On 12 May 2016 at 10:52, Dave Crossland <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12 May 2016 at 09:42, Walter Bender <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As Adam has pointed out, this motion has failed to pass. It seems that >> there is some support of the idea of offering at least a portion of the >> GSoC stipend to mentors who need/request the funds, but the form of the >> current motion, putting the authority into the hands of the mentors >> themselves does not have adequate support. Perhaps someone can craft a >> motion that would be better received by the oversight board. >> > > I submit the following motion draft for comments, based on Sebastian's > text, which I believe expresses Tony's sentiment, and pays a courtesy to > Lionel's sentiment. With the existing votes for the previous motion plus > Tony's swing vote, the motion can pass. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPQRFvCwj > -Az79PB3Y85aK8Pv5Sl1EODs07m9phAS5U/edit >
I invite anyone else to comment on my 2 planned motions, and I'll submit them at the end of the week :)
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
