Hi Scott, On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 10:43:33PM +0000, Scott Kitterman wrote: > As long as there are people involved, a certain amount of it is > inevitable. Putting it in the requirements is bowing to reality. The > FTP Team sometimes has to make unpopular decisions and it's inevitable > that people won't always react well. > > If Sean hadn't mentioned it, I think it would have been a disservice > to potential volunteers. People should know what they are signing up > for. Honestly it's not a lot of the feedback, most of what we get > back is positive, but it's enough that it's worth mentioning. > I think that mentioning it is absolutely the right thing to do, and I'm certainly aware (having been release manager for *mumble* years) that unpopular decisions can lead to unpleasant reactions. I think my point is that we should strive to reach the point where it's not inevitable, and that our reality can change. It should never be the case that making a hard decision leads to abusive messages, and I believe as a project we must act to try and achieve this goal. For leadership roles, such as release manager, or ftp master, I think it's doubly important. Putting aside the issue of current volunteers, and the project's duty to ensure a safe and welcoming environment, this affects the overall ability for the project to attract new volunteers at all. These key posts can be aspirational for new contributors - the concept that one day you could be an ftp-master is attractive. However, if we accept that in order to reach one of these key roles you have to be willing to accept a certain level of abuse, then we have failed to produce that welcoming community, and will fail to attract and retain a diverse and thriving team. This is obviously not something that ftp-masters can solve, but I think it is useful to highlight this issue for the wider project. Thanks, Neil --
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature