Hi All, My take on this has changed a little. I think right now our primary focus should be encouraging and inspiring teams to actively participate in Ubuntu, and I worry at times that our requirements around approval or meeting a certain criteria can stand in the way of teams being active.
If we have active participants who want to form a city team and they are reluctant to be part of a wider country/state team, particularly when that country/state is very large geographically, I think we need to empower them to be part of our community. If we reject them because they don't fit our criteria, it restricts their ability to be successful - as an example, I think if we have a team in Moscow that is being active, we should let them post their blog posts to loco.ubuntu.com - why would we not want to expose their Ubuntu contributions to the wider LoCo community? I do however feel there is a balance to be struck here - we should always encourage these city teams to work closely with other Ubuntu groups, but I don't think that is traditionally a problem - if we don't ask teams to work together they often do, and if they really don't want to work together, then us asking them to be part of the main team isn't going to happen for sure. :-) My recommendation: live and let live, lets let the teams in and handle the cases of conflict on a case by case basis - at least this way we empower teams wherever they may be to do great work. :-) One final point, there was some tension in this thread. Let's all remember we are on the same side - everyone in this thread brings incredible contributions to Ubuntu and while personalities differ, our passion doesn't - I would encourage Laura and Randall get together on a call off-thread to settle any issues before anything brews any further. Jono -- Jono Bacon Ubuntu Community Manager www.ubuntu.com / www.jonobacon.org www.identi.ca/jonobacon www.twitter.com/jonobacon
-- loco-contacts mailing list loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
