On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Bence Damokos <bdamokos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Also, somewhat unfortunately in my view, there is a
requirement for user
groups is to have a "history of projects", which was not further defined
but in theory makes it impossible to form a user group before there has
been a "history".
I see, thank you for explaining. I believe this refers to the language in
Would it be more helpful if the clause you mention were changed to
read "an established contact person and a wikipage describing the
group's activity"? I believe that is equally representative of the
thinking behind the resolution.
If the the Board can remedy unfortunate wording that is slowing things
down, I will propose a change right away.
In any case, the more automation and simplification we
can introduce into
the process, the better.
Bence describes it a bit more, but basically a request
comes in, someone is
assigned it, we ask them some questions, if that person feels okay or
doesn't have questions, they send the info to the group, post a resolution,
and we vote.
If the process can't be done in a single pass, it's probably too complicated.
Compare the process of forming a Meetup group. There are basic
standards of behavior and usage -- applied via review after the fact,
soft-security style -- and measures of activity. But as soon as you
finish filling out a form describing your group, it has been created +
is visible online + has its events included in a global calendar, and
starts to get updates and support.