Further to that, on looking at some of the recent membership data
gathered so far with specific regard to the interns, I have to say, it
does seem like a few interns have been significantly undervaluing
their own contributions by waiting much longer to apply than seems
appropriate for
2015-02-22 14:08 GMT+01:00 Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com:
Again, a brilliant question. On the face of it this seems to be purely about
reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
means less work for them). However there are clearly some implications which
Again, a brilliant question. On the face of it this seems to be purely
about
reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
means less work for them). However there are clearly some implications
which
affect our democratic processes. The question of whether we
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 21:15 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
[...]
Further to that, on looking at some of the recent membership data
gathered so far with specific regard to the interns, I have to say, it
does seem like a few interns have been significantly undervaluing
their own contributions by
Keep it simple. The point is to check whether asking for 2 extra
months of involvement to internship is based on solid ground, no only
perception or anecdotes, as you claimed it is done. The archives with
the decisions are public as well.
Sorry for prolonging this thread, but if we are
Hi;
On 22 February 2015 at 13:08, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com wrote:
On the face of it this seems to be purely about
reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
means less work for them).
On the face of it, this statement is fairly offensive for the
On the face of it this seems to be purely about
reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
means less work for them).
On the face of it, this statement is fairly offensive for the
membership committee.
You've read the email that Andrea sent about the
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Luciana Fujii luci...@fujii.eti.br wrote:
- What is the impact of having people joining the Foundation and
vanishing later?
They gain voting ability when they shouldn't. The board should be
elected by people who are involved with the community. Members of the
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Luciana Fujii luci...@fujii.eti.br
wrote:
- What is the impact of having people joining the Foundation and
vanishing later?
They gain voting ability when they shouldn't.
Keep it simple. The point is to check whether asking for 2 extra
months of involvement to internship is based on solid ground, no only
perception or anecdotes, as you claimed it is done. The archives with
the decisions are public as well.
Sorry for prolonging this thread, but if we are
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:33:19AM +0100, Alexandre Franke wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Luciana Fujii luci...@fujii.eti.br wrote:
- What is the impact of having people joining the Foundation and
vanishing later?
They gain voting ability when they shouldn't. The board should be
The membership can correct me if I'm wrong, but one thing that's not
been said so far is that the N months before accepting a member is
not really special to interns.
Also correct.
In that case, what is the period of time is considered acceptable for
non-interns to have contributed for
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
The membership can correct me if I'm
On 19/02/15 15:39, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote:
Keep it simple. The point is to check whether asking for 2 extra
months of involvement to internship is based on solid ground, no only
perception or anecdotes, as you claimed it is done. The archives with
the decisions are public as well.
Sorry
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:44:19PM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
This is something I believe could happen if an amendment were to be
proposed with compelling evidence to support it so we are able to take an
informed vote on it. At the moment the issue is that a decision which
overrides the
If you have a concrete reason why it does help to continue to ignore
bylaws
that are inconvenient for whatever is more convenient, then you are
free
to
make a case for that. California law probably would probably override
that
idea, though.
I tried to nicest way to
On Thu, 2015-02-19 at 15:13 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support the
hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested solution will
address that problem in a representative way.
Please, go ahead, collect the
On Thu, 2015-02-19 at 16:20 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support the
hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested solution
will
address that problem in a representative way.
Please, go ahead,
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support the
hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested solution
will
address that problem in a representative way.
Please, go ahead, collect the evidence and present it here.
I am going to need
I feel like everything about this has been stated twice, can we please stop
with that thread?
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to
support the
hypothesis that this is a
This is something I believe could happen if an amendment were to be
proposed with compelling evidence to support it so we are able to take an
informed vote on it. At the moment the issue is that a decision which
overrides the bylaws has already been made in the establishment of this
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support
the
hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested
solution
will
address that problem in a representative way.
Please, go ahead, collect the evidence and present it here.
On Thu, 2015-02-19 at 17:05 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support
the
hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested
solution
will
address that problem in a representative way.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
As regards comments on Outreachy internships (which seem to have clearly
been cited a lot more in defence of this new practice, than GSoC); this is
an internship specifically developed to address an identified
One of the main requirements of gaining
Foundation Membership is being active within the community for a
little while *after* the internship has ended to demonstrate the fact
there's a real interest staying around and contributing to the
Project.
This is a practice which
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 06:30:51PM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
If you have a concrete reason why it does help to continue to ignore
bylaws
that are inconvenient for whatever is more convenient, then you are free
to
make a case for that. California law probably would probably override
What you are suggesting would be accepting every single intern
regardless of this person being really interested and passionate about
joining the Foundation. That will probably lead to a wider membership
base for sure but how long these people are going to really stay
around if their
2015-02-15 16:17 GMT+01:00 Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com:
This policy came about after I encouraged interns who were 2/3rd of the way
through their internship in 2012 to apply for the Foundation membership. The
membership
committee preferred that interns have a chance to figure
- Original Message -
From: Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
To: Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
Cc: GNOME Foundation foundation-list@gnome.org
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 8:35:17 AM
Subject: Re: foundation application..
This is not a complicated process
This policy came about after I encouraged interns who were 2/3rd of the
way through their internship in 2012 to apply for the Foundation
membership. The membership committee preferred that interns have a chance
to figure out their level of participation in GNOME after the internship
before
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
As Meg seems to have pointed out already in her question, the same could
be
said for any sponsored contributor. The bylaws are explicit in not
discriminating against sponsored/paid contributors compared with any
other
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
wrote:
Right, but as I've said, it's not a general answer and applications are
dealt
with on a case-by-case basis.
In that case, I suggest that we don't make general statements telling
interns to not apply, but instead
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 02:02:48PM -0600, meg ford wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
wrote:
Right, but as I've said, it's not a general answer and applications are
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
On 02/12/2015 07:33 PM, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
I think you bring up an interesting point, but I also like the idea
that foundation membership is not a badge
On Fri, 2015-02-13 at 09:46 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
On 02/12/2015 07:33 PM, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
I think you bring up an interesting point, but I
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
On Fri, 2015-02-13 at 09:46 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org
wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
On 02/12/2015
Hi.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:52:32PM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
This is not a complicated process, it is fairly clear and transparent
(especially when compared with the alternative). What is the problem with
using It?
There is none.
At the moment we are talking about whether it is
This is not a complicated process, it is fairly clear and transparent
(especially when compared with the alternative). What is the problem with
using It?
There is none.
At the moment we are talking about whether it is justifiable to tell all
successful interns that they are not
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:20:21AM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
It doesn't make a difference. The bylaws are the rules which regulate the
GNOME Foundation. GNOME's bylaws state the rules on membership
eligibility
by
Hi.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 07:55:05AM -0600, meg ford wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:44 AM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
wrote:
I don't read all successful interns are not eligible for membership
there which is what you claimed.
This is not what we were discussing in the
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:35:17PM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
Really? GNOME have no role in this statement which went out to the OP and
GSoC intern lists in August of 2014?
I don't know what exactly you mean by GNOME who has or does not have
a role in the statement.
Before denying this is a
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:52:32PM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
If you have a concrete reason why it does help to continue to ignore bylaws
that are inconvenient for whatever is more convenient, then you are free to
make a case for that. California law probably would probably override that
Hi.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:00:29AM -0500, Dave Neary wrote:
On 02/13/2015 09:07 AM, Tobias Mueller wrote:
There is no general answer. Applications are handled on a case-by-case
basis.
The number of objections to the decision of the membership committee I know
of is exactly 0.
Of
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:20:21AM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
It doesn't make a difference. The bylaws are the rules which regulate the
GNOME Foundation. GNOME's bylaws state the rules on membership eligibility
by defining what a contributor is and who is illegible for membership (i.e.
IMO:
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form describing his contributions (and possibly the name
of someone else who can support it) and
Hi Sriram,
Maybe I could help you with this. How do you think we could do it?
2015-02-11 23:09 GMT+01:00 Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Alexandre Franke
I suggest we just make the rules much clearer to people on the outreach
pages by clarifying what non-trivial actually means. GSoC/OPW interns
are
told to make more contributions after their 3 month internship before
applying. That suggests that the contributions they make over their 3
Hi Magdalen,
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
The bylaws do not say anything about what might motivate contributors to
contribute, nor their level of commitment to GNOME, when it defines a
contributor in terms of foundation membership but it does
On 02/12/2015 07:33 PM, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
I think you bring up an interesting point, but I also like the idea
that foundation membership is not a badge you earn if you contribute
enough, but hints to a deeper involvement with the community inner
workings.
I argue that a 3-months
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
On 02/12/2015 07:33 PM, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
I think you bring up an interesting point, but I also like the idea
that foundation membership is not a badge you earn if you contribute
enough, but hints to a deeper involvement with
On 12 February 2015 at 13:42, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com wrote:
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form describing
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form describing his contributions (and possibly the name
of someone else who can support
On 12 February 2015 at 13:42, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form
On 12 February 2015 at 15:03, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com wrote:
On 12 February 2015 at 13:42, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the
process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form describing his contributions (and possibly the name
of someone else who can
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Luis Menina liberfo...@freeside.fr wrote:
So yes, I still find it intimidating because it's hard to
On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 05:01:42PM -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
Yes, I've had other anecdotes where people relate the same thing. As
I said, I'm intimidated too when go through it. Maybe if there are
interested people we could work on it together?
I sometimes just hand out bugzilla
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Luis Menina liberfo...@freeside.fr wrote:
So yes, I still find it intimidating because it's hard to feel
legitimate when you're a small contibutor.
And that's part of the
Le 09/02/2015 23:57, Sriram Ramkrishna a écrit :
Do people find the application to the foundation to be intimidating?
I've talked to a number of people and I get the feeling that unless I
do coding or something that I'm not a valuable member.
Even with all the stuff I do, I still feel
Do people find the application to the foundation to be intimidating?
I've talked to a number of people and I get the feeling that unless I
do coding or something that I'm not a valuable member.
Even with all the stuff I do, I still feel inadequate when I renew...
I was just curious if other
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote:
Do people find the application to the foundation to be intimidating?
I've talked to a number of people and I get the feeling that unless I
do coding or something that I'm not a valuable member.
Even with all the
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Luis Menina liberfo...@freeside.fr wrote:
So yes, I still find it intimidating because it's hard to feel
legitimate when you're a small contibutor.
And that's part of the problem. This guy calls himself a small
contributer, which he is not. Sure he's not a
62 matches
Mail list logo
