Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> IMHO, there should probably be a max number of concurrent
> projects that one can be a mentor for. This would lead to
> a whole set of derived effects
> * Projects that turns inactive/dormant will be 'terminated'
> by the mentors, as they may want to help out other
> projects instead.
Or could be prematurely terminated if the mentors preferred to work on some
other project.
> * Potential Mentors may be a bit more selective and do more
> evaluation of the situation before accepting Mentorship.
But is that notion of selective beneficial?
> * As the most "active Mentors" get filled up, the circle of
> willing Mentors need to be expanded, and people putting
> together proposals have to actively persuade "fresh blood"
> to help out.
We are always encouraging new people to sign up. The current number of
Incubator PMC members is 41, of which 7 have been added this year alone.
> I have no opinion of "how many" is a good [max number of projects]
I don't believe that there is any such good number. The question is whether
or not a Mentors has the time, energy, and ability to perform the job. It
seems to me that such would vary greatly both with the demands of any given
podling, and other demands placed upon each Mentor. But this is another
reason for why we want multiple Mentors. Alex Karasulu set a nice example
recently, when he indicated that he was having difficulty meeting his
Mentoring responsibilities, and asked for others to volunteer as Mentors to
help out. And he was mentoring just one podling, so no such numeric rule
would have helped.
Personally, I favor fewer rules, and empowering trusted people to make human
decisions, rather than taking decisions from their hands.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
