MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <aJ9ur1eSnk5pp9aD@msg.df7cb.de>
 <190A13D4-022B-4323-B30D-027B0D931DAF@hellug.gr>
 <aOj5NNxXdghSX66R@msg.df7cb.de>
 <CALaz2ZsLQLbw6Pv714DyO8rTJfLF=nhC0BmHV4OhsurkrhLVKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <a651de89b5747747cb0dc795793a280091d72386.camel@cybertec.at>
In-Reply-To: <a651de89b5747747cb0dc795793a280091d72386.camel@cybertec.at>
From: Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 19:36:15 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CADkLM=coR0_AjcEqWF+RHsbb68q-M6_cqRcUaHzTbqhKLtom0A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Contributor levels
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: Cornelia Biacsics <cornelia.biacsics@cybertec.at>,
 pgsql-www@lists.postgresql.org,
	Jimmy Angelakos <vyruss@hellug.gr>, Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>,
	PostgreSQL Contributors <contributors@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000b427c06414f1681"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CADkLM%3DcoR0_AjcEqWF%2BRHsbb68q-M6_cqRcUaHzTbqhKLtom0A%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--0000000000000b427c06414f1681
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

>
>
> That sounds complicated.
>
> Also, I am afraid that splitting up contributions in categories will
> do the opposite of what we want: people will think that code contributors
> are a better category than conference organizers.  And I thought we don't
> want that.
>
> Ultimately, it is a value judgement who is a valuable contributor, and
> we shouldn't try to hide that behind formalisms.  The process will always
> be some variant of "Hey, I think Cornelia should be on the list." -
> "I agree, let's put her on the list."
>
>
+1

I recall a few years ago there was a debate about one contributor being
moved from Major Contributor to regular Contributor. Adding new levels will
ultimately create more such debates, and we will need to be ready for that.

I like Cornelia's categories. Reading through them I recognize that I and
many others would be fully invested in the token economy (aka "gold star
economy") created therein.

The badge proposal described by Melanie would create similar investment on
my part. It also has the advantage that badges can be created on-the-fly to
recognize achievements that otherwise defy classification.

But having either such thing would pressure the community to categorize and
quantify every unit of work put into it, and then defend those quantities
and categorizations when someone feels slighted by their ranking. My fear
is that the new burden will fall on people who are already contributing
greatly, and thus would be contributing less, and the new contributions
won't make up for that loss.

--0000000000000b427c06414f1681
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px =
solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
That sounds complicated.<br>
<br>
Also, I am afraid that splitting up contributions in categories will<br>
do the opposite of what we want: people will think that code contributors<b=
r>
are a better category than conference organizers.=C2=A0 And I thought we do=
n&#39;t<br>
want that.<br>
<br>
Ultimately, it is a value judgement who is a valuable contributor, and<br>
we shouldn&#39;t try to hide that behind formalisms.=C2=A0 The process will=
 always<br>
be some variant of &quot;Hey, I think Cornelia should be on the list.&quot;=
 -<br>
&quot;I agree, let&#39;s put her on the list.&quot;<br><br></blockquote><di=
v><br></div><div>+1</div><div><br>I recall a few years ago there was a deba=
te about one contributor being=20
moved from Major Contributor to regular Contributor. Adding new levels=20
will ultimately create more such debates, and we will need to be ready=20
for that.<br><br></div><div>I like Cornelia&#39;s categories. Reading throu=
gh them I recognize that I and many others would be fully invested in the t=
oken economy (aka &quot;gold star economy&quot;) created therein.</div><div=
><br></div><div>The badge proposal described by Melanie would create simila=
r investment on my part. It also has the advantage that badges can be creat=
ed on-the-fly to recognize achievements that otherwise defy classification.=
<br><br></div><div>But having either such thing would pressure the communit=
y to categorize and quantify every unit of work put into it, and then defen=
d those quantities and categorizations when someone feels slighted by their=
 ranking. My fear is that the new burden will fall on people who are alread=
y contributing greatly, and thus would be contributing less, and the new co=
ntributions won&#39;t make up for that loss.</div></div></div>

--0000000000000b427c06414f1681--