Greetings!
Here’s a summary of tasks from the NAT meeting 2020-01-03, “Promotion of NAT Members”. This includes Criteria for picking a NAT member, Spotting NAT candidates and BNs' Evaluation Feedback.
Criteria for picking NAT members ✓
Spotting NAT candidates
BNs' Evaluation Feedback ✓
If we’ve missed a task related to the meeting, or you have questions or concerns about existing tasks, feel free to post in this thread. We won’t follow it very actively, however, so responses may be infrequent.
Here’s a summary of tasks from the NAT meeting 2020-01-03, “Promotion of NAT Members”. This includes Criteria for picking a NAT member, Spotting NAT candidates and BNs' Evaluation Feedback.
Criteria for picking NAT members ✓
- Create a wiki article detailing what we look for in NAT candidates (Deadline 2020-01-??) ✓
- Document that NAT team size depends on our work fields being covered ✓
- e.g. adding QAH management as work field would lead to more members
Spotting NAT candidates
- Implement a candidate marker on evaluation cards
- Show a new candidate-specific field for feedback similarly to modding/behaviour
- Document that only candidates close to becoming NAT should be marked
BNs' Evaluation Feedback ✓
- Show anonymous notes from other evaluators ✓
- Indicate whether evaluations are made by NAT or BNs ✓
- Only show the notes from the consensus (e.g. if fail, show fail and neutral notes), similarly to veto mediations ✓
If we’ve missed a task related to the meeting, or you have questions or concerns about existing tasks, feel free to post in this thread. We won’t follow it very actively, however, so responses may be infrequent.