Re: [boost] New moderators request unclear? (was: A Remedy for the Review Manager Starvation)
Manfred Doudar wrote:
And now, I think a little more about Joachim's mail, and the stated reception his ideas had at BoostCon (no, I wasn't there - but take Joachim on his word); and now also recall Beman's email of a while back, asking for persons to come forward and nominate themselves to moderate the list - because:
Oh, maybe I completely misunderstood Beman's request then. I'm not a native speaker, but I even looked up "nominate" at <http://dict.leo.org>. It seems to mean something like "to elect somebody". (I had looked it up, because it was unclear to me whether "nomination" includes asking the person for permission first.) But as you put it, it seems to mean something like "to volunteer".
"[existing moderators'] day job responsibilities have changed, or other distractions are preventing them from giving list moderation the attention it deserves."
..this makes me think that there is a call of sorts for "new-blood", because some boosters are moving on, in some respects (not necessarily entirely, but other responsibilities keep them away, and they may not be able to devote as much time as they once did, be it moderation or otherwise).
I wasn't sure here whether Beman was explicitly asking for new blood, or just formulating his request in a way that it was clear that new blood was also allowed. But if somebody would nominate Eric Niebler, Daniel James, Rene Rivera, Hartmut Kaiser, Vladimir Prus, Robert Ramey, Gennadiy Rozental, Joel de Guzman or any other of the usual suspect, I'm pretty sure that Beman wouldn't object. So if I understood Beman's request correctly, he is still waiting for additional nominations. If I understood him incorrectly, and he is just waiting for volunteers, I think he should add a clarification to his request that is also understandable for non-native speakers (that are unaware of the connotations of the word "nomination", if these connotations should really exist). Regards, Thomas
On Sun, 16 May 2010 23:56:48 +0200 Thomas Klimpel <Thomas.Klimpel@synopsys.com> wrote:
Manfred Doudar wrote:
And now, I think a little more about Joachim's mail, and the stated reception his ideas had at BoostCon (no, I wasn't there - but take Joachim on his word); and now also recall Beman's email of a while back, asking for persons to come forward and nominate themselves to moderate the list - because:
Oh, maybe I completely misunderstood Beman's request then. I'm not a native speaker, but I even looked up "nominate" at <http://dict.leo.org>. It seems to mean something like "to elect somebody". (I had looked it up, because it was unclear to me whether "nomination" includes asking the person for permission first.) But as you put it, it seems to mean something like "to volunteer".
My understanding is that Boost largely depends on the contributions of volunteers, and whether Beman had in mind a formal process of nomination, I don't know - note, Beman did not use the word "nominate", I did. I hope I did not muddy waters by doing so.
"[existing moderators'] day job responsibilities have changed, or other distractions are preventing them from giving list moderation the attention it deserves."
..this makes me think that there is a call of sorts for "new-blood", because some boosters are moving on, in some respects (not necessarily entirely, but other responsibilities keep them away, and they may not be able to devote as much time as they once did, be it moderation or otherwise).
I wasn't sure here whether Beman was explicitly asking for new blood, or just formulating his request in a way that it was clear that new blood was also allowed. But if somebody would nominate Eric Niebler, Daniel James, Rene Rivera, Hartmut Kaiser, Vladimir Prus, Robert Ramey, Gennadiy Rozental, Joel de Guzman or any other of the usual suspect, I'm pretty sure that Beman wouldn't object.
No, I don't think he'd object either. Do note however, my post and perceptions of call for 'new blood' so to speak was made in conjunction with issue of review-manager-starvation. I was aiming at looking at a bigger picture - maybe that was unwarranted however. Cheers, -- Manfred
On 16 May 2010 23:56, Thomas Klimpel <Thomas.Klimpel@synopsys.com> wrote:
Oh, maybe I completely misunderstood Beman's request then. I'm not a native speaker, but I even looked up "nominate" at <http://dict.leo.org>. It seems to mean something like "to elect somebody". (I had looked it up, because it was unclear to me whether "nomination" includes asking the person for permission first.) But as you put it, it seems to mean something like "to volunteer".
FWIW, as a native speaker I also didn't understand Beman's request as "to volunteer oneself"; I understood it as "to suggest others".
participants (3)
-
Manfred Doudar -
Scott McMurray -
Thomas Klimpel