Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote: As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. Sometimes preserving anonymity is not good enough. It would be irresponsible of us to solicit candid feedback when identity will be revealed sometimes. If respondents state that they would prefer to remain anonymous, at the very least we must limit publication of any natural language responses to private@incubator -- which would be unfortunate because it shunts discussion that ought to take place in public onto a private list. Furthermore, we should tell them outright that they are fooling themselves if they think no IPMC members will be able to guess who they are. I'm not even sure we can realistically preserve anonymity for scale of 1 to 10, multiple choice, true/false and so on given the very limited pool of potential respondents. We're going to have to think really hard about what we ask and what we publish -- and if we try hard to scrub and fail, I'm going to feel really bad. Nevertheless, if an anonymous option that can only be discussed privately is the price of consensus, I'm still on board. It's better than nothing. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On 6/21/13 5:58 AM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote: On Fri, Jun 21, 2013, at 01:52 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote: As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. Sometimes preserving anonymity is not good enough. It would be irresponsible of us to solicit candid feedback when identity will be revealed sometimes. If respondents state that they would prefer to remain anonymous, at the very least we must limit publication of any natural language responses to private@incubator -- which would be unfortunate because it shunts discussion that ought to take place in public onto a private list. Furthermore, we should tell them outright that they are fooling themselves if they think no IPMC members will be able to guess who they are. I'm not even sure we can realistically preserve anonymity for scale of 1 to 10, multiple choice, true/false and so on given the very limited pool of potential respondents. We're going to have to think really hard about what we ask and what we publish -- and if we try hard to scrub and fail, I'm going to feel really bad. Nevertheless, if an anonymous option that can only be discussed privately is the price of consensus, I'm still on board. It's better than nothing. Exactly. I've seen many surveys where the name is optional, but 5 of 6 people fill in their name. So much for anonymity. I would say make the name field optional and have a 'keep my comments private' tickbox, default unticked. They likely won't be able to keep it from any members of the IPMC, but at least would allow them to say you are a complete bunch of loosers without it getting into the public domain. As a newbie, it seemed like the IPMC and ASF as a whole was like how the movies portray the Mafia in the sense that you had to earn your way in, and folks were pretty tight-knit and knew each other personally. There is no way I would name any names in any email where I didn't know exactly who would read it, so I would never name names in a survey or in an email to an ombudsman or private@. Not because of fear that a 'hit' would be put on me, but just that it could burn bridges I might need later. That's why I just offered another section to the What to expect thread about finding a mentor or ASF member to work with to resolve complaints against individuals. If the matter cannot be resolved directly and off-list, that mentor or ASF member should help the crafting of any email that ends up on-list. Just because the person you are complaining about isn't in the IPMC, there is no guarantee they won't be invited to join the day after you write your email to private@. I would actually suggest giving up on trying to find a way to provide anonymity and adding a warning to the survey/exit-interview to caution folks about naming names. In theory, the complaints about individuals you are worrying about missing have been alluded to on the dev list of that project and addressed via the help of mentors or other ASF members long before the project graduates and an exit interview happens. If some person filling out the exit interview has something else to say that requires they remain anonymous, they should also voice that with a mentor or ASF member, and they should have done so long before graduation as well back when the incident or issue was taking place. My five cents, -Alex - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Part of how best to handle this is to remind people, when they're complaining, to keep two things in mind: a) only state the behavior you observed/read/witnessed, and be specific, rather than using generalizations such as always, or never. b) Keep to I statements. As silly as the template may be: I __ when you _, because ___. (and variants thereof). As in: I felt like our podling was ignored by one of our mentors, because he only voted for one of the seven releases that we did. -- or -- I got frustrated whenever I had to send an email to general, because it usually generated a long email thread, and only one or two responses directly addressed my problem. Doing the above will do much to reduce possible contention. Perhaps add the above to the what to expect introduction to the incubator? Eric. On 6/21/13 5:52 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote: As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. Sometimes preserving anonymity is not good enough. It would be irresponsible of us to solicit candid feedback when identity will be revealed sometimes. If respondents state that they would prefer to remain anonymous, at the very least we must limit publication of any natural language responses to private@incubator -- which would be unfortunate because it shunts discussion that ought to take place in public onto a private list. Furthermore, we should tell them outright that they are fooling themselves if they think no IPMC members will be able to guess who they are. I'm not even sure we can realistically preserve anonymity for scale of 1 to 10, multiple choice, true/false and so on given the very limited pool of potential respondents. We're going to have to think really hard about what we ask and what we publish -- and if we try hard to scrub and fail, I'm going to feel really bad. Nevertheless, if an anonymous option that can only be discussed privately is the price of consensus, I'm still on board. It's better than nothing. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:54 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. A few sample questions: * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? * What advice would you give to future podlings? * What was the most useful thing you learned? * What could we have done differently? I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on general@ after scrubbing sections marked private and anything else sensitive at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because any attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:18:16AM +0100, Upayavira wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:54 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. A few sample questions: * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? * What advice would you give to future podlings? * What was the most useful thing you learned? * What could we have done differently? I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on general@ after scrubbing sections marked private and anything else sensitive at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because any attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. Only one podling graduated in the last two months. At this rate, if you really want anonymity, you'll have to publish the results once per quarter at most. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Anomnity of the individual not the project. I can say my mentor was crap without stating my name - I could be any one of the PPMC. Upayavira On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:18:16AM +0100, Upayavira wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:54 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. A few sample questions: * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? * What advice would you give to future podlings? * What was the most useful thing you learned? * What could we have done differently? I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on general@ after scrubbing sections marked private and anything else sensitive at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because any attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. Only one podling graduated in the last two months. At this rate, if you really want anonymity, you'll have to publish the results once per quarter at most. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. A few sample questions: * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? * What advice would you give to future podlings? * What was the most useful thing you learned? * What could we have done differently? I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on general@ after scrubbing sections marked private and anything else sensitive at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because any attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
I believe a set of automatically generated monthly metrics including a number of commits, total number of letters to the project mail list and number of mentor letters to the list will give a good picture which projects experience which problems. 15.06.2013 19:48 пользователь Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com написал: Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the areas of improvement are for the Incubator. Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' experiences were during incubation. Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: I'm not keen on this one. I don't like surveys and I don't like mandatory activities for volunteers. Yet, Apache does have mandatory reporting for podlings and TLPs. It's not like this is particularly onerous. (Note, I read the proposal as an exit interview for the project/podling, not each and every individual committer/PPMC member.) But if the mandatory thing is too much for people, I think strongly encouraged exit interviews are a good idea. I am curious how the reports would be scrubbed, though - given that the timing of an exit interview would strongly indicate which project had graduated, and there's usually a fairly small number of mentors and project participants to provide feedback. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @jzb http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the areas of improvement are for the Incubator. Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' experiences were during incubation. Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
I'm not keen on this one. I don't like surveys and I don't like mandatory activities for volunteers. However, a pro-active invitation to feedback on experiences at any time during incubation or shortly after would be good. Even better would be recruiting more valuable people from podlings as mentors. Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity On 15 Jun 2013 16:48, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the areas of improvement are for the Incubator. Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' experiences were during incubation. Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Agreed on the undesirability of making survey participation mandatory. On the wiki page in question I framed it as a right that surveys are available fwiw. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 15, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: I'm not keen on this one. I don't like surveys and I don't like mandatory activities for volunteers. However, a pro-active invitation to feedback on experiences at any time during incubation or shortly after would be good. Even better would be recruiting more valuable people from podlings as mentors. Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity On 15 Jun 2013 16:48, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the areas of improvement are for the Incubator. Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' experiences were during incubation. Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
