Re: [Debconf-team] Special sponsorship
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:59:43AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> What I've failed to see thus far in this thread are alternative
> proposals. How could we choose the members of the herb team in a
> transparent manner? Would a call for volunteers on a public mailing list
> be enough? Has it been tried in the past? With which results?
Last year there was a public call:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/03/msg00007.html
I know of people who had problems but since the team met sooner than
this year[0], there was time for the rejected people to ask reconsidering this
decision.
We also had a BOF in dc10 about this.
[0] No blaming this year's people to meet so late, it is just how things
happened.
> > And then we had, in the past, the rule to not rate yourself. Which in
> > the end turned out to punish people for doing the work (no rate, lower
> > score, WAY down in the sponsorship, and that just because you wanted to
> > help DebConf). Which changed the policy to "Rate yourself. The rest of
> > the team WILL rate you down if your request is insane". Which did
> > happen, this year too.
>
> I've heard this argument before (I believe it was last year in New York,
> talking with members of the DebConf10 herb time). It sounded convincing
> back then, but a bit less so now. In particular: if instead of taking
> the sum of scores we take the average a large deal of the problem should
> go away. You will still have the problem that the average for herb team
> members is taken on a smaller sample than for non-herb team members, but
> if the team is large enough (which I believe was a very good feature of
> this year team) the difference should be meaningless. Has that option
> been considered in the past?
I was part of the team in dc8 and dc9, and yes, in the system used
in dc8 (Argentina), you were losing a vote because it was something like
everybody from the team rate all the members in a IRC meeting with
no/abstain/yes, then we gave points to that:
- no (0)
- abstain (0.5)
- yes (1)
With this system, you had to abstain in voting on yourself so you supposedly
lost half a point there.
(disclaimer, I do not remember it exactly how the points were, but you
get the idea)
Then in dc9, we used penta for that and people in the team asking for
sponsorship, didn't vote on themselves, so we just looked at the average
where all the others members have voted and the problem did not exist.
AFAIK, the penta system has been used again in dc10 and dc11 with an IRC
meeting once everybody has rated.
Ana
Reply to: