> Since you are paid by RedHat to work on Linux, you are not a hobbyist at
> this point. When you were unemployed you were a hobbiest.
OK, I see your sticking point is the "now" aspect of this. It was my point that using "now" as the definition of hobbyist is wrong.
Apparently the whole point of inviting hobbyists is to gain knowledge of hobbyists' experiences with the kernel process - and by definition that means people who were hobbyists at the time of their significant interaction with the kernel community. That has nothing to do with their employment status "now", and indeed it may have nothing to do with their employment status even then if their interaction with the kernel was on a spare-time unpaid basis.
Conversely, Joe Blogs whose entire kernel contributions were paid for by a "Big Enterprise kernel vendor", if made redundant yesterday is by the "now" definition a hobbyist, and qualified to explain the difficulties of working with the kernel community as a hobbyist. Can't you see the absurdity of that?
It would be different if hobbyist was simply being used as a euphemism for unwaged, in which case the motivation is to offer assistance (charity) for current circumstances. But does not appear to the motivation here.