New roles in the Ubuntu IRC team

Juha Siltala topyli at ubuntu.com
Wed Oct 26 05:32:39 UTC 2011


Hi,

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 03:10, Melissa Draper <melissa at meldraweb.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Elizabeth Krumbach <lyz at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Juha Siltala <topyli at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Chris,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 15:43,  <chris at cjo20.net> wrote:
>> >> It seems that the list of duties is basically a list of things that the
>> >> IRCC should be doing themselves already. If they are saying 'we do not
>> >> have enough time to be doing the things we should be doing', then there
>> >> either needs to be
>> >
>> > That is why this proposal exists, to fix the above. Delegation is
>> > appropriate when work is overwhelming the current workforce.
>>
>> I think this is worth repeating. There is currently a lot of work on
>> the shoulders of all board and council members within the Ubuntu
>> project and lack of delegation is a problem. Councils should be
>> responsible for making sure things get done, NOT doing all the work
>> themselves - in fact, I think something is wrong if the Council
>> members are doing everything.
>
> This is true. However this is not the situation. The IRCC isn't doing
> everything.
>
> Rather, it isn't doing anything. Or when it does do things, it does
> them wrong by not listening at all or outright dismissing with
> internal comments such as "but this should shut people up, erm, I mean
> satisfy people ;)".

I find this a bit insulting. Some IRCC members are doing a lot of
work, and I'd appreciate it if their work were not dismissed through
vague insinuations. You're a member of the Council and can help if you
wish, or you can undermine its work as above.

> People are naturally teaming up on interest/focus areas. This is
> *organic*. There's already natural appointing of
> champions/spokespeople on an issue-by-issue basis.
>
> There's nothing wrong with focus teams.
>
> What is achieved by appointing particular people to particular areas
> rather than letting (and encouraging) these teams form and designate
> spokespeople on an as-needed basis or by actioning to particular
> people in a meeting?

There is of course nothing stopping the "champions" being
self-selected like that. We can't "appoint" anyone against their will
anyway. The process through which we find and recognize these people
has not been touched in this discussion so far at all, we haven't
gotten past the point of deciding whether or not they're needed in the
first place.

-- 
Juha Siltala
http://ubuntu.com



More information about the Ubuntu-irc mailing list