Ted Husted wrote: > On 4/11/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Cast a binding vote in the project? Yes, of course. Mentorship is a >> heavier >> hammer than that, when necessary. > > As a three-time Mentor, I would venture that anyone who mentors with a > hammer doesn't understand the role :)
* when necessary * given some of the problems that have been percolating all the way to general@, there are some problems in mentorships. The hammer is only applicable to things that are not acceptable ever - backroom (offlist) decision making, refusing to acknowledge merit (keeping a podling 'closed') or not complying with the ASL. There is a short list of unacceptable practices at the ASF - the mentors job is to short circuit those early before they become habit (or - more difficult - rewire them for projects with a long prior-history before entry to the incubator.) When these problems escalate to iPMC there is a problem in the mentoring, either mentors not raising the hammer, or podlings refusing to listen to the advise. Lowering the hammer sometimes has to come from the iPMC, but it should already be hanging over their heads, having very clearly explained what's wrong with the status quo and why at the podling level. This makes it possible for the iPMC to act, instead of discussing the possibility of entertaining the thought of taking a potential action. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
