On 30 June 2016 at 06:56, Tony Anderson <tony_ander...@usa.net> wrote:
> I hope Chris Leonard's report will include the present status of his
> arrangements with the Conservancy (is he officially on board, has he been
> paid his stipend for May or for June? I would also like the report to
> include the present status of the Nigerian project. In particular was the
> first milestone met (setup) and payment made?

Chris, I would also like to see any and all material you have prepared
for the blog :)

> I hope that Adam or someone will be able to report on our financial 'month'
> with starting balance, revenue and expenses during the period, and ending
> balance.

Me too :)

> I am opposed to the second motion in the agenda.
> My objections are:
> (1) The only method to implement a donation is to write a paper check and
> send it to the Conservancy. There is an attempt to provide a 'donate' option
> to the Sugar Labs website, but I believe it has not been implemented.

I do not think that SLOB should be bothered with motions about which
methods of donation are permitted, and which are currently
implemented. That is a matter for Conservancy to decide and its Member
Projects should allow for funds to be accepted to their earmarked
funds with any of those methods; and it is up to the project's members
to implement the methods.

> (2) Such a fund-raising activity should have a target amount. As far as know
> this goal has not been set.

I agree that  fund-raising activity should have a target amount.

You posted a motion on June 4th:

"to undertake a fund raising drive. Arrangements will be made to
enable on-line contributions by PayPal, debit or credit card or other
means. Once the means to make contributions is in place, the Financial
Manager will initiate and lead the drive. The Sugar Labs web site will
show progress in donations toward the goal."

This was not seconded.

Lionel then called for motions to be minimised.

I therefore expect to carry out fund raising activities without making
motions to SLOBs for approval, and without a Finance Manager
appointed, since it seems no one at SLOBs is interested in giving
meaningful feedback on either motions about fund raising or about the
FM position.

I will take into account feedback offered to me by other members.

> (3) I have no problem requesting each member to make a donation in an amount
> they can afford. However, I strongly object asking members to identify
> themselves as not having the means to make a donation of a specfied amount.
> A statement like 'In order to meet our financial goal for the year, members
> should try to donate at least $50 although donations in any amount are
> welcome' would be acceptable.

Sounds good!

> (4) We could identify donors of say $100 or more as sponsors or partners or
> associates or sustaining members, There are many such designations
> available.


> The 'prominent placement' and 'release codename' are not acceptable without
> clarification.

Cool, when I get there I'll let the community know

> According to Dave Crossland, Caryl Bigenho wants the motion on the Financial
> Manager to be on the agenda. Has she withdrawn her propsoed motion.

No, we haven't heard from her. I have now taken the liberty of posting
the 2 motions with my suggestions which she did not review.
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)

Reply via email to