14:02:38 <potty> #startmeeting famsco
14:02:38 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Nov 30 14:02:38 2016 UTC.  The chair is potty. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:02:38 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:02:38 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco'
14:02:40 * bexelbie is lurking
14:02:41 <potty> #topic Roll Call
14:02:43 <bexelbie> .hello bex
14:02:44 <zodbot> bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' <bex@pobox.com>
14:02:45 <potty> .hello potty
14:02:46 <zodbot> potty: potty 'Abdel G. Martínez L.' <abdel.g.martinez.l@gmail.com>
14:02:49 <mailga> .hello mailga
14:02:50 <zodbot> mailga: mailga 'Gabriele Trombini' <g.trombini@gmail.com>
14:02:54 <potty> ping tuanta cwickert giannisk gnokii
14:03:23 <mailga> potty: I haven't seen any of them in the channel.
14:03:44 <potty> Attendance is 2/6 + 1
14:04:48 <potty> Any specials topics to be discussed today?
14:04:59 <mailga> the querum is no reached, but I have a couple of questions I'd like to get recorded.
14:04:59 <potty> mailga, bexelbie ^
14:05:04 <potty> mailga: go ahead
14:05:43 <mailga> 1) fedorahosted is going out of time soon https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/famsco@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/EAENFI7UZF44S4XO6R5UP3CR64COMU3K/
14:06:12 <mailga> I know cwickert had some question for not let this happens.
14:06:42 <mailga> I can't understand why, but for me is ok migrate to pagure.
14:07:28 <mailga> 2) council asked for an update of FOSCo migration, and I can let bexelbie to dive in....
14:07:33 <bexelbie> I have not heard any other groups come up with significant reasons to not migrate to pagure
14:07:50 <mailga> bexelbie: +1
14:08:15 <bexelbie> The council is trying to understand why the process has not come to a conclusion.  I provided an overview of my understanding in the last council meeting.
14:08:38 <bexelbie> The council decided to visit with FAmSCo to hear the issues first hand from those closest to the situation
14:08:58 <bexelbie> and then from that decide if they want to take action, provide guidance, or allow the process to continue to unfold without interruption
14:09:40 <bexelbie> eom
14:10:11 <mailga> bexelbie: the first question is FOSCo without FAmSCo or FOSCO with FAmSCo right?
14:11:07 <bexelbie> that is one of the open questions I am hearing
14:12:02 <mailga> bexelbie: the second is if there's somehow that is going to move forward starting from your proposal.
14:12:36 <bexelbie> I would phrase that as: Who is going to drive a proposal to completion and which of the two leading candidates (are there more?) will be used as the basis for the final push to completion.
14:12:52 <bexelbie> s/.$/
14:13:01 <bexelbie> s/.$/\?/g :)
14:14:48 <mailga> bexelbie: the problem is deeper IMO. We are only few people working on the FAmSCo stuff (or tasks), and soon we have to step down because of new elections.
14:14:53 <mailga> eof
14:16:05 <mailga> #info .famsco #408
14:16:06 <bexelbie> Speaking candidly - I believe that most folks working on FAmSCo are feeling frustrated or burned out.  I don't know that serious effort is being put in to figuring out what the right structure is moving forward for the Fedora of tomorrow and not the Fedora of yesterday
14:16:33 <bexelbie> I am reticent to push a proposal to completion as I suspect there are deeper issues in the Ambassadors group, in general, that I do not fully appreciate
14:17:06 <bexelbie> As I mentioned, I believe, in the council meeting, there seems to be almost no cross-regional cooperation and lots of tiny flareups that make me wonder if we are all moving forward with the same expectations
14:17:25 <bexelbie> I realize that the process for actually doing the work will vary some by culture/location
14:18:00 <bexelbie> eom
14:18:34 <mailga> bexelbie: I totally agree! So I'm asking (to you or to the Council) to give the task to one of us even if not FAmSCo anymore to have a proposal that next FAmSCo and Council will approve. eof
14:19:36 <bexelbie> mailga, nothing is stopping you from driving a proposal forward now
14:20:33 <bexelbie> What I haven't heard is a clear articulation of the goals of FAmSCo and FOSCo for any form of the proposals
14:20:54 <bexelbie> I have draft proposal that I wrote to organize my own thoughts, but again, it is based on assumptions I am worried are wrong
14:20:58 <bexelbie> but I started from that perspective
14:21:51 <mailga> bexelbie: I want that one of us (one of us only because we know the issues) bring the proposal from the start to the end, without too many influences and only at the end make the adjustments.
14:21:51 <bexelbie> right now I feel like I am hearing, "we have problems, we don't know how to solve them, so we hope that by creating more committees they will magically be solved.  Also, we'd like to make sure the Ambassadors stay in charge or don't stay in charge (depends on who talks). "
14:22:48 <bexelbie> mailga, again, nothing is stopping that today.  However, I don't see a proposal built in private and isolation and basically being presented only for an up/down vote at the end being very successful.  However, if well thought and supported by a logical goal (see logic models) it could work.
14:22:53 <mailga> bexelbie: your last sentence is the point. IMO.
14:24:29 <bexelbie> One possible way forward would be for those who are motivated to form a small working group and to develop proposals and circulate them in a wider way to try and build consensus.  There doesn't seem to have been a lot of consensus building so far.
14:24:47 <bexelbie> There will never be 100% support - but with logical support you have something strong to take to the council
14:25:04 <bexelbie> technically this proposal, if it doesn't replace FAmSCo, could come from anywhere
14:25:18 <bexelbie> so you don't need 100% approval from FAmSCo, merely what ever is defined as a majority
14:25:22 <bexelbie> I think - though I could be worng
14:25:23 <bexelbie> wrong
14:25:25 <bexelbie> eom
14:25:33 <mailga> bexelbie: don't give any fault to me. I did my proposal. Later Cwickert changed the POV (That wasn't what I've heard at Flock 2015) and so I was waiting for some explanations. So, let start from the Council willing. Whate they are expecting?
14:26:28 <bexelbie> mailga, no fault is being assigned or given :)
14:26:45 <bexelbie> This sounds like it has been a torturous process long before I showed up as "Johnny come lately"
14:27:40 <bexelbie> The council is wanting to know what the project thinks is best for the project.  Ultimately, I believe, the council wants to see our attraction activities (marketing, ambassadors, etc.) aligned around common messages and themes that work toward the overall project goals and target markets.
14:27:51 <mailga> bexelbie: sorrybut it seems. When you say "nothing is stopping....". I only want to know, at this point "why" we need FOSCo if it will be only another body?
14:28:28 <bexelbie> mailga, if you don't think we need FOSCo then your proposal could be for the changes, if any, you think FAmSCo needs and how you would address any questions that led people to suggest FOSCo.
14:28:39 <bexelbie> and then it would end with no definition of a FOSCo.
14:29:40 <bexelbie> mailga, however, I am not sure if FAmSCo works today as it is set up.  In my limited view there seems to be challenges
14:29:56 <mailga> bexelbie: my POV is that the two groups that can have a clear umbrella are marketing and ambassadors, which have to work really together. Other groups can implement later as needed.
14:30:28 <bexelbie> mailga, so it sounds like you ahve a proposal that will fix the coordination between those groups?
14:30:52 <mailga> bexelbie: of course, this FAmSCo can't move forward.
14:32:02 <mailga> bexelbie: I have lots of proposals in my head, but they will be rejected because of too many changes (also of the status of the people). :-D
14:32:50 <bexelbie> mailga, so one way to approach this is to ask the question, "If we were starting Fedora over today, what do we want for attraction activities?"
14:33:07 <bexelbie> Then figure out how far we are from what we have and figure out the incremental steps to get there
14:33:50 <bexelbie> I think you will find support for logical changes and that the community will override people who are blocking for the wrong reasons (i.e. budget protection, personal travel protection, obstinate, personal issues with the proposer, etc.)
14:35:50 <mailga> bexelbie: budget is not a community business, the numbers are.
14:36:36 <bexelbie> I don't understand the difference between budget and numbers
14:36:40 <bexelbie> what do you mean?
14:37:16 <mailga> bexelbie: that we can't discuss about money, we only can ask to have. Nothing more.
14:37:37 <bexelbie> I disagree
14:37:47 <mailga> why?
14:37:51 <bexelbie> an important question for Ambassadors to decide is what to do
14:38:00 <bexelbie> that means balancing activites against resources
14:38:11 <bexelbie> what will get us the best results for our investment be it with $$ or people
14:38:14 <bexelbie> or time or whatever
14:38:47 <bexelbie> From comments I have heard, there are people who don't want to have to justify their travel to conference X against results - they just want to make sure they get paid for every year like they always have
14:39:06 <bexelbie> that isn't helping us overall - those are the objections that I believe our healthy community will override
14:40:56 <mailga> bexelbie: dunno, I never noticed about this. But that we should have a measurement of the success of an investement is sadly true. But people says also that we can not measure it in term of people presence at the events or in download.
14:42:56 <bexelbie> So, I have a lot of ideas .. some good, some bad :)
14:43:11 <bexelbie> one of my ideas was to ask FAmSCo - once the whole definition issue was settled
14:43:29 <bexelbie> whether it made sense to ask event proposal to include a logical model that showed how the event related to our overall objectives
14:44:07 <bexelbie> that would get us closer to measuring things.  Just saying "talk to potential users" isn't good enough .. who is supposed to be at this event? are they our target? are we going to "preach to the choir" or to talk to new people, etc.
14:44:22 <bexelbie> It is hard, but not impossible to come up with definitions of success
14:45:17 <mailga> bexelbie: yes, that's a thing I asked to have some time ago (I don't remember if in the mktg list or elsewhere) but someone said that people working for pleasure can't be checked.
14:45:35 <linuxmodder> .fas linuxmodder
14:45:35 <zodbot> linuxmodder: linuxmodder 'Corey W Sheldon' <sheldon.corey@openmailbox.org>
14:45:42 * linuxmodder just reading / watching
14:46:36 <linuxmodder> bexelbie,  the issue I've seen with that is the 'measure' of results
14:46:54 * mailga waves linuxmodder
14:47:41 <bexelbie> linuxmodder, measure is a term that can mean something very specific (think quantitative science) versus something more conclusion oriented (think qualitative science)
14:48:20 <bexelbie> I also believe that like Open Source software, our events would be much better if we would collaborate on them with larger groups (i.e. inter-regional idea sharing)
14:48:20 <linuxmodder> and that still seems to shift too much
14:48:31 * mailga says there are 10 minutes left....
14:48:34 <bexelbie> linuxmodder, shift from what?  too far from what?
14:48:42 <linuxmodder> and again just becuase say media is still on table doesn't mean it was not productive
14:48:53 <bexelbie> linuxmodder, the only reason to make a change is if we can improve something, if everything is perfect then no change is needed
14:49:11 <bexelbie> linuxmodder, no one has suggested that DVD counts is a great way to measure impact
14:49:32 <linuxmodder> in some offline chats and such it has been inferred
14:49:34 <bexelbie> well let me restate that
14:49:36 <bexelbie> I haven't said that
14:49:46 <linuxmodder> hence some of the hesitance with some
14:49:54 <bexelbie> then we need to make sure we explain clearly what we are trying to accomplish
14:50:12 <bexelbie> what I haven't seen in the public proposals are clear articulations of what is viewed as the challenge and how this proposal answers it
14:50:35 <linuxmodder> and at least in famna not all our events are same audience so harder to evaluate one ot another
14:50:36 <bexelbie> Which leads to a lot of hesitation (and in some cases that clouds out the standard cheese-movement fear)
14:51:07 <linuxmodder> bexelbie,  exactly what I was getting at
14:51:21 <bexelbie> linuxmodder, I would not propose direct comparisons of the events, but of the goals.  If we can do 6 things, we should make sure all 6 are on goal and message for the project.  We may still target 6 different types of events/people/etc.
14:51:25 <linuxmodder> it all back to documentation and re-verbing that
14:51:48 <linuxmodder> bexelbie,  I agree but not everyone seems to
14:52:08 <bexelbie> So that comes back to what is the goal of having a group like Ambassadors
14:52:26 <bexelbie> we can encourage people to consider our goals when deriving their opinions
14:52:33 <bexelbie> and then we can move forward in the community
14:52:41 <bexelbie> but right now I don't think people even agree on why we do this
14:55:39 <linuxmodder> as sad as this is to say  it seems more solidified in our less priveldged regions imo
14:55:57 <linuxmodder> where its more community involvement centric
14:57:00 <bexelbie> linuxmodder, do you mean that we have greater focus from the regions that have the lower $$ budgets?
14:57:43 <linuxmodder> and manpower / resources ( gender nuetral meaning )
14:58:00 <linuxmodder> that is how it seems to me at least
14:58:16 <linuxmodder> case and poitn is latam
14:58:48 <linuxmodder> they seem to be more organic minded while still central in the role of events and audiences
14:59:14 <bexelbie> I understand your point.  I also think that those regions are also lacking in focus at times and believe they ahve some real resourcing issues I am trying to help solve as FCAIC
14:59:22 <bexelbie> but yes, they do
15:00:27 <mailga> we're running out of time potty can you end the meeting? Sorry guys.
15:01:49 <bexelbie> I think we can end the meeting now, barring objections - we've been having great conversation that we need to decide how to turn into forward movement
15:02:53 <mailga> bexelbie: +1 discussion are ever productive.
15:03:19 <mailga> potty: you there, I'm not chair today, dunno if I can close the meeting.
15:03:33 <mailga> #endmeeting
15:03:38 <potty> #endmeeting