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

Re: Helen Koike: Declaration of intent

On 08/03/2018 05:16 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> [ Dropping Helen's archives, as this mail is quite "meta" ]
> On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 01:45:48PM +0800, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
>> Thanks Mattia for bringing your concerns (once more :-). Not everyone
>> wants to publicly express their worries on particular nm processes,
>> maybe to not to sound rude or offensive to our dear new applicants, who
>> are obviously in a more 'vulnerable' position at the moment they express
>> their wishes to be publicly recognized as (potential) Debian members.
> This is indeed one reason I'm doing it.  I often pondered whether to do
> it in public or in private, but turns out that most of the time is
> indeed some misunderstanding, like in this case, so having everything in
> public is IMHO a good thing.

I agree, when discussions are public misunderstandings usually go away

>> A few times I've also felt some discomfort with some applicantions, but
>> due to some dificulty on chosing my words (in a non-native language) I
>> decided just to let it go...
> Remember that in the nm.d.o website there is a field for comments, that
> also let people leave confidential comments that are read only by FD.  I
> can't talk for everybody, but I at least would like to know if anybody
> has concerns on a particular applicant.
> I'm personally sad to admit that in past when I shared my concerns in
> this mail list I felt mostly ignored, when all it would have takes were
> some clarifications on the applications...
>>  "...please tell something about yourself, how you came to Debian and Free
>>  Software, and why you want to volunteer your time. Please describe the
>>  contributions you have made to Debian, your primary areas of interest
>>  and any goals you wish to accomplish."
> Indeed one of the reason I couldn't understand this Helen's application
> was because of her quite terse introduction...

Sorry about that, I agree is was a short introduction, mostly because I
assumed that the people reading it would be the people that are here in
DebConf and know me, this was an assumption I shouldn't make, sorry
about that.

>> For instance, here is a recent statement that I think has room for
>> improvement:
>>  "As a member of DebConf18 orga team, I has seem Taowa working in Front
>>  Desk.  Because of his hard work, people can get room key, dorm card, AC
>>  card without any problem. Also for local team, we can trust him to track
>>  all dorm card in wafer so that we don't lost any of them."
>> Although I personally think Taowa has a great potential to become a
>> valuable Debian member, I'd rather avoid an advocating text that only
>> points his work on a particular Debconf. This has a great potential to
>> create noise.
> I pretty much ignored such advocacy.  Handing out keys is surely
> respectable but hardly enough to be project members...
> When the dd_nu concept was introduced one reason that was brought on the
> table was to recognize people like the DebConf contributors that would
> otherwise not be mentioned anywhere.  With Taowa being a member of DC17
> and DC18 that was good enough for me to go ahead without much blinking.
> As advocacies go, Holger's words were more "useful" than Hector's or
> ChangZhuo's, despite not being formally sent through the website.
>> Regarding Helen's case, I've never worked directly with her, but I've
>> seen that she has a long term involvement in Debian. I can atest her
>> contributions on mentoring, helping with events, giving talks about
>> Debian and I'm happy to have had here in DC18 very good references about
>> her on the technical side as well.
> Worry not anymore, I'm not blocking her process! :)
> My doubts about Helen dissipated, so I'm not concerned anymore.
> Also, despite what some people seem to believe I didn't start this
> discussion with the direct goal of blocking her (nor with any other
> applicant in the past) but to rather understand better the situation> (OK, I did block Helen's DM application because that was totally odd for
> me and didn't make sense, and indeed it was not the correct course of
> action, as this discussion proved).
> Let me look for an AM now....

Thank you :)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: