[kepler-dev] webpage suggestion
jones at nceas.ucsb.edu
Thu Feb 23 10:29:30 PST 2006
I made that category. The people listed there are still members, but
they have decided, and told me explicitly, that they will not be
actively contributing to Kepler indefinitely, although all wanted to
retain the ability to contribute as full members in the future. But for
now, due to other demands on their time, they said they will not be
contrinuting and, importantly, should not be counted in any of the
project votes for changes in policy, etc. This is the main reason for
the separate category, so we will know who to count in votes and when we
have a quorum.
I'd be happy to change the term 'Inactive' to something else, but it
does describe their current status as members who are not actively
working on the project. I suppose 'Previous Members' would be fine,
although it implies they are not current members which would be inaccurate.
Laura L. Downey wrote:
> I honestly don't know. Just looking at how things were described on the web
> page. And it said people had requested inactive status. So to me that
> meant, still members, but not active and not voting. As I said the "past"
> term doesn't make sense to me in conjunction with inactive.
> If we really mean previous or past members, as no longer members, then I
> think your suggestion is fine.
> I guess Matt may be the one who set up active or inactive.
> In the grand scheme, it doesn't appear to be big issue, so if you feel
> strongly about the wording, Previous Members sounds reasonable.
> Laura L. Downey
> Senior Usability Engineer
> LTER Network Office
> Department of Biology, MSC03 2020
> 1 University of New Mexico
> Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001
> 505.277.3157 office
> 505.610.9657 mobile
> 505.277-2541 fax
> ldowney at lternet.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Bowers [mailto:sbowers at ucdavis.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 10:22 AM
> To: Laura L. Downey
> Cc: Kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
> Subject: Re: [kepler-dev] webpage suggestion
> So what's the point of this distinction then?
> Are we saying these folks are no longer "members" or are
> we saying they are just not producing anything
> for Kepler?
> I prefer giving folks who are not working on kepler any
> more (which I think is the case), the tag "previous"
> members -- because regardless, I think "inactive" has
> a negative connotation.
> Laura L. Downey wrote:
>>I don't see inactive as being negative, just merely a state. And because
>>have an "active" state, it makes sense to have an "inactive" state.
>>Although I don't understand Inactive (past) members; I interpret inactive
>>current members, but not active. So inactive but past, makes no sense to
>>I interpret past or previous members, as not currently members.
>>All that said, if we really mean people that are no longer members, then
>>"previous members" seems reasonable.
>>Laura L. Downey
>>Senior Usability Engineer
>>LTER Network Office
>>Department of Biology, MSC03 2020
>>1 University of New Mexico
>>Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001
>>ldowney at lternet.edu
>>From: kepler-dev-bounces at ecoinformatics.org
>>[mailto:kepler-dev-bounces at ecoinformatics.org] On Behalf Of Shawn Bowers
>>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 4:59 PM
>>To: Kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
>>Subject: [kepler-dev] webpage suggestion
>>I noticed recently that on the kepler webpage there is now
>>a section called "Inactive (past) members".
>>I think a better way to phrase this, which is not so negative,
>>would be "Previous members". Anyone mind if I change this
>>Kepler-dev mailing list
>>Kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
> Kepler-dev mailing list
> Kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
Matt Jones Ph: 907-789-0496
jones at nceas.ucsb.edu SIP #: 1-747-626-7082
National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS)
UC Santa Barbara http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics
More information about the Kepler-dev