[IAEP] SoaS as a Sugar Labs project.

David Farning dfarning at sugarlabs.org
Wed Aug 26 12:33:49 EDT 2009

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Bert Freudenberg<bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> On 26.08.2009, at 17:42, David Farning wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Michael Stone<michael at laptop.org> wrote:
>>> Tomeu,
>>>> Frankly Michael, the only way I can read these posts from you is that
>>>> you are frustrated because we aren't churning more work, regardless of
>>>> how much we have achieved that is relevant to OLPC deployments.
>>> Correct.
>>> I do not accept that work I have managed to do in the past is sufficient
>>> simply
>>> because it was the work that I was able to do. Instead, I form or
>>> disintegrate
>>> this acceptance with reference to three external measures:
>>>  * absolute standards of quality, e.g. as formed by acceptance testing
>>> against
>>>    written design goals or user experiences,
>>>  * relative standards of quality as evidenced by the respect and
>>> participation
>>>    of specific individuals whose judgment I trust and whose biases seem
>>> to me
>>>    to control for some of my obvious biases, and
>>>  * freeform standards of quality as evidenced by what other people have
>>>    made from the work.
>>> I am therefore frustrated, for the reason you mention, because I believe
>>> that
>>> our work is achieves none of these standards of "good enough".
>>> (Unsurprisingly, I'm frustrated for some other reasons too, but that's
>>> neither
>>> here nor there.)
>>>> Do you have any actionable ideas about how to work better for our users?
>>> I perceive a double bind: I have lots of ideas, but ideas are cheap and
>>> seem
>>> most unwelcome here -- they're just "talk" instead of "do", aren't they?
>>> Michael
>>> P.S - Maybe a reasonable compromise on the double bind would be for me to
>>> share
>>> a small number of ideas, or to share as many ideas fit into a fixed
>>> duration
>>> conversation in a different medium?
>> An effective way to become a respected member of on open source
>> community is to start with small ideas and implement them.  If the
>> deliverable works, is useful, and meets coding standards it will be
>> accepted. A couple of iterations through this:
>> a: Produce improvements to the product.
>> b. Help the contributor earn the respect of the current community so
>> they will be encourage to participate  and take on larger projects.
>> That tends to open doors.
>> Drive by ventings tend to shut them.
>> david
> I find dismissing Michael's points as "drive by venting" highly
> inappropriate.

During a thread in which someone expressed frustration about their
ability to affect the Sugar Labs community,  I pointed out two end
points, along a spectrum, for interacting with a volunteer
community... and the likely consequences of those interactions.

Nothing more, nothing less.


More information about the IAEP mailing list