| 1 |
On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 14:35 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> So, I'm not going to go point by point as this is getting out of hand. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
This whole thread is way to much. There really should have only been a |
| 5 |
single reply to my initial post. Providing links or access to the |
| 6 |
information I am seeking. That nothing has come forth, and this thread |
| 7 |
has grown quite substantial. Just makes me further doubt the current |
| 8 |
wellness of things all around. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> First, I'm inclined to trust the current trustees until I see evidence |
| 11 |
> that we shouldn't. Certainly if elected I would ask to see evidence |
| 12 |
> that filings have been made, and I'm sure that in this capacity |
| 13 |
> everybody would be cooperative. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Given the clear lack of knowledge and experience on these matters, thats |
| 16 |
blind faith which I do not have. Since I do have knowledge of said |
| 17 |
matters. If the filings had been done, proof would be very easy to |
| 18 |
produce in variety of ways. Which I have mentioned more than once. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> Second, my points in general were that we need to focus on moving |
| 21 |
> forward and not in correcting mistakes ages ago that might not be |
| 22 |
> correctable. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Yes, and the first thing is financial accountability! Which for some |
| 25 |
reason hasn't happened in years. Like the bylaws state annual financial |
| 26 |
report to membership. Thats never happened, and there is no annual |
| 27 |
financial reports published, just quarterly. Which the bylaws make no |
| 28 |
provisions or requirements for quarterly reporting. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Much less if annual filings with New Mexico and the IRS have been done, |
| 31 |
then duplicating that info in guidexml, or what ever would be a minor |
| 32 |
task. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> I wasn't trying to suggest that we can afford to not follow the law. |
| 35 |
> I'm just saying that we need to have our current ducks in a row before |
| 36 |
> we try to fix the past. From the sound of things this may already be |
| 37 |
> in order, and so we can look into the past at our leisure. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
There is no proof things are in order. That a trustee said Gentoo does |
| 40 |
not exist with the IRS is a major red flag! Any legal entity has to be |
| 41 |
filed and exist with both. You can't exist with a state only and not the |
| 42 |
federal government. Its impossible! |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> My example of what can go wrong with community-driven projects wasn't |
| 45 |
> intended to suggest that we shouldn't accept money, or that these |
| 46 |
> problems are going to happen. My point was that we aren't Canonical, |
| 47 |
> and that what works for Canonical might not work for Gentoo. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
Well again there are many NPO's out there, and I was looking at quite |
| 50 |
many. I did not want, and had no intention of getting Gentoo's structure |
| 51 |
to mirror any other. I was simply looking to cherry pick, and the main |
| 52 |
ones were FreeBSD, Debian, and Gnome. Which all are NPO's have great |
| 53 |
structure, funding development, etc. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
> I certainly support expanding the foundation, and its financial |
| 56 |
> impact. I'm even fine with paying for more consistent professional |
| 57 |
> help with the books if it makes sense. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Well most can be done in house, with using an outside professional for |
| 60 |
review purposes. Which should reduce any costs even further. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
> I'm not sure that funding a |
| 63 |
> bunch of devs makes sense right now, though perhaps it could in the |
| 64 |
> future. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
Thats moot to me, and up to others to make a reality, if that ever |
| 67 |
happens which I seriously doubt. But it would be wonderful if Gentoo did |
| 68 |
get its act together enough and could fund development. The GSoC tends |
| 69 |
to be a good thing for Gentoo. Gentoo doing the same for itself would |
| 70 |
only be that much better. |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
> I'd rather see money spent on hardware, infrastructure, or |
| 73 |
> perhaps on expenses if they're judicious and don't create a lot of |
| 74 |
> resentment if some benefit more than others. A Gentoo conference is |
| 75 |
> nice in theory - although people who aren't near clusters of devs |
| 76 |
> might feel left out (how likely is a dev in Zimbabwe to get to attend |
| 77 |
> a local conference ever?). |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
What if devs had free tickets to the event? Paid for by the Gentoo |
| 80 |
Foundation. Or what if Gentoo provided developer hardware? ;) |
| 81 |
|
| 82 |
Keep in mind any conference would be towards the user base, with regard |
| 83 |
to attendance. Gentoo developers would be more staff at the event. |
| 84 |
|
| 85 |
> Bottom line is that spending money can create problems in a community, |
| 86 |
> and we need to think about that. This isn't a reason to never spend |
| 87 |
> money - it is a reason to keep this in mind. |
| 88 |
|
| 89 |
Well many other communities do not have such problems on the money |
| 90 |
front. But I am more concerned with financial accountability and |
| 91 |
required legal filings relating to such. That would have to come long |
| 92 |
before Gentoo even considered paying people. Which that comes with other |
| 93 |
things, like payrol tax, etc. Which even a NPO pays payrol tax, thats |
| 94 |
different than income tax. Even if all devs were 1099 contractors, still |
| 95 |
bunch more financial paperwork when paying people, vs buying or spending |
| 96 |
money on stuff. |
| 97 |
|
| 98 |
-- |
| 99 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 100 |
Obsidian-Studios, Inc. |
| 101 |
http://www.obsidian-studios.com |
Archives