Truncate usernames in block navigation tabs

[rails.git] / FAQ.md

diff --git a/FAQ.md b/FAQ.md
index d4ac1fc9fbd9959ca4e2a02a4562c66e8bbc80c8..e53c8dddb4195288797355a975395b41dcaa7ac5 100644 (file)
--- a/FAQ.md
+++ b/FAQ.md
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
+# Frequently Asked Questions
+
 ## How do I create a banner to promote my OpenStreetMap event?
 
 We occasionally display banner images on the main page of [openstreetmap.org](https://www.openstreetmap.org/) to
@@ -23,3 +25,13 @@ drive.  This is a great way to reach a lot of people!
 
 See [PR #1296](https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/1296)
 as an example.
+
+## Why don't you assign issues?
+
+We don't assign issues to volunteers for several reasons. The main reasons are that it discourages other volunteers from working on the issue, and the process turns into an unproductive administrative overhead for our team.
+
+There's no need to ask for an issue to be assigned before anyone starts working on it. Everyone is welcome to work on any issue at any time.
+
+In our experience, most people who ask for an issue to be assigned to them never create a pull request. So we would need to keep track of the assigned issues, and remember to unassign them a week or two into the future, when it is likely that they will not be making a PR. Assigned developers might feel bad if they perceive that we're unhappy with their progress, further discouraging them from contributing. Or we will get drawn into discussions about needing more time, or re-assigning them again, or so on. So it is best not to assign in the first place.
+
+The risk that two people are both genuinely working on the same task in the same hour or two is vanishingly remote, and doesn't outweigh the downsides described above. A better approach is to encourage people to simply work on the task and create a pull request, at which point everyone knows that they are actually working on the issue and not just planning/hoping/wishing to do so.