[Members] Feedback on votes
dave at cridland.net
Tue May 10 11:02:10 UTC 2016
My rule of thumb is that I want people to join because they want to help in
the operations of the XSF; whether that's on the XEP Editor team, or
helping with the website, or seeking and managing sponsors, or whatever
else the XSF needs volunteers for (and there's a lot - the XSF really
doesn't run itself, and a comparatively few people do a disproportionate
amount of the workload). If members did more of those things, I'd be much
more inclined toward ensuring we got some perks back again (in years gone
by the XSF has picked up hotel tabs and all sorts, not just the occasional
So if someone has actively helped with something within the XSF - not the
standards, but the website, for example - then that's a definite yes (even
if it's small). So Guus, for example, got a yes from me because he spotted
an error on the website and corrected it.
If someone's reason for joining is that they want to work on XMPP software,
or XMPP standards, or "evangelize", then I'm somewhat concerned that they
don't know what the point in joining is. None of those things are any
better if you're a member (or shouldn't be).
If someone's active within the standards@ list, I tend to vote yes, even
though really that shouldn't make a difference. I can't really claim to be
FWIW, I'm usually much stricter with people who're reapplying and haven't
done anything practical than I am people who're applying the first time.
On 10 May 2016 at 11:35, Nicolas Vérité <nicolas.verite at gmail.com> wrote:
> I totally agree, feedback is needed at each stage!
> Likewise, thanks for accepting me, and eager to listen to no-ers and
> yes-ers ;-)
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Guus der Kinderen <
> guus.der.kinderen at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Happy to be a new XSF member! My membership application was accepted in
>> the last voting round, where I did get some "no" votes. The anonymous
>> voting does currently not leave any room for feedback (other than "no"),
>> which will pretty much make it impossible to identify, let alone address,
>> the issues that some have. Can we build in a mechanism that allows for an
>> optional, anonymous text that accompanies a vote? I think that this would
>> add value to the voting process.
>> And, in the mean time, if you "nay-ed" me, feel free to reach out. I'm
> Nicolas Vérité (Nÿco)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Members