On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova <kittykat3...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On 6 June 2014 07:38, Fabiano Fidêncio <fabi...@fidencio.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 8:20 A > >> >> 3) Check if the values spent are okay > >> > > >> > Here I am unsure what you are asking for. I published summaries in > the > >> > past regarding to GUADEC, for example (Sorry for my English, it was > >> > rustier than now): > >> > > >> > > http://calcifer.org/notes/2009/05/status-of-guadecs-sponsorship-requests.html > >> > > >> > > http://calcifer.org/notes/2010/04/guadec-status-of-travel-sponsorship-requests.html > >> > >> Also at: > >> > http://blogs.gnome.org/kittykat/2013/06/07/sponsorships-for-guadec-2013/ > > > > Thanks for the link, Ekaterina! > > > >> > If you are asking for details of how much we have sponsored per every > >> > individual, it was decided at the very beginning to keep that > >> > information private. It was also part of the announcement (see the > >> > links below): > >> > > >> > "Any information you send the TC will be private" > >> > > >> > If we provide the names and numbers, there will be missing contextual > >> > information to explain some things. And this could refrain people of > >> > requesting sponsorship. So, there is a trade-off between transparency > >> > and privacy. > >> > > >> > And this is mostly the case for GUADEC and GNOME.Asia. For hackfests, > >> > you still have the wiki page that has that information. Something > that > >> > might change once we start having a fixed amount for the hackfests > >> > altogether. > >> > > >> >> Although I'm not the one who would like to dig into these data, I'd > >> >> feel > >> >> really more comfortable knowing that I can do this, if I'd like to. > >> >> Does it make sense? Am I asking too much? > >> > > >> >> Please, as I told before, I'm kind-of new here. So, If this > discussion > >> >> already happened in the past, please, point me some links and I'll be > >> >> happy > >> >> reading them and trying to understand why this process is not > >> >> transparent > >> >> for all the Foundation members. (Seriously, I'm not trying to put my > >> >> finger > >> >> in anyone's face about how the money is or should be spend. Just > would > >> >> love > >> >> to understand how the process works) > >> > > >> > The Travel Committee was proposed and discussed in 2009. You can see > the > >> > original proposal in the following link: > >> > > >> > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2009-February/msg00007.html > >> > > >> > This was lengthly discussed, see for example the archives of February > >> > 2009: > >> > > >> > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2009-February/thread.html > >> > > >> > And you can see a follow-up on March on a related topic ("Sponsoring > >> > hackfests"): > >> > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2009-March/thread.html > >> > > >> > And the announcement in April: > >> > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2009-April/msg00012.html > >> > > >> >> With my thoughts and my doubts, yesterday I approached the Treasurer > >> >> (who > >> >> is also member of the Travel Committee) and asked her about those > >> >> things > >> >> and I'd like to share my disappointment with the answers. > >> >> [comments deleted] > >> >> After that, I was told to raise it with the Foundation, and that's > the > >> >> motivation for my email :-) > >> > >> There is indeed lack of context here. You strongly implied that the > >> board and the travel-committee was corrupt, which is an opinion that > >> you have every right to hold. If you do truly think that this is the > >> case, then it is my opinion that you should indeed raise the matter > >> with the membership rather than keeping quiet. > > > > Wait a bit. Asking for information means that I imply that board and > > travel-committee is corrupt? > > If yes, sorry the Board, sorry Travel Committee. I've noticed that I > think > > both of you are corrupt! > > No, you said "from the place where I come from obscurity helps with a > lot of bad things". I try to assume that people mean well, but I find > it very difficult to read anything positive from that statement. > Yep. I did say that and it's true. From the place where I come from, the obscurity helps with a lot of bad things as well. So, what does it mean? Does it mean that I think Board and Travel Committee are corrupt? Or does that mean that I think that obscurity does help with security is a bad argument from my point of view? > > Come on, Ekaterina. We know that everyone is equal for GNOME Foundation > and > > we know we had problems about decisions being taken differently for the > same > > situation and different people. Is it corruption? I don't think so. > > What I do think so is that having every detail opened would help people > to > > understand this kind of situation without have to argue with you and hear > > those kind of answers. > > If anyone holds my personal information which I gave under the belief > that it would not be shared, then I should hope that they would fight > to keep my information private, regardless of who was asking for it > (government, a company or another individual). > You asked me why, IIRC. I explained you why I think the process should be opened. Hope it can be considered for the future. > > >> Regarding the travel committee issues and taking quotes out of > >> context, I would prefer to be clear on the matter: > >> > >> You asked me where the amounts of sponsorship were recorded, I > >> responded by saying on hackfest pages and in board minutes. > >> > >> You asked me for exact amounts that every individual has been > >> sponsored for, I responded by explaining that you can make an educated > >> estimate from the above two resources. > >> > >> You asked me why the exact amounts of sponsorship for each individual > >> are not published, I explained that one of the reasons is that they > >> would make little sense without context and context is not ours to > >> publish. I also assured you that they are recorded properly, as that > >> seemed to be of concern to you, and the board also has access to them > >> in case the board ever wants to audit them. > >> > >> I believe you when you say that you have no agenda, but you have yet > >> to give me a good reason for telling the world (you were asking me in > >> a public IRC channel) on which service to try guessing a travel > >> committee member's password > > > > Come on. Asking where are those info is "try guessing a travel committee > > member's password"? > > Now I'm really surprised, again! > > Please read what I wrote again, I did not accuse you of anything. My > point is to highlight that revealing where the information is stored > makes that information less secure. > Sorry, you're right about this. I misread your sentence. > > >> and where to look for sponsorship details which, as Germán pointed out, > >> the travel committee does promise to > >> keep private. > > > > You could have answered this, right? But you took the non-polite way. > > I still prefer to not answer this question as you have still not given > a good reason to do so. > With or without a good reason, you took the non-polite way to answer. Why? I don't know, seriously. Germán aswered my questions in a really nice and polite and he pointed me out for the most important thing: " Any information you send the TC will be private" Best Regards, -- Fabiano Fidêncio
_______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
