[Foundation-l] Proposal for new projects

Michael Snow wikipedia at frontier.com
Sun Oct 24 23:43:29 UTC 2010

On 10/24/2010 4:30 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Michael Snow<wikipedia at frontier.com>  wrote:
>> On 10/24/2010 4:12 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Pharos<pharosofalexandria at gmail.com>    wrote:
>>>> Perhaps an alternative strategy could be to hold a grand round-robin
>>>> vote to launch one new project per year, at least in beta phase.
>>>> This might ensure that the very best ideas get through and are
>>>> actualized, without quite opening the floodgates.
>>> I like the idea of one 'beta' per year.
>>> Before starting these betas, we should have a rough process for how we
>>> decide when to kill an unsuccessful beta.  An RFC on meta?
>> Should the parallel processes require comparable levels of agreement for
>> starting or shutting down a project? That would seem fair.
> I'm not following you.
> Are you referring to existing processes for starting/killing
> projects/subdomains?
> Could you expand/rephrase?
A mixture, I guess. The idea of a regularly scheduled process to launch 
new projects seems reasonable, and an annual cycle sounds good to me. A 
firm commitment to launch one (and only one) beta project per year does 
not. If there are multiple great concepts, or none, I don't want us to 
be bound to a quota. But if there's a basic altitude for achieving 
launch, presumably losing too much altitude after launch would justify 
shutting down before there's a crash.

--Michael Snow

More information about the foundation-l mailing list