Membership procedures

In several of the discussions that we have had since just before the release of Lenny there have been wide-ranging suggestions about how to evolve our membership procedures. Concrete proposals that have been made have produced discussions bogged down in details. In order to try and avoid that we would first like to gauge opinions on high-level approaches and get agreement on which one to follow, then work on the details of that approach. In order to do this, we would like to run a poll asking questions about each of the approaches, which will be presented as short (less than 10 lines) summaries of the approach. If you have a proposal you would like to see included in the poll, please add it to this page.


I propose that we should decouple different rights which are granted through NM. These rights can then be granted gradually, with different requirements. Advocacy is suitable for the parts which don't require technical skill but those that do should have technical checks. I don't want to distinguish many different 'categories' of contributor, just people who are all equal, but may or may not have permission to do certain things by themselves. I do think that it should be grouped under one process with some central checks in each stage, but we should try to trim down checks and use time spent with some permissions as evidence to grant the future ones, so there aren't long artificial periods of waiting.