+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.
