Not paying for code is a highly discriminatory policy.
A typical employed or retired programmer in wealthy country, faced with a wish to build a large body of code, will ask themselves, "Which of my computers should I use?". Downloading the code will be trivial over their unlimited-data, high-bandwidth, Internet connection. We do not notice our computer access or Internet bandwidth any more than a fish notices water. Doesn't everyone measure their data storage capacity in terabytes?
Now consider, even in the US, a programmer who has developed some form of chronic fatigue, making the times they can work too unpredictable to hold down a job or reliably fulfill contracts, living off social security. Or someone in sub-Saharan Africa, who shares a computer with their village if they are lucky, and connects to the Internet by tethering to a phone with a limited data plan.
Not paying for code means not just favoring those who have certain resources of time, computer power, and Internet bandwidth, but absolutely excluding those who do not have those resources and cannot afford them.
The board may consider the principle of not paying for code so valuable as to outweigh its discriminatory nature, but please don't pretend it does not discriminate.
On 6/26/2019 3:26 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: ...
I would encourage the committee to focus on building a proposal that fits within the expectations of the board, who act as they believe the membership expect. Arguing, about the validity of a long held policy, which itself does not discriminate, is a waste of time that could be better spent on mentoring individuals.
..
