On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:45 AM, Camilo Mesias <camilo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 6:12 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> this is a *terrible* idea. We may see users as a 'resource', but they >> don't see themselves this way. We should not interrupt their usage of >> their computer to try and exploit them to our ends. > > What if it was an opt-in scheme? Users would consent to receive a > limited number of contacts about their current packages and for their > trouble would get streamlined access to potential fixes. > > I think there's enough in that for the opt-in scheme to be marketed > successfully, because although some people would see the interactions > as annoying, others would welcome the chance to participate. That was more the idea. I didn't declare any implementation details because I was pretty sure that would be a topic of some contention. Maybe "coerce" was the wrong idea; the idea was not to make involuntary guinea pigs of anyone, but to give people the chance to take an on-ramp to contribution. We're simply not doing that at all right now, which, given the technical process required, is not too much different than erecting a barrier to participation. Paul -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
