[wp-forums] Doing it for free. - the people

[TechGnome]

Great, now none of us will make the cut. None of us have any wits about us.

Aaaanyways.... It can and probably should be subjective. Having people 
apply? Eh, I'm not too keen on that.... you'll get all kinds of people 
applying.  The bottom line should be, would YOU trust this person with 
the keys of your kingdom? There are a few people I would trust with this 
info (nearly all of whom are on this list), and mostly it's because I've 
dealt with them before, they have a long standing in the community, and 
their help has been top notch.

It should be the other way around... by invite. The process would work 
like this:
1) Person is nominated to be an installer
1a) Person is asked if they want to be one
2) Committee reviews the nomination (should be a black box process)
3) Committee approves or disapproves the nomination
4) Person is notified of outcome

I've seen this process work successfully before. Steps 1 & 4 would/could 
be made public, 1a is done as a private email to the nominee, but steps 
2 & 3 is done out of the public. I know this kinda goes against Podz's 
concept of being transparent, but we are talking about the integrity and 
security of other people's blogs, they deserve the right to know that 
the installers have been fully vetted and can be trusted.

-tg

Handy wrote:
> Great questions.  As a hopeful volunteer, I suppose I shouldn't poison the
> well too much..
>
> Hopefully y'all will definitely look at some *fuzzy* amount/quality of
> involvement in WP to avoid folks signing up for a forums account and
> volunteering the next day.   However, I've only been around for half a year,
> so to many I'm still a Johnny-come-lately.  Maybe name a small "council" or
> team of reviewers and have hopefuls actually apply?  A simple online form
> would likely suffice as a place to list out skills and resume'ish type
> information.  Just a thought.
> Hmm...  Glad I'm not you!
>
> I say go for measurable attributes:  Sex appeal and charm.  ;-)  Oh - and
> wit.  Can't forget wit.
>
>
>
> On 4/26/06, Podz <podz at tamba2.org.uk> wrote:
>   
>> At some point the issue of who will actually be doing this arises.
>> Potentially it is contentious but hopefully we can agree something that
>> is fair.
>>
>> At the last #meetup in response to someone suggesting that security of
>> information was a potential problem, Matt stated "we already have
>> concepts of trust with each other based on how long someone has been
>> around, how they contribute, etc " which I think is an excellent view.
>>
>> The point I think we also need to come from is not who do we let join,
>> but what is the marker for joining? How do we do this to include people
>> rather than exclude people? This making sense?
>>
>> I do not think it should just be moderators only, as has been said
>> before and I agree with there are some excellent people in the forum who
>> may wish to take on the extra work too.
>> Excellent is a fuzzy word though.
>>
>> Given this is purely for the benefit of people coming to WordPress and
>> that we must be seen to be very competent (I imagine that when this
>> happens it will be scrutinised) how do we choose who can help inside
>> this? How many should there be?
>>
>> P.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp-forums mailing list
>> wp-forums at lists.automattic.com
>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-forums
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> wp-forums mailing list
> wp-forums at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-forums
>