neil at ubuntu.org.zw
Fri Jul 23 15:16:35 BST 2010
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 14:52 +0200, Philipp Stiegler wrote:
> I know some guys, who have their work, make their studies AND care
> about the ubuntu project. They do that for free without asking for
> payment or asking for anything else. Thats why I think that its not
> fair that a council judge that people.
Just to give a somewhat impartial view on this, because our LoCo Team is
still a way off of being approved I think, and this is something we're
1. I certainly don't think the Council is judging people as individuals,
but rather how those individuals come together as a team and organise
themselves, which is quite different in my opinion. There may be a
number of individuals on a team who are a shining example of commitment
and hard work, but this does not necessarily mean that the team is
performing well. And when the team does not meet required standards,
this is also not necessarily a bad reflection on the individuals who are
doing their best.
2. Team accountability and organisation is vital, particularly when
additional resources are being given to them, so I personally feel that
the approval process is important. I think how this is viewed depends on
individual perspectives, but I'm sure it is not intended to discourage
people, but quite the opposite; it gives teams something to aim for both
initially, and in the long-term.
3. Speaking from the experiences we've had in our team: There have been
times when the team has nearly fallen apart, due to lack of enthusiasm
and personal clashes among other things. The main reason we have tried
so hard to keep things together is obviously for the overall well-being
of Ubuntu and the community in our area, but at least one other reason
was knowing that we have goals to achieve, including reaching the point
where we're ready for approval. Knowing that we're not just "doing our
own thing" and that in the long run we have expectations to meet, is one
of the things that has helped motivate us to keep things together.
4. For Teams facing "re" approval, I think this is just as important. I
can think of any number of voluntary commitments that are started with
good intentions but never continue or reach completion simply because
people have to deal with other issues in their lives and at some point
might lose interest. Having to be approved repeatedly ensures that Teams
maintain their commitment and continue to deliver results.
In summary, I do think that even voluntary groups need a certain amount
of "policing" to maintain standards, but this should be seen as
motivation, rather than discouragement. It should encourage us to keep
getting better and better, both as teams and as individuals, as we reach
for the goals that have been set.
More information about the loco-contacts