| 1 |
On Friday, January 20, 2017 10:39:49 AM EST Kent Fredric wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> The framing here is that this structure is a stick to keep everyone in line, |
| 4 |
> and that the beatings shall continue to drive up morale. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
You are taking this completely out of context. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Your repeated comments on beatings and morale, makes me some what question |
| 9 |
your line of thinking. More so given how you are completely misreading and |
| 10 |
making your own interpretation of things not even written in the GLEP. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> I'd rather a more informal structure, where somebody is appointed the task |
| 13 |
> of polling the different projects and asking them questions like: |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Oh yes, create more positions and roles no one wants to fulfill. Are you going |
| 16 |
to do that? Just another area/project/team to be understaffed. FYI this is |
| 17 |
what used to happen as part of the newsletter. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> As an adjunct, it might also be useful to have some sort of active "status |
| 20 |
> board" for different projects that can be edited by anyone easily and can |
| 21 |
> easily be displayed in bulk, and not have any real requirements on its |
| 22 |
> frequency of change. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That is something that could be programmed into wiki pages for each project |
| 25 |
tracking commit activity. However it would still not tell you where the |
| 26 |
project/team is going or information about its activities. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> And for groups who want to bother to sit down and have meetings, |
| 29 |
> brief outcomes from those meetings could be part of that status board, |
| 30 |
> perhaps with longer contents in links. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
That is in part what I am suggesting in a report provided to the council. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
The reports I am suggesting, could be linked into the status board your |
| 35 |
suggesting. So your basically proposing the same thing in a different way. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives