On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 9:46 PM, Randall Ross <rand...@executiv.es> wrote: > I don't feel the tweak is hitting the crux of the issue. Perhaps it's > still a result of terminology though. I'm confused, so let me try to > play it back... > > The tweaked problem statement sounds like: > > 4) LoCo teams (that are regional or national) aren't serving the > communities (that are truly local) within their boundaries to the extent > that they need to be supported. As a result, local teams (that are truly > local) are rare. > > Is this true?
Kinda, but I think we're still speaking two different languages, let's try and rectify I think that a LoCo should cover a large scope. It should be this large scope that decides on how to break up it's area into something that it can manage. I don't think changing the verbage to have a LoCo refer to a city would really help at this point. If we had to do it again, yeah, I could see your point. Too little, too late changing the names at this point IMHO. After all, we can't really set up a way to split up every case, we should instead set up what we expect from a team, and let the team hit that objective. If it's something in the official policy, it's something we would have to look at when considering a team for approval or re-approval. Yes, you don't see city level locos on the LD or list because there should not be city level locos. LoCos should be state / country level. How it breaks up ( county / city / lat & lon ) is really up to the team it's self IMHO. > > Cheers, > Randall. > > -- > > > On 10-08-23 06:35 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Randall Ross <rand...@executiv.es> wrote: >> >>> Who needs bugs anyways? ;) Let's discuss. >>> >> I like it :) >> >> >>> I suggest that we start with a *problem statement*. Several come to mind >>> based on this thread. >>> >>> 1) "LoCo's are not local enough" or, >>> >>> 2) "LoCo's would become more local if sufficient guidelines were put in >>> place to help them" >>> >>> 3) "LoCo's that are local need guidance to run/operate"? >>> >> I think these are all really strong starts ( and in the spirit of >> "yes, and" and not "yes, but" ) I will "tweek" them a bit -- >> >> LoCo teams would better serve the community if guidelines and >> expectations regarding activity on a local ( read -- no farther then >> an hour or two from another area ( we use 30 minutes for Ohio ) ) were >> put in place for both approved and un-approved local communities. >> >> >>> I vote for number 1. (No surprise to many I guess.) Let me explain why: >>> We have over 12 million Ubuntu users worldwide and only 7 truly local >>> teams. That's a big problem. A community of our size should have many >>> many more. The lack of truly local teams hobbles our marketing efforts, >>> our visibility in the community, and possibly more. Our mindshare may be >>> shrinking for the first time in history... >>> >>> Which problem do you all feel we trying to solve? >>> >> How do you feel about my tweek? >> >> >>> Cheers, >>> Randall >>> Ubuntu Vancouver LoCo >>> >>> >>> On 10-08-23 05:35 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Contacts, >>>> >>>> I'd like to kick off a discussion, if I could. >>>> >>>> Bug #392986[1] was filed a while ago. I just closed it, and figured we >>>> can actually, well, follow through with this. >>>> >>>> The bug is about how LoCos are not Local enough. I closed the bug with >>>> the note that we would adopt a best practices line for how to run a >>>> LoCo with a city level presence ( *more* then one ). >>>> >>>> Since this bug is now *closed*, please do not file anything against >>>> this bug ( comments or otherwise ), and keep it in this thread. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? Opinions? >>>> >>>> -Paul >>>> >>>> [1]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/392986 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> loco-contacts mailing list >>> loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts >>> >>> >> -Tag >> >> > > > -- > loco-contacts mailing list > loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts > -Tag -- #define sizeof(x) rand() :wq -- loco-contacts mailing list loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
