Re: [gentoo-nfp] Extending Social Contract to guarantee that Gentoo will remain volunteer work

[Matthew Thode]

On 01/26/2017 09:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> [discussion intended at -nfp, CC-ing -project]
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to add an additional clause to the Gentoo Social Contract
> [1], to guarantee that Gentoo will remain a volunteer-based project
> and will not turn into some kind of paid enterprise. The suggested text
> would be:
>
> | Gentoo is and will remain independent volunteer work. We will never
> | pay anyone to develop Gentoo, nor will we accept any donations given
> | on the condition of any particular development.
>
> Text improvements welcome.
>
> The main idea is to protect volunteers spending their time on Gentoo.
> I don't want to learn one day that my opinion doesn't matter anymore
> because a new lead (Council, Trustees, Board, BDFL or any other
> possible future form) decides that they/he/she will use the donation
> money to hire paid workers doing the Gentoo work that they desire.
>
> I believe that any possible lead Gentoo might elect in the future
> should still represent the whole Gentoo community, and the community
> should have the right to refuse to follow the directions set by
> the lead if he/she stops listening to the community. As volunteers,
> we have the right to refuse to do something that in our opinion harms
> Gentoo.
>
> Sadly, this could become pointless if the leading bodies keep the power
> to hire people to work on Gentoo for money. This means that effectively
> they have the power to spend Gentoo money on pursuing their own goals
> as long as they can legally claim that the work is done for
> the benefit of Gentoo. In volunteer-based project, they effectively
> have to *convince* others to work on their ideas and/or spend
> a significant effort working on them themselves.
>
> The other part is pretty much a formality, that means to make it clear
> that Gentoo is not supposed to be bribed by third-party companies to
> alter its course. I don't think it really changes anything but it looks
> like a nice thing to state.
>
> I should note that this doesn't mean to prevent anyone from being paid
> by third parties to work on Gentoo, or receive any money on account of
> what he did or is doing for Gentoo. I think that's fine as long as
> the wider Gentoo community has the right to reject any work that it
> sees unfit.
>
> [1]:https://www.gentoo.org/get-started/philosophy/social-contract.html
>

This rule would be able to be replaced by whoever that new board is,
making it not fully effective (not that it's is ineffective).

Also, I think this would prevent us from hiring outside people to help
us in things we are not skilled in.  Say, taxes and law type stuff.
It'd also prevent us from re-reimbursing gsoc volunteers for travel I think.

Overall I'm not against something like this, but I think it'd be better
to attack it in the other direction.  Decide what can we spend money on,
not what we can't.  At the moment it's up to the trustees to spend the
money and I haven't seen or heard of any bad behaviour there.

-- 
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)