[OOTB-hive] Member Criteria, Voting and Badges

[Ole Hejlskov]

On 16 Aug 2014, at 23:27, Jeff Potts <jeffpotts01 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree we have no need for privileges at the moment but the concern that was expressed was distinguishing between fly-by-night people or spammers and people who are actually known to others in the community. A vouching system does that in a low-tech, low-pressure way.
> 
> The vouching system is not an assessment of someone's worth or capabilities, it is simply a way to say, "I know who that person is because I've interacted with them before."
> 
> Someone who is unvouched is not embarrassed or ashamed. On the contrary, it may motivate them to get involved in the group and make a meaningful enough contribution that they can then ask the person they've been working with to identify them as a known contributor.
> 
> It is that simple and does not require much effort.
> 
> The way we vouch initially is that the board members simply click the vouch button (or similar) and say how you know that person. Maybe you've interacted with them on IRC. Maybe you've worked on a contribution together. Maybe you gave a lightning talk or were on the same panel at a conference. All that matters is that you have interacted with them in some way.
> 
> Mozilla has recently moved to a three-vouch system which means three people have to vouch for you before you are fully vouched. We could do the same.
> 
> I ask that the group strongly considers this as a way of taking what's in our head ("Oh, I know who that is") and making it explicit. If we don't do this or something similar, the group will be left open for manipulation/exploitation by unknown/anonymous parties who may not have the best of intentions.
> 

+1 

I support this idea. My biggest concern is that we get overrun with individual developers or agencies who does not really have interest in the order, but only want the extra exposure and to be “associated” with the right people. I want the order to succeed, have many members and create beautiful things. However it’s no good to have a huge list of members if only a handful of them are contributors, then I’d rather have a small group of active members than a big group of idle ones.

I assume that only full members can vouch?

Perhaps in addition to this, we need to re-think the levels of memberships (roles/badges), perhaps something like
 - Board member
 - Member
 - Alfresco employee
 - Supporter

We have yet to define the “Alfresco employee” role. I really *love* that we have so much support from Alfresco employees, but we need to setup ground rules. Are Alfresco employees allowed to vouch? Can they become a board member? etc.

Or we could just implement the vouching system and say that everyone who are vouched for is a member to keep it simple. What do you bees think?

/Ole