[Members] Consultants

Ludovic BOCQUET lbxmpp at live.com
Wed Jul 27 15:02:47 UTC 2011


Le 26/07/2011 17:12, Kurt Zeilenga a écrit :
> While it seems I'm in the minority here, I'm actually against making consultant listing a perk of membership.
>
> I think this will lead to folks requesting membership for the purpose of being listed, and then once listed, not perform their duties (vote!) as a member.  I fear such perks will lead to quorum problems.
Already some people use this... :/
>
> I would rather that members only have one responsibility, to vote, and no other duties and perks.   I don't think persons otherwise participating in the community, such as any teams, ought to be required to become members, or that perks, such as belong listed as a consultant, be member only.
>
> I also note that only individuals can be members… and many consulting firms are not sole proprietorships.  This can create some interesting issues.  It certainly means that we'd need to track which listing is due to which member(s) [more than one member could work for the consulting firm], so that we'd know when to delist a firm.   And what if a member is available through multiple consulting firms, is he allowed multiple listings?
>
> Personally, I rather just have some wiki page that folks who provided consulting could add themselves too with a big "Buyer beware!" notice.
>
> -- Kurt
>
>
>
> On Jul 26, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Matthew A. Miller wrote:
>
>> I think most of my opinions below have been previously stated, but I'll reply anyway (-:
>>
>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:17, Dave Cridland wrote:
>>
>>> I've been asked today for someone I can recommend for consultancy, again. As usual, my first step was to think of people I know whose skills fit, and who might be available, and it got me thinking...
>>>
>>> 1) We have lists for clients, servers, and libraries - should we have one for consultants, too?
>>>
>> Seems like a fine idea, as long as we have disclaimer language (e.g. "these individuals are not endorsed or certified by the XSF").
>>
>>> 2) If we did, should this list be restricted to members who are available for consultancy? (A perk of membership, if you like).
>>>
>> +1
>>
>>> 3) Or, should we have a directory of members, which could list people as consultants, provide links to businesses and projects, as well as providing contact details for members?
>>>
>> I think a separate opt-in list would make it clearer just who is available for consulting work and who isn't.
>>
>>> (FWIW, this was also partly sparked by my realisation that although I've an XSF group in my roster, it has only 35 people in, instead of everyone).
>> Sounds like we need shared rosters (-:
>>
>>
>> - m&m
>> <http://goo.gl/voEzk>
>>
>
>



More information about the Members mailing list