Talk:WANTED: Hands-On PPer

I've been thinking about this for a while and I'm wondering what others would think about this. I'm thinking that the name of this page doesn't really fit its content too well. Very few of the PMs and projects listed here are really looking for a Hands-on PPer, but most are really just casually looking for a PPer for a project or projects, and also in a few cases (which I think is very useful info for PPers to know), stating preferences and attitudes toward projects skipping rounds. I'm thinking that a page named something like "PMs seeking PPs," with sections something like 1: PMs' general practices in choosing/working with PPs; 2: PMs' general policies on "skipping" projects; 3: Projects needing Hands-On PPs; 4: Projects for new PPs (this should probably just be a link back to the Projects for new PPs thread, since that seems to work pretty well); 5: Etc. (or maybe the sections should be in the exact opposite order since items in 1 and 2 wouldn't change frequently, and would thus be more appropriate toward bottom of the page, etc.,). It's just the start of a vague idea I had, and I was wondering what others thought about it. FWIW. -- kraester 03:54, 16 January 2007 (PST)

I do 1 and 2 on my own wiki user page, which saves cluttering up this one ;), and I use this page only for those projects that I want a PPer to help guide. Perhaps there should be a separate page for PMs who are looking for skips? I'm also thinking maybe a clean-up of this page is in order, like maybe deleting (or moving) the sections where the PM doesn't have any projects at the moment. logista 08:07, 17 January 2007 (PST)

Yes, that's another good option. Return this page to its original purpose of looking for just "hands-on" PPs, not PPs in general, and create or find other pages to serve the other functions; hold the other information. I guess that's my main point: the page title no longer is an accurate description of what is on the page, so people who just see the title in a list of some sort (Category list, directory list, "Exploration" list, etc., aren't getting an accurate idea of what the page is all about in its current configuration. I don't really care how the situation is "fixed," I just think it should be fixed in some way, and I really started this Talk page so we could get a discussion going on the best way to "fix" it. So I'm very glad to see Logista putting in her perspective.  :) -- kraester 10:10, 17 January 2007 (PST)