+Contributor Experience On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 9:13 AM, <lu...@luxaslabs.com> wrote:
> So what I was basically trying to say Daniel and Tim is that I believe > this matter is much more complex than a binary good/bad switch. > > > Something I wanted to do but fell off my plate is to set up a kube > "janitors" effort. This has been pretty effective in the Linux > kernel, finding ways for people who didn't know the whole kernel to > contribute, clean up, and earn an identity ("I'm on the kernel > janitors team!"), and take a ton of tasks off the backlog. It needs a > rally point, a website, a logo, and some serious effort cataloging > initial work items. > > I really like this idea as well. But I think it's a compliment to what's > proposed above, not a replacement. > This also goes for K8sPort (compliment to these community efforts). It's > pretty good but hasn't gained traction at all really. > Are there thing we could do to improve k8sport adoption? Would k8sport and 21 compete for people to accomplish the same tasks? > > K8sPort also offers a charity option. I just donated $200 to victims of > the Haiti Earthquake via K8sPort: https://campaign.newstorycharity.org/ > This all just thanks to the Issues and Pull Requests I've created, SO > questions I've answered and so on. > > I see a huge potential here to square the good we're doing, both donating > to OSS and charities. > > As pointed out above, we can't control whether 21 becomes a thing or not, > nor if the Kubernetes 21 list will be used or not. > What we can do is to provide good examples to the community and try to > find the forums/tools/activities that work well for us to engage the > community even more and keep the project healthy. > > My and Joseph's intention with this thread was to investigate how we can > possibly use this tool in the best possible way for the community (a list > would be created in any case sooner or later). > > Den söndag 28 maj 2017 kl. 18:07:41 UTC+3 skrev lu...@luxaslabs.com: >> >> Thanks for the feedback Tim and Daniel >> >> As a independent contributor (+more) working on Kubernetes "for the >> greater good" for more than two years I want to say a couple of words: >> >> First it should be stated that we're not in control of whether person A >> wants to pay person B for getting a question answered via whatever medium >> (be it SO, 21, Slack or email or...). >> Sooner or later a Kubernetes list would pop up. We (the maintainers or >> steering committee or any specific persons) are not in control of that nor >> the people in it or the people using it. >> >> Secondly, we should recognize that most people working on "boring tasks" >> as well as features are monetarily paid by a company. >> There is _a lot_ of money in this game already, so we shouldn't pretend >> there isn't any. >> >> I fully recognize the problem you're referring to and can see some >> potential drawbacks, but I do think there are more benefits than drawbacks >> with the proposal. >> >> Scenario 1: A person that's interested in K8s but works on something else >> generally. Would pick up a K8s job if possible. >> >> - People that work on Kubernetes for the greater good most often have an >> other job. In my case I'm living with my parents while studing in high >> school. >> People that want to work full-time on Kubernetes could be in the list >> to get job offers regularily from people posting to the list. That's one >> use-case for the list. >> >> It shouldn't go unsaid that thanks to being able to do contracting I can >> work on K8s as my summer-time job (but I'm not doing contracting right now >> when dealing with these community matters, this is my hobby) >> I can't say my motivation has declined, rather I'm more motivated than >> ever to do more good to the K8s ecosystem than I would be able to do >> otherwise. >> >> Scenario 2: A general contributor that works for the greater good >> >> - The most interesting part here IMO is the charity and marketplace >> aspects though. As Joseph also pointed out earlier here, you can *choose >> to donate all the to you transferred funds directly to a charity of your >> choice*, currently you can choose between CoinCenter, Black Girls Code, >> Folding At Home, Code To Inspire. >> - To me, being able to help people that are using the 21 list to >> escalate important (support as well as non-support) issues while donating >> those $5 or so dollars *to help Afghan women learn to code is truly >> motivational*. >> >> Note: The person that takes the money (which you referred to -- accepting >> the extrinsic motivation) *maybe isn't the person that would work for >> the greater good in the first place*. I think the person that >> contributes to K8s for the intrinsic motivation is very likely to *boost >> the intrinsic motivation* by using the charity option. >> >> Scenario 3: A person that hasn't been involved in K8s very much so far >> but sees his/her chance to earn some dollars >> >> This person doesn't seem to recognize the intrinsic motivation related to >> OSS projects and didn't contribute really to K8s before. >> Now he/she does contribute and gets some dollars in return. Let him take >> those bucks, he probably needs them in that case. >> >> >> Further ideas: >> >> I've been experimenting with the tought of providing a CNCF sponsor HTTP >> service in the 21 marketplace (https://21.co/mkt/). It would basically >> be a way to donate the bitcoins you've earned from completing microtasks on >> 21 to different areas of CNCF. Each API call costs a little money, and the >> CNCF-backed service would just charge a dollar or two, add your name to a >> CNCF individual sponsors list and let you choose what to donate money for. >> >> Imagine anyone being able to issue a command like this (or do it via the >> 21 web interface) >> >> 21 buy "cncf/sponsor/diversity_scholarship" >> >> >> and the API service will put your name on a list next to the total amount >> you've paid (adds up on every API call). Now you've donated to CNCF >> diversity scholarship recipients! >> And as the 21 ecosystem grows, it might be possible to choose CNCF >> instead of the four above mentioned charities automatically... >> >> Let me know what you think... I have even more thoughts to share later ;) >> >> Den söndag 28 maj 2017 kl. 06:32:04 UTC+3 skrev Joseph Jacks: >>> >>> Thanks for your feedback, Daniel. >>> >>> My take on this 1999 study you point to is that it has some major flaws >>> when taken into current context: >>> >>> - The world was extremely different when this study was conducted. >>> The sharing economy did not exist. There were only ~195M people on the >>> Internet globally. Etcetera. >>> - RE: "*If the size of the monetary reward is not large enough to >>> compensate for the loss of intrinsic motivation, overall engagement can >>> decline*": We can easily solve this simply by increasing the reward >>> amount. With the first basic implementation of extrinsic incentivizing -- >>> i.e K8s experts and/or charities get paid in BTC/fiat only when they >>> respond to K8s user questions via the 21 system -- we have a reward >>> <https://21.co/kubernetes/> of $5 set for each reply. That can >>> easily be adjusted up to $20 and far beyond. Balaji Srinivasan shared >>> with >>> me earlier that 21.co/ethereum routinely sees users paying $10 for >>> answers from Ethereum experts. >>> - (Some help with framing thanks to Balaji here)... Regarding the >>> net result as is implied in the 1999 study and in other areas as Tim >>> alluded, I think in most areas generally the introduction of market >>> dynamics really improves the overall experience. There are certainly edge >>> cases like the ones that Dan Ariely >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Ariely> identifies, but these >>> need to be kept in perspective against the gigantic examples of (say) >>> communist vs capitalist China, or communist vs capitalist Eastern Europe. >>> Most of the time, you are replacing a breadline with a market. >>> >>> >>> HTH! >>> >>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Daniel Smith <dbs...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I agree w/ Tim. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overjustification_effect# >>>> Volunteering >>>> >>>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Joseph Jacks <jack...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> CIL >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, May 27, 2017 at 3:45:29 PM UTC-7, Tim Hockin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Joseph Jacks <jack...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > Thanks! I do hear you, Tim --- however, I find that such an >>>>>> experiment is >>>>>> > worthy in the face of the challenges the project has in this area. >>>>>> Why not >>>>>> > have both extrinsic and intrinsic, then see what happens? >>>>>> >>>>>> That was the point of the study. Intrinsic motivators alone ("help >>>>>> make the world a better place") were MORE effective than combined >>>>>> motivators ("help make the world a better place, and here's 100 bucks >>>>>> for your effort"). >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 21 also allows the reward to be automatically credited to a charity: >>>>> currently, there are four choices: CoinCenter, Black Girls Code, Folding >>>>> At >>>>> Home, Code To Inspire. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> > Would love more feedback. >>>>>> >>>>>> Something I wanted to do but fell off my plate is to set up a kube >>>>>> "janitors" effort. This has been pretty effective in the Linux >>>>>> kernel, finding ways for people who didn't know the whole kernel to >>>>>> contribute, clean up, and earn an identity ("I'm on the kernel >>>>>> janitors team!"), and take a ton of tasks off the backlog. It needs >>>>>> a >>>>>> rally point, a website, a logo, and some serious effort cataloging >>>>>> initial work items. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This along with the K8sport effort share similar aims! I think what we >>>>> are envisioning here is highly complimentary. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> > On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Tim Hockin <tho...@google.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Curiously, I was JUST listening to a radio piece exploring the >>>>>> effects >>>>>> >> of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. It is well understood that >>>>>> >> "common purpose" and "for the greater good" (intrinsic motivators) >>>>>> are >>>>>> >> more effective than money and stuff (extrinsic motivators). The >>>>>> >> interesting part was that the addition of an extrinsic motivator >>>>>> to a >>>>>> >> situation which was already intrinsically motivated REDUCED the >>>>>> net >>>>>> >> motivation. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> So we should be careful that applying money to our community >>>>>> doesn't >>>>>> >> change it from a righteous mission into a low-paying job. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Tim >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Lucas Käldström < >>>>>> lu...@luxaslabs.com> >>>>>> >> wrote: >>>>>> >> > Adding kubernetes-dev and kubernetes-maintainers... >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> >> > On May 28 2017, at 12:31 am, Joseph Jacks <jack...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> >> >> https://twitter.com/kubernetesonarm/status/868577771953455105 >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> >> >> Lucas and I got to DM'ing earlier and came up with this over >>>>>> the last >>>>>> >> >> hour. Feedback welcome! >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> >> >> Doc: >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VQDIAB0OqiSjIHI8AWMvSdce >>>>>> Whnz56jNpZrLs6o7NJY/edit#heading=h.en8cy6hno0c6 >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> >> > -- >>>>>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>> Google >>>>>> >> > Groups >>>>>> >> > "Kubernetes user discussion and Q&A" group. >>>>>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>> it, send >>>>>> >> > an >>>>>> >> > email to kubernetes-use...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> >> > To post to this group, send email to >>>>>> kubernet...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> >> > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou >>>>>> p/kubernetes-users. >>>>>> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Kubernetes user discussion and Q&A" group. >>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to kubernetes-use...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to kubernet...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/kubernetes-users. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Kubernetes developer/contributor discussion" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to kubernetes-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to kubernetes-...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/kubernetes-dev/1d7caf1f-ce40-475b-9c6a-166d375b1fec% > 40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kubernetes-dev/1d7caf1f-ce40-475b-9c6a-166d375b1fec%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Kubernetes user discussion and Q&A" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kubernetes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to kubernetes-users@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/kubernetes-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.