#210 Criteria for fund request approval
Closed: Invalid None Opened 10 years ago by mribeirodantas.

Hello fellow contributors,

Regardless of how democratic and efficient we think ticket voting is in LATAM, there is no doubt we can improve it. A discussion came up in the mailing list (Brazilian Ambassadors) regarding the criteria for fund request approval, and after some discussion some nice points were raised.

Though it was suggested to take it to the official wiki for future reference, I thought it'd be better to file a ticket and discuss it during the next meeting before voting really starts. This way we could compile an even better set of criteria with larger consensus.

I briefly quote some criteria suggested in the mailing list below:

'''Events Report'''
1) Once you're sponsored to attend an event, you're supposed to write a report back to the community sharing it through Fedora Planet. It's no "it would be nice". You have to. The frequency and amount of details depend on the size and duration of the event. Nobody will expect you to write pages and pages, for days in a row about an event that took two hours, though it'd be really nice. The same way, it wouldn't really be nice of you to write a paragraph about a international event that took three days. Is it really everything you have to say?!

'''Activity already approved'''
2) Contributors whose talks are already approved should have preference. Of course we can't just make a law out of it, after all it depends on several things, but if the talk of someone has already been approved, we should have a reason for not sponsoring this person.

Besides, we should not forget that there must be an equilibrium. We can't just foment people who enjoy speaking to large audiences. During an event, we need all sort of contributors, including the ones who like staying at the booth, supporting new contributors, helping Fedora users with technical issues and well, working the one-a-one.

'''Not forgetting there are other contributors too'''
3) Of course it's nice to travel, meet new people and have some nice experiences. But we should not forget to give opportunity to other contributors too. They're there, doing their best, why should I not consider they should get a chance to be sponsored too?

If we have to decide between two contributors who both do a great job and one has been less sponsored than the other, we should go for the less sponsored. Giving opportunities is what makes our community meritocratic and with a nice cycle of new-old contributors. We must show them our support.

Meeting and/or Activity Assiduity
4) Attending a meeting at dinner time in the middle of the week is not easy, we all know it. Timezones make it really difficult for some to attend, and we're even aware of some people who are stuck in traffic or driving back home during the time of our LATAM meeting. This item is not about 'you must attend meetings', it's more like having done something for Fedora. Neither it is about translating strings everyday or packaging new packages every 48 hours.

We must have common sense in here (which includes the person requesting funds). I see no problem about requesting funding if you've contributed to Fedora along the time. I see a problem when you pop out of nowhere and starts contributing like a beast a month or so before the voting of the event you want to attend. So have common sense. If you think you're a good contributor and you think you deserve it, don't think twice. File your ticket.

PS: Something VERY important (and that we are reminded every year) is that we must NOT point fingers and say you don't, you aren't you suck. Right now, even for some people in Fedora Infrastructure, plus the help of Fedora Badges and everything that is logged, it is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to track who does not contribute. Basically, you can't just tell. Some people wear a fedora face everyday of their lives and talk about Fedora regardless of where they go. Just because you can't read a log saying that, you think you're worthy of saying this person doesn't contribute?

Everyday I find new ways to contribute to Fedora, through https://apps.fedoraproject.org/ for example. If you're not 100% sure the person has not been contributing in any way, DON'T judge this person. Do you want to vote -1? Good luck. But don't feel you're good enough to humiliate the person in public.

However, there must be something to measure the contributions, after all it may happen that we have two people requesting funds and we can only sponsor one. They're tied regarding the other criteria and we have to find out who has been a better contributed. In this situation, I think we should ask the contributors why they think they should be contributed and take into consideration Fedora Badges (which is not perfect, but at least is evolving everyday, being more and more accurate with time).


While all the criterias are there voting and supporting sponsorship for an event it is a matter of personal criteria, so every one has vote acording to what he think is best.

However event owners should be able to define what is the profile of the contributor that fit best for the event.

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata