| 7 May 2024 |
 nyanbinary | What's the "due date" of the Zulip? | 10:35:27 |
| nyanbinary | May 14th right? | 10:35:29 |
|  @jamesmowery:matrix.org joined the room. | 14:17:37 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | May I get some clarification why people who have contributed nothing directly to NixOS (but could be argued that there is a very tiny indirect NixOS implication) have been accepted, but my application has not been processed? https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/issues/143#issuecomment-2097361458 The bar for clearing was "The exact kind of contribution does not matter, it doesn't even have to be code or official, as long as it is before 2024-05-01 and related to Nix." I feel I have met this criteria, but I've been told that "I'm afraid your linked contribution doesn't clear the bar, sorry!" As someone who has used and helped onboard people to NixOS for 10 years and helped drive contributions to this great project, it feels like a slap in the face. | 14:20:16 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | (Apologies if this should be directed somewhere else. It's not clear, and I have received no response on GitHub despite requesting clarification and reasoning.) | 14:21:13 |
 @hexa:lossy.network | your contribution linked, as far as I know, was a comment asking for blockers on an open PR | 14:22:05 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | and them moderators were in agreement that wouldn't clear the bar | 14:22:25 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | * and the moderators were in agreement that wouldn't clear the bar | 14:22:42 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | Understood on that part, which is why I came back. I didn't think it was being taken that seriously given the above quoted requirements. | 14:22:57 |
 raitobezarius | I count 35 edits on your GitHub comment | 14:23:02 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | So that's why I came back with far more examples. | 14:23:06 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | raitobezarius: I had to think of about 35 more examples in my head just to give enough context. | 14:23:24 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | If my newly linked post doesn't meet the criteria. I'm okay with that. I'd just love a clear explanation as to how it doesn't clear the bar. And I would like to know why some indirect contributions that have barely anything to do with NixOS have been accepted. | 14:24:21 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | And I just ask for 3 or so examples of contributions that are not code related nor documentation that would be accepted... which is allowed, per the original requirements. Because I'm very confident I can clear this bar. | 14:25:06 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | Again 10 years of helping onboard people to this wonderful community. 10 years of helping drive donations. Previously working in the tech media. | 14:26:45 |
| raitobezarius | So, the problem from my view (personal) is that excessive editing of your GitHub comment raise concerns to me about your understanding or respect for the community guidelines and standards we have setup for the governance discussion. Your successive edits to meet the requirements which are a bit orthogonal to what is expected here (compare with all the other posts) may appear as a lack of genuine contribution. For me, what you did is on the edge of disruptive behavior to get onto that platform. | 14:28:43 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | The amount of edits matters? I like to edit my presentation to make it clear. | 14:29:12 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | The number of edits would disqualify someone? | 14:29:37 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | What does this have to do with community contribution? | 14:29:58 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | Can we focus on community contribution, that's all I'm asking for. | 14:30:10 |
| raitobezarius | You sent a link to your NixOS repository and I think it would have been enough proof to qualify you, but now that you behaved this way, I am leaning on the original judgement. | 14:30:24 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | That's totally fine. If I'm rejected. I just want a clear explanation and want something I can clearly document. | 14:31:10 |
 infinisil | Also, just to be clearer about the bar: Imo the contribution needs to be:
- Verifiable
- Be usable by others | 14:31:46 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | infinisil: totally makes sense. I just ask... why isn't that in the original requirements? | 14:32:27 |
| infinisil | Your linked comment was verifiable but not usable by others. And your IRC help is usable by others but not verifiable | 14:32:35 |
| raitobezarius | From my part, let me add that we reviewed your history because we had nothing more to use to weigh on your case and we found: https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1clf7v8/separating_nix_drama_discussions_from/l2uws01/.
Given https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/blob/master/governance/zulip/coc.md, I am afraid that this won't work out. | 14:33:31 |
 7c6f434c | https://logs.nix.samueldr.com/ seems to be still up, so IRC help in #nixos should be verifiable, no? | 14:33:32 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | Okay. So then let's clear the board. Contributing my NixOS configuration and sharing it on GitHub and the fact that "You sent a link to your NixOS repository and I think it would have been enough proof to qualify you" | 14:34:45 |
| @jamesmowery:matrix.org | So... I was qualifiable, but now I'm not? | 14:35:05 |
| infinisil | If a link to the chat logs was sent we could've considered it | 14:35:11 |
