DMB: Proposal for a different review process

[Oliver Grawert]

hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 04.08.2011, 10:12 -0400 schrieb Mackenzie Morgan:
> I'd actually take Kate off that list. 
why ? she expressed her surprise about LP contributions not counting as
well in tuesdays meeting. the same apparently made jorge be a bad
canonical guy, why isnt this the case for kate ?
neither of them ranted or argued in the meeting and still it caused the
discussion we currently have.

>  I
> honestly believe there are some managers at Canonical who think that
> the way membership works is:
> - Hire someone
> - Wait a token number of months
> - Get new hire to write an application
> - New hire writes a "meh" application
> - Get other team members to all write testimonials because quantity
> beats quality
> - Automatic approval
> 
> YES!
GOD ! 

If you really think canonical managers have the time to even remotely
think about such plans, dont you think they would just try to change the
rules instead of making up a fake process ?

seriously there are canonical teams where your first objective is to try
to achieve membership in ubuntu within your first six months, becoming
an ubuntu member is encouraged all across the company docs and i think
from a management perspective thats as far as it goes ...

indeed if you want to get testimonials from people trhat worked with
you, you will ask your co-workers.

"meh" applications will get rejected no matter if you are canonical or
not. 

> > or did you just think
> > "screw it, these canonical bastards again, sigh" and blame canonical for
> > their opinions ?
> 
> More like:
> Ugh, these two getting upset about the people they manage being
> rejected. Again. How predictable! *eye roll*
and what forbids them from being like that ? go ahead, fill the gap in
their knowledge so they are not upset next time, if things are
predictable for you you should as well be able to change them.
 
i dont think we have a rule yet in the community anywhere that forbids
being upset and board members should really be able to be above such
things if they happen in a meeting instead of winding up and blaming
canonical in the end. i have seen enough membership meetings where
discussions or rants occur after someone who brought a bunch of cheering
friends was rejected, it happens and its totally not bound to canonical.

ciao
	oli