Re: [gentoo-project] William Hubbs council manifesto 2018-2019

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 9:42 PM William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
>
> Keep in mind that this is already basically the case. All the trustees
> have to do is stop paying for infra and revoke our permission to use the
> Gentoo logo, name etc.
>

At most that would prevent us from using the logo/name (or it would
require carefully following the logo usage guidelines), and it is
pretty unlikely to happen in any case.  With things as they currently
stand it would be all or nothing - there is no orderly way to appeal
decisions to Trustees short of the Trustees completely destroying the
project, which means that there aren't any appeals.

In any case, I'd much rather see us transition to a model that is more
sustainable than have everybody fight over who is in charge of the
model we currently have.

>
> My impression is that we are just waiting for robbat2 to catch up the
> accounting/tax issues, so the foundation isn't in as big of a mess as
> has been spread. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
>

Yup, it has been just around the corner for the last 10 years as far
as I've been able to tell from all the optimistic list posts over the
years.  However, as more information comes to light it seems like the
trend has been towards us being further and further behind.  Robin
appears to have done a lot to help fix things, but I'll count those
chickens after they hatch...

> > > Regarding comrel, given that more than one person who has been removed
> > > from Gentoo has threatened the foundation with law suits, I can
> > > understand the trustees wanting to be in that loop.
> >
> > Just another good reason to not have a foundation to sue...
>
> Would you rather have the council and comrel members be open to being
> sued individually?
>
> I'm no expert, but it seems like the legal entity protects us from this.

I don't see how this risk goes up by having an umbrella org own the
name/etc.  In fact, having one that is competently managed probably
would be beneficial to whatever extent it could shield individuals
from being sued.

That said, anybody can name anybody in a lawsuit for anything, at
least in the US.  That doesn't mean that they'd win.  Gentoo can't
stop anybody from suing you.  At best it could offer to pay your legal
bills, though that would be a bit of an empty promise in our current
state.

Keep in mind that nobody around here is an expert, and this is why we
probably should stop trying to run a corporation in our spare time.
That is how you end up not filing your taxes for 14 years and
counting.  Hopefully the IRS will exercise enforcement discretion, but
it isn't really something we want to mess around with.

I just don't see the benefit in having developers moonlighting as
corporate officers.  It is a lot of work, and it is work that for the
most part hasn't been getting done.  Even if Robin saves us, we're
only a year away from falling behind again.  Distros much larger than
ours have been pulling out of this area, and the ones which seem to
remain independent have a lot more funding.  Also, as much as I
appreciate the work Robin has done, I don't see a lot of others
willing to pick up the slack if he ends up stepping down at some point
either.

Having these positions that are hard to fill but which legally have
all kinds of power is also a source of risk, because it basically
means that almost anybody can end up in one of these positions simply
by running for them unopposed.  If it is true that the Trustees can
effectively override the Council today, then what good is it in having
a vigorous debate with 20 people running for 7 council slots, if 3
random people get elected to the Trustees unopposed (or lightly
opposed) and can just overturn their decisions at will?  Shouldn't we
be having the healthy/vigorous competition for the positions that
wield the most power?

-- 
Rich