Open Stack

On 03/01/2016 04:30 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 03/01/2016 09:03 AM, Anita Kuno wrote:
>> On 03/01/2016 05:08 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
> 
>>>>>> In Vancouver I happened to be sitting behind someone who stated "I'm
>>>>>> just here for the buzz." Which is lovely for that person. The
>>>>>> problem is
>>>>>> that the buzz that person is there for is partially created by me
>>>>>> and I
>>>>>> create it and mean to offer it to people who will return it in
>>>>>> kind, not
>>>>>> just soak it up and keep it to themselves.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know if drive-by attendance at design summit sessions by
>>>>> under-
>>>>> qualified or uninformed summiteers is encouraged by the
>>>>> availability of
>>>>> ATC passes. But as long as those individuals aren't actively derailing
>>>>> the conversation in sessions, I wouldn't consider their buzz
>>>>> soakage as
>>>>> a major issue TBH.
>>>>>
>>>> Folks who want to help (even if they don't know how yet) carry an
>>>> energy
>>>> of intention with them which is nourishing to be around. Folks who are
>>>> trying to get in the door and not be expected to help and hope noone
>>>> notices carry an entirely different kind of energy with them. It is a
>>>> non-nourishing energy.
>>>
>>> Personally I don't buy into that notion of the wrong sort of people
>>> sneaking in the door of summit, keeping their heads down and hoping
>>> no-one notices.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>> TBH we should be flattered that the design
>>> summit sessions are interesting and engaging enough to also attract
>>> some of that sort of audience, as well as the core contributors of
>>> code. If those interested folks happen to also have the gumption to
>>> earn an ATC pass by meeting the threshold for contributor activity,
>>> then good for them! As long as no-one is actively derailing the
>>> discussion, I don't see much of an issue with the current mix of
>>> attendees.
>>
>> Yeah, I don't feel you have understood what my point is, and that is
>> fine. We did put forward an attempt to communicate and it failed. We
>> will have other opportunities on other issues in the future.
> 
> I don't think it's so much a failure to communicate, but rather simply a
> failure to arrive at a consensus.  As I see it, Eoghan understands your
> point but does not feel the same way.

No anyone who believes that my position includes dishonouring users
isn't understanding my point.

Thanks,
Anita.

> 
> Chris
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev