On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Javier P.L. <chilic...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > I'd split my vote between 'sponsored' and 'evaluated', the first one have the > drawback that persons could think you're strongly sponsored by canonical and > that would lead to more people demanding Ubuntu resources, because you're > sponsored. > > However in most cases it seems like the general rule is that people involved > in the local teams give and support with their own resources many of the > Ubuntu activities. > > I think 'verified' is closer to the reality. >
In either case, one needs a clear cut definition of what exactly sponsored means and its benefits whilst making sure that the loco team is sponsored by the ubuntu community in terms of the resources provided to sponsored locoteams (i.e sponsored locoteams get x and y stuff as a support (eg dvd's/cd's et al)) On the contrary verified also is good but it should not raise a point in any of the locoteams as to LoCo council does not look at the operations of unverified loco teams (which isn't btw) and should not refrain anyone from reaching out to the LoCo council in case of any issues. Thanks for all your views and efforts to spread ubuntu! Cheers, -- Bhavani Shankar Ubuntu Developer | www.ubuntu.com https://launchpad.net/~bhavi -- loco-contacts mailing list loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
