Ahmad Samir <[email protected]> schrieb am 2010-10-06 > > I don't think it'll happen this way. It's not going to be some people > > will be in charge of decision making forever. > > > > If you look at the association board itself, you'll see that it'll be > > replaced by third every year; it's built this way. So even a new > > packager, once he proves his commitment/competence, becomes an old > > packager.
That is o.k., you (or it's better tosay we) just have tomake sure, there are nounneccessary obstacles fora padawan tobecome a master. I wasjust concerned by Romains words in his original posting > > > The idea is that Masters have voting power within the team (for > > > decisions or leader election) > > > [...] > > > Apprentices have no voice yet That sounded a lotlike creating two castes, one with power, one without. But as he wrote later, it was just a matter of putting it in the wrong words. > > Note that a period of time is needed for a new guy who starts > > working/contributing in a new place to gain people's trust/confidence. > > (trust is gained not given, right?). > > > > (For example you, in MUD, you have a packaging team; say you, > > doktor5000 and tigger-gg are the old packagers (though girls never get > > older than 30 ;)); a new guy wants to contribute, he must will take > > some time to prove his worth / that he can be trusted / competence > > before you give him decision-making privileges. He'll be the new guy > > until a new new guy joins.). That's logical and as I wrote, I have no problemat all with being tutored by some experienced packager who will be able to teach me many things I don't know yet. After all "you have much to learn, young padawan". > > P.S. I forgot to say I like the term "padawans" too. :) Oliver
