[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-team] Patch to DebConf orgateam structure



also sprach Tassia Camoes Araujo <tassia@debian.org> [2015-08-31 05:30 +0200]:
> Maybe what we lack is a "Welcome team" for DebConf orga.

Another team…

> Also, having a separate IRC channel and mailing list for
> volunteers that don't want to go deep into dc orga discutions but
> what to help with specific tasks seems like a good thing to me,
> and I think Marga's and Bernelle's concerns would be addressed
> here.

This was the reason why we resurrected #debconf15-germany as
a channel shielded from the meta-talk in #dc-team. A bunch of
people, including chairs, were furious about it.



also sprach Bernelle Verster <bernellev@gmail.com> [2015-08-30 11:19 +0200]:
> I feel the same as Nigel and Allison stated. I think from the
> discussion on this thread that the DC16 team that attended DC15
> can be considered as part of the 'global' team, and that new
> volunteers would be considered local. I imagine these to be people
> who may only want to get involved with smaller or more specialised
> tasks, and not get involved in the greater strategy or whatever
> discussions.

I don't think this is what Nigel and Allison said, at all. If I read
them right, then they advocate no distinction whatsoever between
DC16 team people who attended DC15, non-DC16 people, global helpers,
long-timers, and volunteers only joining for a particular conference
or to help on site. We're all just one team (and a dozen sub-teams,
actually).

> There was talk about merging the dc-team and dc16-team mailing
> lists, but I think now that we should keep the dc16 list for the
> per-task discussions, and as the 'global' component take special
> care to keep that list neutral and fun, and direct the flamewar-ey
> discussions to the dc-team list. I can volunteer to moderate that.

This discussion happens every year. To me, this is a strong
indication that in fact it's wrong to try to ignore or even deny the
existence of a group that is mainly interested in "their"
conference. Rather than closing our eyes to reality, we should try
to see the benefits of having people interested in running one
particular DebConf, without being involved in any of the stuff that
happens at the more global level.



also sprach Tassia Camoes Araujo <tassia@debian.org> [2015-08-31 05:40 +0200]:
> I'd rather focus our energies on improving communication and
> collaboration in the whole team, cause we all need a healthy
> environment to work. For instance, would we benefit from a code of
> conduct for the team?

Better than an (imposed?) code of conduct would be IMHO to gain
a common understanding of what we're actually trying to achieve with
DebConf. We have "goals" formulated, but they are too lofty to give
firm answers to some of the fundamental differences we have within
our team.

> So I would advocate for those separate channels for
> volunteers/newbies in dc-orga, regardless of them being local to
> South Africa or not.

Who would lead this team? Or is this just a support group where
newbies and volunteers can help each other, while they're still
expected to integrate with existing teams if they want to do
anything?

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  DebConf orga team
`. `'`
  `-  DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
      DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17

Attachment: digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)


Reply to: