> The group interviewed 18 subjects, some of whom were contributors and others not, and came up with five archetypes to describe them: > Leaders, like "Rory

> The group interviewed 18 subjects, some of whom were contributors and others not, and came up with five archetypes to describe them: > Leaders, like "Rory", who are active in their communities; their activity is generally supported at work. Rory's biggest need is usually help in growing the community. > "Avery", who is convinced about open source, but whose participation is held back. Avery knows the value of contributing and feels safe in the community, but is unable to fully participate, perhaps because of a lack of support at work. > Competent people like "Taylor", who are not yet convinced of the value of participating in the community. Taylor does contribute, generally in the form of bug fixes, but doesn't see the point of doing more. Taylor may be skeptical about the owners of a project and is not sure what benefit would be gained from participating more fully. > Curious people like "Parker" who do not yet contribute — we all began as Parker, she said. Parker is curious about how to get involved but faces a number of barriers. They may not be technically advanced or understand how open-source development works; they almost certainly do not have support. > Lurkers; MacNamara didn't really talk about this unnamed group at all. Or instead just use the idiot color archetypes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22064530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22064530