Money is always nice, but I wanted to chime in and refocus two aspects: 1. Software carpentry runs on volunteers who may have to take time off to do the training; I’m hesitant to ask them to make sacrifices for a company that can afford to compensate fairly. If SWC training truly is being recognized as the best on its merits, then I respectfully disagree with the notion that “getting exposure” requires asking someone to work for free.
2. In setting prices, ability to pay is not the only factor; I suspect that many of us are also attracted by mission. Universities produce students; companies produce widgets. All that said- this is new, and variable pricing is hard to work out. But there’s a wide gap between “unpaid labor” and “market rate”. SWC is an educational organization, and Monsanto has people who would benefit from what we have to offer. Ultimately this falls on the instructors- +1 to letting them decide for themselves, so long as we create a system where the opportunities are fair and equitable. If it helps make the organization sustainable, so much the better. Regards, -Andrew Boughton [email protected] > On Mar 4, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Marianne Corvellec > <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 to Noam and Ethan's simple/intuitive/clear idea of drawing the dividing > line for pricing tiers between for-profit and nonprofit. I find the Canadian > terminology 'not-for-profit' to be better and clearer: you might be a > start-up and make no profit (yet) so, as such, be a 'nonprofit' de facto, but > really you are not not-for-profit, you are for-profit. ;) > > So, to Greg's question > > How about small companies: do we ask a start-up less than we ask Monsanto? > my answer is no, keep it market rate. Start-ups raise money so they can > afford good talent or, in this case, good training. Raising funds is part of > (sometimes, the core of) the start-up game. > > Personally I think a sliding scale doesn't make any sense: Tell me what your > profits were last year, I'll run my linear model and give you a rate? If you > are a new start-up, maybe you were not even around last year. Profits from > big corps travel the world, fiscal policies are different everywhere and > subject to fraud... Garbage in, garbage out, basically. > > I understand that the for-profit/not-for-profit divide may sound > unsophisticated. I know that big vs small speaks more to Greg's mind. But I > think it's good for the sake of transparency and clarity. Mission over bank > account balance (it's not like big corps typically use their big profits to > share and invest 'proportionally'). > > Marianne, living the start-up life ;) > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Ethan White <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > 1. I agree with Greg and others that, in general, choosing not to participate > in workshops at certain locations due to ethical concerns should primarily be > the choice of individual instructors regarding whether they want to teach or > not, not a broader SCF decision on whether to run the workshops at all. > 2. I like the idea of a split fee structure for for-profit vs. non-profit > groups. I understand Greg's point about rich vs. poor, but that's more > difficult to handle (e.g., what are we measuring to represent wealth, what's > the dividing line, should it be a sliding scale, etc.). My general feeling is > that any extra funds from for-profits (or rich) institutions should go to SCF > rather than the instructors, at least until SCF is on a very firm financial > footing. > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org > > <http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
