<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family: Monaco; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">With the intention of this thread being to come up with days/times<br class="">that will allow the most number of board members to attend, I propose<br class="">we eliminate the "alternating time" meetings and just stick to a<br class="">single day/time that works best for the board. That also implies that<br class="">we're placing additional burden on candidates who don't normally<br class="">overlap with whatever time slot we choose, meaning we should make the<br class="">board more available to by-request meeting times and/or mailing list<br class="">applications.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">I'm mostly lurking these days, but I want to say that this last part is<br class="">critical to get right. The DMB is a super important part of the pathway<br class="">that new developers take when getting involved in the community, and<br class="">it's really critical that you don't end up favouring people who are for<br class="">whatever reason able to be available when you all are. (Most obviously<br class="">by living in similar timezones to enough DMB members.) If you're going<br class="">to end up pushing them to asynchronous meetings then this needs to be<br class="">made a proper first class option, in documentation and the actual<br class="">candidate experience (timely, good quality interactions as you get on<br class="">IRC).<br class=""><br class="">To this end, I want to throw this option out: for maximum fairness when<br class="">there is only one meeting slot provided, consider moving *all*<br class="">applications to the same asynchronous method and keep the meetings only<br class="">for administrative DMB matters which you feel need to be discussed<br class="">synchronously.<br class=""></blockquote><br style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Monaco; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class=""><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Monaco; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">I completely agree, with one addition - I think candidates should have</span><br style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Monaco; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class=""><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Monaco; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">the option of requesting a synchronous meeting if they want one.</span><br style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Monaco; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class=""></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>I'm +1 on defaulting to async and letting the applicant to choose if</div><div>he would like the process to be sync. Only one thing we have to consider:</div><div>async "tests" are easy to "pass" as you can seek for information on a</div><div>question done by e-mail for example (while the sync interviewing process</div><div>does not give that option to the candidate). Nevertheless, I'm not a</div><div>huge fan of the interview process we currently have as it always seem</div><div>to me we're trying to trick candidates to answer something wrong. I</div><div>prefer to analyze the previous work of the candidate and base my</div><div>vote from this "async" root of information anyway.</div></div><br class=""></body></html>