Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-nfp
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-nfp: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-nfp@g.o
From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>
Subject: Re: Section 4.1 Member Classes
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 21:30:33 +0200
William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 10:36 -0700, Chrissy Fullam wrote:
>> How would Gentoo benefit from having non-developers (individuals as you put
>> it) and businesses (you don't mention sponsors so I presume any business,
>> say Intel) be allowed to become part of the foundation and have a vote?
> 
> By allowing the greater community to feel they are participating and
> have a role in Gentoo. Not limiting the Gentoo community to just
> developers.

Why not?

> Also everything I have been reading in posts, and hearing in like
> interviews. Which includes Vapier/Spanky's recent interview. Pretty much
> calls for help from the community beyond development stuff. So those
> people should have some form of representation.

Right now the major issue I see within gentoo, past the rudeness that 
result in removal of poisonous people, is the will to do something ELSE 
than our core values: experiment, enjoy the results, have fun.

> Unless you or others feel we should ignore the community.

Which community?

> And only reflect the will of the community through developers and
> the council.

I do not see any problem with that. Who does, decides his own fate.

> Just to play out a scenario real quick for those concerned with power.
> The community would like to see A. The foundation hears that, and goes
> to the council and says hey. There is lots of interest in A. What are
> the chances of it happening? Council makes a call/ruling, and that's
> that.

Bogus.

People would like to see A, developers found A interesting, discussion 
happens among them, A gets done or not depending on the consensus

The council got involved only IFF the consensus hadn't been reached. The 
foundation has NOTHING to do with this.

> If the community is unhappy, sorry we can't please all. But at least
> this way they have some influence, can participate in some way, and at
> least are heard.

Gentoo is a volunteer project, your value/honor/weight is given by your 
contribution to the project, that doesn't mean that non-developers have 
no chance to give an input, that just means that they have to convince 
others that their idea has a value. Everybody is free to participate by 
proposing on the gentoo-dev mailing list, contacting developers working 
on the area they are interested in, helping project and subprojects 
within Gentoo evolving.

>> Also you mention Gentoo making money off this arrangement, can you please
>> elaborate how the money comes into play? Where does it come from, how do we
>> determine how much, and what do we do with it, etc?
> 
> Money would come from businesses wishing to be members. Not from
> individuals. The amount is yet to be discussed, and I am open there. But
> I do feel a tiered system is based. Where the amount does change based
> on company size.

We got already sponsors, how that would change the relations we have 
with them? Again being a volunteer project the main contribution should 
be made in time and people. A business should hire developers or provide 
people willing to develop for Gentoo. Money by itself is less 
interesting and useful.

> I think it's unfair to require a large corporation to pay the same
> amount to be a member as a small to medium sized business. Maybe it's
> unfair to have a tiered system where they pay different amounts. Not
> sure. Up to debate, discussion, and majority there.

I think that's unfair thinking about this.

> As a business would have a benefit of using Gentoo. In some form, that
> one would assume is reflected on their bottom line, profit wise. I feel
> they should give back to the community. While that is optional now. If
> they want to participate in some form beyond just contributing $. Then
> they should be required to pay for such privileges. Essentially paying
> for a membership, and right to vote.

They should get their right to vote by doing not buying.

> ( This would never apply to individuals, which would be free to join,
> short of filling out an application/form, maybe a quiz, etc. )

Business last time I checked is done by individuals.

> Now we are talking about a very small amount of influence if any at all.

Considering what you suggested in another thread and on irc, it looks 
quite a large amount once the foundation got some of the power the 
council is supposed to have.

> Being as how the foundation does not steer or control the project. The
> council does.

But strangely you are the same person asking for more power to the trustee.

> It's mostly like a honorary thing. They could use it in
> marketing etc. Our company supports and is a member of the Gentoo
> Foundation, etc. Which could mean squat, but then again 99% of all
> marketing is just hype so :)

We got sponsors and again they are volunteers.

Looks like the keyword here is "volunteering".

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

-- 
gentoo-nfp@g.o mailing list


Replies:
Re: Section 4.1 Member Classes
-- William L. Thomson Jr.
Re: Section 4.1 Member Classes
-- William L. Thomson Jr.
References:
Section 4.1 Member Classes
-- William L. Thomson Jr.
RE: Section 4.1 Member Classes
-- Chrissy Fullam
RE: Section 4.1 Member Classes
-- William L. Thomson Jr.
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-nfp: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
RE: Section 4.1 Member Classes
Next by thread:
Re: Section 4.1 Member Classes
Previous by date:
RE: Section 4.1 Member Classes
Next by date:
Re: Section 4.1 Member Classes


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-nfp mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.