This website, particularly the nomination criteria and the nomination process, is currently in “draft proposal” form. This website therefore represents a “straw man,” intended to create a point around which a healthy, constructive discussion can occur.
Points KNOWN TO NEED Discussion
Some points of this website are known to need discussion, and need suggestions for resolution. These include:
- Both the nomination criteria and nomination process propose a means by which the community-at-large can propose and accept changes to them. Presuming anyone may propose a change, how many people should be required to accept it for it to take effect? Is an online petition (perhaps collecting social media handles) sufficient?
- Simple “voting by the community” was not proposed as a selection mechanism, due to social media’s extensive normalization of “just click like,” rather than encouraging thoughtful engagement in these kinds of decisions. Instead, community members are encouraged to comment upon nominations, giving the Selection Committee a range of perspectives to consider. Is this a good approach?
- As proposed, nominees are selected by a Committee consisting of prior inductees and community members. What is the right size for a Committee?
- The power and value of recognition is connected to the perceived “prestige” of whomever awards the recognition. Is a permanent (e.g., not annual, like the MVP Award) recognition by the community sufficiently prestigious to be perceived as valuable?
- The intent is truly for this to be a globally valuable and inclusive recognition. Does the current proposal provide for this? If not, what could be done to better provide for this?
The above list is not comprehensive, and professional, constructive discussion is invited on all topics related to the website as proposed.
How to Participate in the Discussion
Discussions are expected to be:
- Polite and professional – trolling, attacks, and similar behavior will result in banning of the perpetrator.
- Prescriptive – if you don’t like something, propose an alternative, and state the reasoning behind your proposal.
- Respectful – nobody’s opinion is objectively correct; respect others’ opinions and seek to understand them before commenting.
Don Jones will take responsibility for collecting feedback and facilitating discussion, and for carrying any generally accepted change proposals over to this website, so that this website may represent a “living draft.”
To participate in the discussion, please visit this forum on PowerShell.org prior to the end of April 2020. After discussion closes, an online survey will be used to gather the votes of individuals who support the proposed criteria and processes in their then-current state.
This is an effort to document changes from the original draft until the current state:
(none at present)