[Members] Membership Application period Q1 2018
daniel at pocock.pro
Thu Jan 4 22:39:11 UTC 2018
On 04/01/18 17:56, Dave Cridland wrote:
> On 4 January 2018 at 16:09, Daniel Pocock <daniel at pocock.pro> wrote:
>> On 02/01/18 15:33, Alexander Gnauck wrote:
>>> I have created the membership application page for Q1 2018 at:
>> I'd like to reapply but I can't log in to the wiki, maybe my account was
>> lost after the wiki problems.
>> Also, is it really necessary for everybody to go through this process
>> every year or can some mechanism be used to automatically validate
>> people? E.g. if somebody's name has appeared on a mailing list, if
>> their blog is syndicated on planet.jabber.org or if they made a
>> contribution to the wiki then that could qualify them to remain a member
> But none of those are either sufficient, nor necessary, for XSF membership.
> If I can rant lyrical for a moment, what I expect from XSF members is
> that they contribute meaningfully to the XMPP Standards Foundation.
Is there any way we can automatically establish who might already be
crossing that threshold to save them the trouble of manually re-applying?
Or another approach: somebody might screen the list and pre-approve some
people and only send reminders to the people who don't obviously qualify?
The suggestions I provided were only examples, there may be other ways
to go about it.
> The XSF exists to enable the development and evangelisation (ie,
> marketing, but we're engineers so we think that's a dirty word) of the
> XMPP standards. The XSF does not, itself, actually develop the
> standards (there's a confusion here in that the Council arguably
> contributes a significant effort to development of XMPP, but one can
> view it as ensuring the process is working from a technical
> As an example, writing a XEP doesn't require XSF membership, and nor should it.
> But ensuring that the XEP *can* be published, *is* published, has a
> process to follow to ensure quality, and follows that process - those
> are all activities which the XSF does. Groups exist for each of these
> - the iteam, the Editors, the Board, and the Council (sorta).
Can any of that activity be detected on certain mailing lists or in
version control systems like Git?
> The XSF organises conferences (SCAM), and does outreach and marketing
> (well, comms team if it existed).
> I would hope that people wanting to be members are applying not to do
> the things they could do anyway, but because they want to enable other
> do do those things effectively.
Interesting point: during my student days, I used to be the (volunteer)
bar manager at a rowing club. Eventually I joined the committee as a VP
but as a committee member I didn't actually do anything I didn't already
enjoy doing as bar manager. This is a frequent pattern in non-profit
and volunteer organizations.
> All of which, by the way, should not be taken as a suggestion that
> Daniel doesn't do anything - I think organising that FOSDEM devroom is
> proof enough of that - but there are sadly a lot of names on the
> member list that I don't see around in the teams helping with the
> often quite dull work involved in keeping this whole thing running.
The danger with processes like reapplying is that the people who are
really busy or active doing stuff feel it is an extra burden. E.g. I'm
currently trying to get into FOSDEM mode right now. So far Saul has
actually done far more work on FOSDEM this year.
More information about the Members