Carol Spears wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 03:23:47PM +0100, David Neary wrote:
> > I think that we need an event before we go looking for money,
> > though.
> as far as i am concerned, this event and all of the other ones suggested
> here have already occured.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you... when I talk about an even, I
mean something that we can then "sell" to people for sponsorship.
That is, that we can say that we have concrete plans that we need
> while people were struggling with real life problems and such, they were
> told that a presentation would be needed for consideration for a recent
> trip to talk about gimp with real life people.
I have lost you a little here - are you talking about Roman's
efforts to gather resources for presentations? Or dsrogers's call
for ideas on what to present at comdex? Or something else?
> someone did get to go, travel and such paid for. no presentation that
> was shown to me.
In fairness (I think you are talking about comdex) what ORA does
with their money, and who they decide to invite to an event, is
outside the scope of this discussion. There are 3 or 4 GIMP
people in the US, and 1 or 2 (not sure how many) went to
represent the GIMP. This is completely different from organising
a developers conference to outline the future of the gimp.
> everything outlined in this letter has already been done, perhaps
> several times over. then over again. then again just to be sure.
> where is the money? how much is there? who are the contributers and
> what did they intend to get from the money.
> faith shall set you free.
> i have much faith in the misinformation surrounding gimp.org.
I'm afraid that I have no idea what you're talking about here.
Could you clarify what money you're talking about, which letter,
and particularly what this has to do with the conference next
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gimp-developer mailing list