Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

Hi, Dave Can you identify these motions. Most of the votes were cast at the meetings. As far as I remember there were two email votes. Tony On 06/27/2016 04:14 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: On 27 June 2016 at 09:24, Tony Anderson wrote: If it is useful. It surely is

Re: [IAEP] Sugarlabs and Sugar are different

pls dont sent emails On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Dave Crossland wrote: > Attempt > > ___ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep >

Re: [IAEP] Sugarlabs and Sugar are different

Happy to help with the form design Since production is voluntary I can only meet it where it is and attenot to grow it :) ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugarlabs and Sugar are different

Attempt ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugarlabs and Sugar are different

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: > Hi > > Sameer, thanks for this! Please can I repost this on the youtube channel, > https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfsR9AEb7HuPRAc14jfiI6g, with a CC-BY > license ? :) > > I don't think it's very useful on the Youtube

Re: [IAEP] Sugarlabs and Sugar are different

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Caryl Bigenho wrote: > BTW… as with any really good presentation, the slides don't tell the whole > story, they mearly enhance it. Doing otherwise results in that tragedy > commonly referred to as "Death By Power-Point." So, please find the

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Sugarlabs and Sugar are different

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Lionel Laské wrote: > > Great work. > Very clear. > May be you could share your slides too for those that had no time to see > the video. > > Posted to the wiki. https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/File:Sugarlabs_Strategic_Plan.pdf Sameer >

Re: [IAEP] Sugarlabs and Sugar are different

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Chihurumnaya Ibiam < ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Sameer, i couldn't watch the video because of the format (.webm), > except i am online, because of where i am i can't really watch the video > online, can i get a download link. > > You can

Re: [IAEP] Oversight Board Meeting

On 27 June 2016 at 09:28, Tony Anderson wrote: > Based on the level of discussion in the email lists, there is apparently no > longer any interest in having a Financial Manager or a Vision statement as > topics for Friday's meeting. Sameer has said he will run some kind of

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

On 27 June 2016 at 09:24, Tony Anderson wrote: > If it is useful. It surely is > Why do you care for specific emails for specific votes? Transparency > Do you have any specific motions where there is concern about > whether it passed? Each motion where I can not

[IAEP] Oversight Board Meeting

Based on the level of discussion in the email lists, there is apparently no longer any interest in having a Financial Manager or a Vision statement as topics for Friday's meeting. Tony ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

Hi, Dave If it is useful. Why do you care for specific emails for specific votes? Do you have any specific motions where there is concern about whether it passed? Tony On 06/27/2016 02:42 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: Hi Tony On 21 June 2016 at 23:00, Dave Crossland wrote:

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

Hi Tony On 21 June 2016 at 23:00, Dave Crossland wrote: > Please provide me with 7 links to 7 emails on a public mailing list > from 2016-05-05 to 2016-05-12 for each of the votes for this motion > that you say you are aware of. Would you be willing to do this? Cheers Dave

Re: [IAEP] Translation Community Manager report

Hi Chris On 5 June 2016 at 19:23, Dave Crossland wrote: > > On 5 June 2016 at 17:20, Chris Leonard wrote: >> >> Most of the work I've done is not captured by this particular issue >> tracker and I see no reason to do double-entry book-keeping in >>

Re: [IAEP] SLOBS Meeting

Hi Adam On 17 June 2016 at 11:47, Dave Crossland wrote: > > On 17 June 2016 at 11:42, Tony Anderson wrote: >> >> I understand the need is to have a financial report at each monthly >> meeting reporting on starting balance, amount received, amount paid, and