Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-nfp <gentoo-nfp@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Section 4.1 Member Classes
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 03:26:07
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Section 4.1 Member Classes by "William L. Thomson Jr."
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:05 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
<wltjr@g.o> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 03:26 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: >> >> > I am not a fan of bureaucracy, but I am a fan of structure and >> > organization. Without you get chaos, and we have that on so many fronts. >> >> We got chaos because some people are too attached to the letter of >> laws/policy/writtenpaper from my point of view. > > Which I tried to fight. But bottom line, people are open to change > things, but not retroactively. Thus until someone does something, and we > move forward with elections. We are stuck in a quagmire. > >> > Um, did you not see all the emails where I was fighting GLEP 39? You >> > mentioned the word rules. Which the council is at the top of all. Yet >> > the council doesn't seem to want to enforce their own rules against >> > themselves. >> >> Check the council ml. > > Ok will do, guess I should have been commenting there. Seemed like most > conversations about that were taking place on -project. > >> I followed the discussion on -project but I won't comment there, I >> already gave my opinion on the -council ml. > > Ok great. Thank you for your input on the matter. But at the end of the > day, opinions are moot. What action is being taken? Is the council > staying or going?
Note that in my reading of the GLEP we have 30 days to *begin* the election process. I expect in the end this will occur (feel free to check the -council ml archives for status). I expect the council will start the election process and if they fail to do so I will start it independently. It seems like you are always in a rush :P It takes time for folks to communicate, please be patient. Even if we held an speedy election now, the council we have now is still the council until that election is concluded. -Alec
> >> > It is a NPO organization, 501c6. Inc has nothing to do with the type of >> > entity. No more than anything else in the name. Incorporation does not >> > imply profit. >> >> I was referring to Gentoo Technologies inc. > > Yes I read something about past issues wrt to embedded Gentoo. Not sure > it was a very long time ago. But that entity hasn't exists for some > time. Predates foundation's creation. > > > >> > Based on how it seemed Daniel operated in the past. I don't think he >> > asked anyone's permission when he resigned and created the foundation. >> > Thus I would find it surprising for him to poll, and act on majority wrt >> > to the type of foundation he was to create. >> >> In short, the 6 one was quicker to get, at least that's what I recall. > > Yes, the other takes 5 years, and the 5 years is a probationary period > so to speak. > >> > In how it functions, and it's mission. Not the type of legal entity it >> > is. >> >> c.f. the freebsd nfp > > Which I have looked into allot. They fund developer travel via grants. > And do allot of things. Not to mention have like $400k, and have > investments. Money market account, etc. > > Soo many things we are likely years away from or decades at this pace. > > -- > William L. Thomson Jr. > amd64/Java/Trustees > Gentoo Foundation > >
-- gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-nfp] Section 4.1 Member Classes "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o>