Tison,

The suggestion was stated a bit differently:

Quote:

Rather, I would recommend a project-level “active/inactive” flag that PMC
members can voluntarily apply to themselves. For example, do a PMC roll
call on private@pulsar.a.o <mailto:private@pulsar.a.o> and ask whether
current PMC members self describe as “active” or “inactive”. That status
could then be reflected on the Community section of the pulsar website. No
reply from a PMC member? Mark them inactive until they request a change.

End Quote


On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 6:13 PM tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I won't object if any PMC member or committer is willing to set their
> personal status; e.g., open to topics of a specific domain, "inactive"
> or "don't
> disturb"
>
> Best,
> tison.
>
>
> Asaf Mesika <asaf.mes...@gmail.com> 于2023年3月7日周二 00:05写道:
>
> > Do other think it's a good thing to adopt P. Taylor Goetz idea of active
> > flag and the process suggested?
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 2:03 PM tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Yu,
> > >
> > > You can start by adding a page on the contribution guide or a table in
> > the
> > > README of the main repo/site repo to state that you're an expert in the
> > > document domain.
> > >
> > > I have an in-house landscape about Pulsar modules, the broader
> ecosystem,
> > > and their active contributors/maintainers. Since people may not want to
> > be
> > > referred to publicly by another person, I don't make it public.
> > >
> > > Finding experts can be a skill to collaborate in a community. You can
> > find
> > > them when browsing relative PRs, analyzing the commit history, meeting
> > them
> > > in the community, and having conversations. I don't have the motivation
> > to
> > > maintain such a table publicly.
> > >
> > > Scala has a table of domain experts that can help[1]. If you like it,
> you
> > > can list yourself and try to bring other experts to list themselves.
> The
> > > ASF shares a sense that "The Foundation belongs to *you*". You're
> > already a
> > > PMC member and able to drive such an effort.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/scala/scala#get-in-touch
> > >
> > >
> > > Yu <li...@apache.org> 于2023年3月6日周一 19:48写道:
> > >
> > > > Hi Asaf,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for bringing this up!
> > > >
> > > > If I may put my two pennies' worth:
> > > >
> > > > To be honest, this idea flashed across my mind previously. I talked
> > about
> > > > this to my colleague, and he was surprised that I was willing to be
> > > > deprived of benefits (at that time, I was a PMC member already).
> > > >
> > > > PMC members are vital promotors and driving forces of a community.
> > > Ideally,
> > > > they should be direction leaders and make great contributions
> > > > *continuously*. No one should enjoy the benefits of honor but not
> > > > contribute much *all the time*. Setting retirement bars for PMC
> members
> > > > reminds us to contribute and provide value. Maybe I'm a little
> > aggressive
> > > > :-)
> > > >
> > > > ~~~~~~
> > > >
> > > > +1 but a long list of PMC members with many inactive members does not
> > > > create a good feeling since "false prosperity" is no better than
> "real
> > > > contributions".
> > > >
> > > > > 3. Merit doesn’t expire.
> > > >
> > > > ~~~~~~
> > > >
> > > > Compared to my previous thought, Goetz has proposed a better idea
> > since:
> > > >
> > > > 1. It's mild and can be accepted by many PMC members. A kind of life
> > > wisdom
> > > > :-)
> > > >
> > > > 2. People who need help (e.g., PIP approvals / PR comments / ...)
> from
> > > PMC
> > > > members can check the flags to know who is available to help.
> > > >
> > > > Except for flags, I suggest adding "area of expertise" for PMC
> members
> > > and
> > > > committers, so people will know who are the most suitable experts to
> > ask
> > > > for help or collaborate.
> > > >
> > > > > 1. You can maintain active/inactive status at the project level
> with
> > a
> > > > simple flag on a community page, without removing people from the
> PMC.
> > > > > 2. By making it an informal, self-reported flag, you avoid the
> > overhead
> > > > of board resolutions, etc. and just manage it at the community level.
> > If
> > > > someone wants to change their status, they can just say so or submit
> a
> > > pull
> > > > request to change their status on the pulsar website.
> > > >
> > > > ~~~~~~
> > > >
> > > > Yu
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 10:31 PM Asaf Mesika <asaf.mes...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks to everyone who took the time to carefully answer with
> > detailed
> > > > > explanations.
> > > > > I personally learned a lot about Apache projects this way (made me
> > read
> > > > > about it some more).
> > > > >
> > > > > So my personal recap is:
> > > > >
> > > > >    - The goal of knowing the health of the Apache Pulsar community
> > can
> > > be
> > > > >    achieved by taking a look at monthly active contributors over
> time
> > > > >    displayed on the community page.
> > > > >       - It could be nice getting those numbers on the mailing list
> > > itself
> > > > >       as well.
> > > > >    - Calculating the engagement is not an easy task.
> > > > >    - Kicking people off is not something you'd like to do in
> general
> > > and
> > > > >    specifically for volunteers.
> > > > >    - People's credit for work, which is also expressed in PMC
> > > membership
> > > > >    never expires due to Merit never expires - your work credit and
> > > earned
> > > > >    right should not expire.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I personally see PMC members answering someone not a PMC member
> nor a
> > > > > comitter on this topic as a very healthy community indicator :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks !
> > > > >
> > > > > Asaf
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 10:22 AM Enrico Olivelli <
> eolive...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is an interesting discussion.
> > > > > > Good to see this kind of a discussion on the dev@ mailing list,
> > this
> > > > > > way more people are aware of the fact that we are a project in
> the
> > > ASF
> > > > > > and there is a Project Management Committee.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been following a few Apache projects for a while, and I
> > > believe
> > > > > > that this kind of discussions should be run on the private@
> > mailing
> > > > > > list.
> > > > > > It is the PMC that usually deals with this stuff.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As Tison said, the common practice is that you never remove
> anyone
> > > > > > from a PMC or from the Committers list.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This happens only in rare cases where an individual behaves in
> > such a
> > > > > > way that the Project or the Foundation could be damaged,
> > > > > > for instance if you speak on behalf of the project and you offend
> > > > > > someone publicly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Inactive contributors/committers/PMC members do not do any harm
> to
> > a
> > > > > > project.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some projects have some rules that you cannot participate in
> > official
> > > > > > VOTEs if you are not "active".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If anyone has some problems with someone in the community, then
> > they
> > > > > > can reach out to priv...@pulsar.apache.org and the PMC will
> listen
> > > to
> > > > > > the problem and take actions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > my 2 cents
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Enrico
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Il giorno ven 3 mar 2023 alle ore 04:39 Yunze Xu
> > > > > > <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> ha scritto:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As a PMC member, I don't like playing a game of determining who
> > > > should
> > > > > > > be removed from PMC as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I hear a viewpoint that someone is only participating in the
> > > > community
> > > > > > > only to join a PMC so that he can benefit from it. After
> > becoming a
> > > > > > > PMC member, he is never active in the community. It might be
> true
> > > but
> > > > > > > I think it's acceptable. Making such a rule won't prevent such
> > > cases.
> > > > > > > If he wants, he can make use of the rule and keep himself
> > "active"
> > > to
> > > > > > > avoid being kicked out of the PMC. Though the active state is
> > fake.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm not against the way to remove (or something else that
> sounds
> > > > good)
> > > > > > > a PMC member because none of these ways is perfect. However,
> I'm
> > > > > > > STRONGLY AGAINST changing a rule that has been applied for some
> > > time
> > > > > > > unless it can be proved the rule is very harmful to the
> > community.
> > > > > > > You mentioned https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#pmc-removal.
> > But
> > > > > > > please don't ignore the first sentence:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Projects can establish their own policy on handling inactive
> > > > members,
> > > > > > as long as they apply it CONSISTENTLY.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In addition, Dave and Tison both mentioned we have some boards
> or
> > > > > > > webpages to see how many people are active. We don't need to
> > remove
> > > > > > > some PMC members just for knowing who were still active
> recently.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > BTW, I'm also curious about the motivation of this proposal.
> I'm
> > > > > > > wondering how do the inactive PMC members harm the community?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Yunze
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 10:14 AM tison <wander4...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In the proposal, it's unclear if you'd like to _mark_ the
> > > inactive
> > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > in emeritus status or _remove_ them from the LDAP group.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I saw a similar discussion in the Flink community, resulting
> in
> > > > > > "active"
> > > > > > > > sentences in its Bylaws[1]. Here is some consensus there:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. Merits never expire. There's no reason to _remove_ a
> > committer
> > > > or
> > > > > > PMC
> > > > > > > > member from the LDAP group because of inactive following the
> > > Apache
> > > > > > way. I
> > > > > > > > remember numbered cases a member got removed because they
> > _keep_
> > > > > > harming
> > > > > > > > the community.
> > > > > > > > 2. Emeritus status is set for unblocking consensus. The Flink
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > experienced some votes that could not get the required
> > approvals
> > > in
> > > > > > time
> > > > > > > > and thus tried to unblock consensus by setting some members
> > with
> > > > > > binding
> > > > > > > > votes in emeritus status. Do we spot concrete issues that the
> > > > Pulsar
> > > > > > > > community cannot work well with current PMC members and
> > > committers
> > > > > > group?
> > > > > > > > 3. Emeritus status is voluntary. I know that in other
> > > foundations,
> > > > it
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > be judged or eagerly applied, but in ASF, we share a
> "Community
> > > of
> > > > > > Peers"
> > > > > > > > sense that everyone is a volunteer. They won't be "fired"
> > because
> > > > of
> > > > > > "low
> > > > > > > > productivity".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gain real visibility into the health of the project in
> terms
> > of
> > > > > real
> > > > > > > > active PMC / Committers members.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On the community page, we already have a monthly active
> > > contributor
> > > > > > graph.
> > > > > > > > It's an insight concept; I don't think we should _remove_
> > members
> > > > for
> > > > > > such
> > > > > > > > a reason.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have the alert threshold set correctly as to when it's time
> > to
> > > > > start
> > > > > > > > working on recruiting new PMC / Committers members
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ditto. When working in the community, you will know what
> > modules
> > > or
> > > > > > repos
> > > > > > > > lack participants. For example, I remember someone proposing
> to
> > > > > promote
> > > > > > > > more committers working on Pulsar multilingual clients. It's
> > not
> > > a
> > > > > > reason
> > > > > > > > for emeritus or removal.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Generally, committers and PMC members have "Earned Authority"
> > to
> > > be
> > > > > in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > group. They share a high trust level, and I have numerous
> > > examples
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > returned members do outstanding work. If we don't have some
> > > > critical
> > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > to introduce an emeritus status, and such members do no harm,
> > why
> > > > do
> > > > > > we set
> > > > > > > > a bar if they return?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > tison.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1]
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Bylaws
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> 于2023年3月3日周五 09:37写道:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mar 2, 2023, at 11:58 AM, Asaf Mesika <
> > > > asaf.mes...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Following the discussion I've started in Pulsar bi-weekly
> > > > > meetings.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As I said when you brought this up, I don’t think it is a
> > good
> > > > > idea,
> > > > > > not a
> > > > > > > > > good idea at all.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Projects can establish their own policy on handling
> > inactive
> > > > > > members, as
> > > > > > > > > > long as they apply it consistently.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As a PMC member I have no desire to play a game of
> > consistently
> > > > > > tossing
> > > > > > > > > PMC members who somehow haven’t met an engagement criteria.
> > > That
> > > > is
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > anti-pattern to building a community. It would be
> disruptive
> > > and
> > > > > time
> > > > > > > > > consuming.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > = The idea
> > > > > > > > > > PMC and Committers members will transition into Emeritus
> > > status
> > > > > > after X
> > > > > > > > > > months of inactivity, or voluntarily.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > PMC members have the opportunity with or without this
> > proposal
> > > to
> > > > > > > > > voluntarily resign as PMC members with or without giving up
> > > their
> > > > > > commit
> > > > > > > > > bit.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > = Why?
> > > > > > > > > > - Gain real visibility into the health of the project in
> > > terms
> > > > of
> > > > > > real
> > > > > > > > > > active PMC / Committers members.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Here is an exercise. Generate activity reports to show
> > > criteria.
> > > > We
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > correlate between the rosters and all of our GitHub
> > > repositories.
> > > > > > Also
> > > > > > > > > Mailing lists and slack which only goes back 90 days. I
> would
> > > be
> > > > > > better
> > > > > > > > > persuaded if you did that to actually show and prove that
> > there
> > > > is
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > problem. I think you will find that it is a large amount of
> > > > effort
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > little value in the end.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > - Have the alert threshold set correctly as to when it's
> > time
> > > > to
> > > > > > start
> > > > > > > > > > working on recruiting new PMC / Committers members.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Those two points are not coupled. We ARE ALWAYS be on the
> > alert
> > > > for
> > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > > committers and PMC Members. This PMC has been ACTIVE in
> > > > recognizing
> > > > > > many of
> > > > > > > > > those who are deserving.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Here are the Pulsar Board reports:
> > > > > > > > > https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Pulsar
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > = Is there any precedence?
> > > > > > > > > > Yes. A lot.
> > > > > > > > > > Many CNCF projects do it.
> > > > > > > > > > Many Apache projects do it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I’ve been on many PMC’s and I cannot think of one that does
> > > this.
> > > > > > You’ve
> > > > > > > > > come up with a few examples below, but I won’t be
> persuaded.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Apache foundations rules allow it.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Read below to see examples and links.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > = Examples
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > === etcD project <
> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don’t care about how another Foundation does it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Quote
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Life priorities, interests, and passions can change.
> > > > Maintainers
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > retire
> > > > > > > > > > and move to the emeritus status
> > > > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/README.md#etcd-emeritus-maintainers
> > > > > > > > > >.
> > > > > > > > > > If a maintainer needs to step down, they should inform
> > other
> > > > > > maintainers,
> > > > > > > > > > if possible, help find someone to pick up the related
> work.
> > > At
> > > > > the
> > > > > > very
> > > > > > > > > > least, ensure the related work can be continued.
> Afterward
> > > they
> > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > remove
> > > > > > > > > > themselves from list of existing maintainers.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If a maintainer is not been performing their duties for
> > > period
> > > > of
> > > > > > 12
> > > > > > > > > > months, they can be removed by other maintainers. In that
> > > case
> > > > > > inactive
> > > > > > > > > > maintainer will be first notified via an email. If
> > situation
> > > > > > doesn't
> > > > > > > > > > improve, they will be removed. If an emeritus maintainer
> > > wants
> > > > to
> > > > > > regain
> > > > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > active role, they can do so by renewing their
> > contributions.
> > > > > Active
> > > > > > > > > > maintainers should welcome such a move. Retiring of other
> > > > > > maintainers or
> > > > > > > > > > regaining the status should require approval of at least
> > two
> > > > > active
> > > > > > > > > > maintainers.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > === Apache Gump
> > > > > > > > > > According to this link <
> > https://gump.apache.org/bylaws.html
> > > >,
> > > > > > they have
> > > > > > > > > > emeritus status for maintainers and PMC members and
> policy
> > to
> > > > > > transition.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gump is a tiny project that does not release code. The two
> > PMC
> > > > > > members was
> > > > > > > > > added in 2014. The rest were in 2004 - 2006. The project
> is a
> > > > build
> > > > > > system
> > > > > > > > > that other projects used to use. I don’t even know if any
> > > project
> > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > uses it. In fact that are just keeping it up for Tomcat.
> See
> > > > > > > > > https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Gump
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > QUOTE
> > > > > > > > > > Committer access is by invitation only and must be
> approved
> > > by
> > > > > lazy
> > > > > > > > > > consensus of the active PMC members. A Committer is
> > > considered
> > > > > > emeritus
> > > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > their own declaration or by not contributing in any form
> to
> > > the
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > over six months. An emeritus committer may request
> > > > reinstatement
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > commit
> > > > > > > > > > access from the PMC. Such reinstatement is subject to
> lazy
> > > > > > consensus of
> > > > > > > > > > active PMC members.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > All of their committers except for on of 16 are ASF
> Members.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Membership of the PMC is by invitation only and must be
> > > > approved
> > > > > > by a
> > > > > > > > > lazy
> > > > > > > > > > consensus of active PMC members. A PMC member is
> considered
> > > > > > "emeritus" by
> > > > > > > > > > their own declaration or by not contributing in any form
> to
> > > the
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > over six months. An emeritus member may request
> > reinstatement
> > > > to
> > > > > > the PMC.
> > > > > > > > > > Such reinstatement is subject to lazy consensus of the
> > active
> > > > PMC
> > > > > > > > > members.
> > > > > > > > > > Membership of the PMC can be revoked by an unanimous vote
> > of
> > > > all
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > active
> > > > > > > > > > PMC members other than the member in question.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > END QUOTE
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > There are many more: Apache Hive
> > > > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Bylaws#Bylaws-Committers
> > > > > > > > > >,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hive has 56 PMC Members and 106 Committers. I can tell from
> > > their
> > > > > > roster
> > > > > > > > > that many do not seem to be engaged any more.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Board reports:
> https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Hive
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Apache Orc <
> > > > > > > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/orc/blob/main/site/develop/bylaws.md
> > > >,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > They are actively working to regrow, but I doubt they are
> > > kicking
> > > > > > out many
> > > > > > > > > PMC members. You could read their board reports:
> > > > > > > > > https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/ORC
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > = What does Apache thinks about this?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > According to this link <
> > > > > > https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#pmc-removal
> > > > > > > > > >,
> > > > > > > > > > any project can have their policies for retire an
> inactive
> > > PMC
> > > > > > member.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > QUOTE
> > > > > > > > > > SHOULD A PMC REMOVE INACTIVE MEMBERS?
> > > > > > > > > > <https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#pmc-removal>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Projects can establish their own policy on handling
> > inactive
> > > > > > members, as
> > > > > > > > > > long as they apply it consistently. It is not a problem
> to
> > > > retain
> > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > of the PMC who have become inactive, and it can make it
> > > easier
> > > > > for
> > > > > > them
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > stay in touch with the project if they choose to become
> > > active
> > > > > > again.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Typically, PMC members who are no longer able to
> > participate
> > > > will
> > > > > > resign
> > > > > > > > > > from the PMC. However, if a PMC chooses to remove one of
> > its
> > > > > > members
> > > > > > > > > > (without that member's request or consent), it must
> request
> > > the
> > > > > > Board to
> > > > > > > > > > make that decision (which is typically done with a
> > resolution
> > > > at
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > Board's next meeting). The PMC chair should send an email
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > board@
> > > > > > > > > > mailing list detailing the request for removal and the
> > > > > > justification the
> > > > > > > > > > PMC has for that removal, and copy the project's private@
> > > > list.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > END QUOTE
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > = Summary
> > > > > > > > > > I believe that Apache Pulsar has the responsibility with
> > > > respect
> > > > > > to its
> > > > > > > > > > users to reflect the real number of people actively in
> the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > - its
> > > > > > > > > > PMC members.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > How would you do it consistently? How would you measure
> > > > > > disengagement?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The only fair way would be to go through the exercise of
> > > > measuring
> > > > > > actual
> > > > > > > > > engagement. Once you do I think that you will understand
> why
> > it
> > > > is
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > really done.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > Dave
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to