Ambassador program #52857
Ambassador program #52857
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com>
|
Review requested:
|
|
Some related background
|
| early feedback. | ||
| * Helping ambassadors promote content that aligns with the | ||
| messages and topics defined through social media and other channels. | ||
| * Advocating for ambasadors to be part of the OpenJS speakers bureau, even if the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
unable to follow this statement (blame it on my lack of understanding). would you pls explain? does it mean openjs speakers bureau should take lead in advocacy, or they should identify ambassadors? or something else?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gireeshpunathil it was mentioned that the OpenJS foundation had a speakers bureau. I had originaly said we would support requests against the travel fund but we agreed to change it to the project would support ambassaors being part of the OpenJS foundaation speakers bureau which would in turn help them get approvals from the travel fund.
Does that help, if so do you have suggestions on how to better word so that comes across?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks @mhdawson , understood now, no suggestions; the text is good as is.
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
mhdawson
added
the
tsc-agenda
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
|
@Trott since you've indicated you won't block, I assume no response to the comment of "this never works out well". Buy my 2 cents I think this is a much more specific/constrained proposal than some of the instances you pointed to which started as WIP and never went beyond that. |
| In the initial phase of the program: | ||
|
|
||
| * there will be a maximum of 4 ambassadors | ||
| * the term will be for the calendar year. After a year ambassadors automatically |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"the calendar year" means January through December. You probably mean 12 months instead, I'm guessing.
| * the term will be for the calendar year. After a year ambassadors automatically | |
| * the term will be for one year. After a year ambassadors automatically |
| [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) | ||
| as well as the additional expectations outlined in | ||
| [MemberExpectations](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/blob/main/MemberExpectations.md) | ||
| for a leadership position. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So an ambassador is a leadership position but also it's totally fine if they have no connection to the project other than the ambassador role? (I do think they should be bound to the Member Expectations. I just don't think it should be because of anything having to do with leadership.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I did not intend to say it was a leadership position, but the working for MemberExpectations lists the expectations for leaders. I meant to say that the expectation on those in leadership positions as documented in MemberExpectations apply to abassadors. Not sure if you can think of a better way to express, versus implying an Abassador is a leadership positiion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe just remove "for a leadership position"? I'll add a suggestion in another comment. It's not working right when I do it in this comment. (Maybe a change has already been made?)
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
| [Member Expectations](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/blob/main/MemberExpectations.md) | ||
| for a leadership position. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| [Member Expectations](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/blob/main/MemberExpectations.md) | |
| for a leadership position. | |
| [Member Expectations](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/blob/main/MemberExpectations.md). |
| The TSC may choose to remove an ambassador if things are not working | ||
| out in terms of the content promoted and alignment with the project. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The "if things are not working out" seems weirdly informal compared to the general tone of the document. Maybe also don't tie the hands of the TSC regarding reasons to remove someone?:
| The TSC may choose to remove an ambassador if things are not working | |
| out in terms of the content promoted and alignment with the project. | |
| The TSC may remove an ambassador for any reason, | |
| including promoting content misaligned with the project. |
| * there will be a maximum of 4 ambassadors | ||
| * the term will be for the calendar year. After a year, ambassadors automatically | ||
| drop out of the ambassador list and must be re-nominated | ||
| * ambassadors will be documented on the nodejs/ambassadors README.md |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems weirdly superficial and trivial to document. I'd remove it.
| * ambassadors will be documented on the nodejs/ambassadors README.md |
| * Helping ambassadors promote content that aligns with the | ||
| messages and topics defined through social media and other channels. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The ambassador program helps ambassadors promote content? Is that what is intended by this sentence? If not, it needs a rewrite. If so, it would be useful to understand how the ambassador program helps ambassadors promote content. It seems like the purpose actually goes the other way: The ambassador program helps Node.js promote content via ambassadors recruited for that purpose.
| The ambassador program does that by: | ||
|
|
||
| * Maintaining an up-to-date set of messages that it would like ambassadors | ||
| to promote. These will be documented in the nodejs/ambassadors repository. | ||
| * Maintaining an up-to-date set of topics on which additional content | ||
| would benefit the community. These will be documented in the | ||
| nodejs/ambassadors repository. | ||
| * Providing a space for collaborators to share new topics/features they | ||
| are working on, when they would be happy for ambassadors to help share and get | ||
| early feedback. | ||
| * Helping ambassadors promote content that aligns with the | ||
| messages and topics defined through social media and other channels. | ||
| * Advocating for ambassadors to be part of the OpenJS speakers bureau, even if the | ||
| ambassador is not otherwise an active member of the project itself. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe I'm failing to separate "the ambassador program" from "ambassadors". Does this effectively mean that ambassadors advocate for ambassadors to be part of the OpenJS speakers bureau?
| Interested members of the Node.js organization may comment/make | ||
| suggestions in the issue and the ambassadors are expected to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"comment" and "make suggestions" are redundant:
| Interested members of the Node.js organization may comment/make | |
| suggestions in the issue and the ambassadors are expected to | |
| Interested members of the Node.js organization may comment | |
| in the issue and the ambassadors are expected to |
| repository on which access is limited to members of the Node.js | ||
| organization. The issue may include the link to existing published |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| repository on which access is limited to members of the Node.js | |
| organization. The issue may include the link to existing published | |
| repository, which limits access to members of the Node.js | |
| organization. The issue may include the link to existing published |
| without any need for validation based on the request coming from | ||
| an ambassador. These requests can be made through the existing social channel | ||
| in the OpenJS Slack. For that reason and for communication purposes and | ||
| collaboration opportunities ambassadors should be a member of the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| collaboration opportunities ambassadors should be a member of the | |
| collaboration opportunities, ambassadors should be members of the |
| Ambassadors are asked to share links to new content before asking | ||
| for the content to be promoted. The goal is to provide the opportunity | ||
| for collaborators to help improve content as opposed to a detailed | ||
| nitpick review. | ||
|
|
||
| This is done by opening an issue in the nodejs/ambassadors | ||
| repository on which access is limited to members of the Node.js | ||
| organization. The issue may include the link to existing published |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not one of those people that thinks passive voice is always bad, but this is the type of passage that gives passive voice a bad name. All of this would be a lot clearer, IMO, if it were written with active voice instead of passive voice.
|
@mhdawson For the ambassadors, what is the big incentive? Is the incentive here, basically that ambassadors get their content promoted by the official Node.js social media accounts? |
No description provided.