> > > As Louis has said, we are now after the fact. If its going to change, it > should change for the > following year(s), not the one just past. But a slution that would reimburse people who needs most the money would not be "changing the fact" . - The fact that changed is that this year, LGM< won't be abe to fully reimburse everyone. - Th shad already changed. What we need to decide now is how to apply this.
If someone had to spend multiple times his monthly income to be there, and was hoping to get back the tickets cost, I'd say that paying this person is the only reasonable thing to to. Again, the "change" is not a "highest priority first". the change has been "not enough money this year". Putting that in numbers taht could apply: I surely hope that someone one more than €3500.00 age will insist in getting some € 300.00 back, when someone on a € 800.00 wage won't be able to get back € 1200.00 spent on tickets. If the idea of " dont chaneg the rules after the event" is keeping fainerness, I think it is quite clear what would be fair on this case. (in a separate subject I am and the other GIMP team people, should be covered by money donated to the project - we won't be using the money donated to LGM.) js -><- > > Craig > _______________________________________________ > CREATE mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
