Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss
Do you have any more specific objections? ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss
Progress. Further progress will come after I speak with Bradley Kuhn in coming weeks, to understand has real-world recommendations on pacing/publishing financials, based on his extensive experiences with the ~40 NGO's he (as SFConservancy's de facto bookkeeper) supervises/supports. I hope he has time in the coming week, but if not I will work around his schedule. On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: > Hi > > I went over Caryl's google doc again after re-reading the below, and I > must say that I am no longer surprised by Adam's comments at the SLOB > meeting on Friday; it seems that these clearly expressed points were > not addressed in the text that Caryl submitted. > > Adam, please review the Google Doc with my comments and let me know if > this resolves your concerns. > > On 6 May 2016 at 10:06, Adam Holt wrote: > > The financial spring cleaning CarylB, DaveC and others have worked hard > on > > within > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit > > is promising, but seems premature in my opinion, until its mechanics are > > better understood: > > > > - Even if we suppose that $X remains $200 (as it has been for many years, > > not Board involvement for expenses under $200), Financial Manager > potential > > monthly stipend $Y still remains too vague. Should $Y be $100 per month > or > > what? > > > > - The prior "month" is very poorly defined, making the Financial > Manager's > > life impossible, if for example SL Board meets on Friday March 1st, and a > > financial report summarizing February must be submitted "72 hours in > > advance" by February 25th realistically, then the Financial Manager must > > have worked for the prior week to get this right Feb 18-to-25th. If > s/he > > is away that week for a family/professional emergency, and does not want > to > > be fired then s/he must do the work Feb 10-to-17th, and as such has > pulled > > the numbers from SFConservancy's system on February 10th, just over a > week > > after the prior SL board meeting. So perhaps the only practical thing > she > > can do is run a report on the prior month of January? And even if s/he > > tries to do that, SFConservancy has explained to me that they often take > a > > month-or-so to get all receipts entered into their system, so the > Financial > > Manager cannot in fact get hard information about January. My > understanding > > from SFConservancy is that on February 10th, we could only get hard info > on > > December's financials, and even then there's no absolute guarantee, as > > receipts come in very late at times. > > > > On the one hand it sounds ridiculous, in the age where most of us obtain > > live bank statements online, that we cannot get confirmed up-to-date > > financials until 2 months later! But what other options are there? > Should > > we accept known-imprecise financial reporting in exchange for recency? > And > > if so, aren't we really asking for a rolling report of the prior ~3 > months > > every time? Let`s spell it out, if in fact those are the true duties of > the > > Financial Manager -- to provide a rolling estimates (estimates, to the > best > > of his/her professional ability) of the prior 3 months of expenses/income > > and balance on the last day of each month? > > > > - Dismissal notice could be a lot more precise: "Failure to carry out > these > > 2 duties for more than one meeting will result in removal and > appointment of > > another Finance Manager." Can s/he miss one or both duties once per > 6-month > > period due to death of a close family member? Is s/he fired immediately > for > > missing one or both dutires twice, even if separated by 2 years? If so, > we > > need to spell it out. If conversely we want to fire the Financial > Manager > > immediately, for failing to fulfill 1 duty or the other, then we should > say > > that more explicitly. > > -- > Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org ! > ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Libre Learning Lab: Call For Papers (Oct 7-10 @ MIT)
FYI - CFP closes 1 July 16. On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: > Hi > > http://librelearnlab.org/about has opened its call for papers: > > http://librelearnlab.org/call-proposals > > Stefania Druga will keynote - http://librelearnlab.org/keynote-speakers > > -- > Cheers > Dave > > > -- Avni Khatri Kids on Computers, Inc. http://kidsoncomputers.org/blog ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Motion: to undertake a fund raising drive.
On 6 June 2016 at 08:30, Sean DALY wrote: > sorry, June 14th is a Tuesday... can't do it the 13th. Starting time between > 9:30PM and 11PM (UTC+2) OK for me that day Will 11PM UTC+2 on June 14th work for you? http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2016&month=6&day=14&hour=21&min=0&sec=0&p1=179 http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?p0=1440&iso=20160614T21&msg=Sugar%20Labs%202016%20Vision%20Proposal%20Hangout https://plus.google.com/events/c3qn7hksl71offj7jitkjb81aa4 ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Motion: to undertake a fund raising drive.
On 5 June 2016 at 12:34, Dave Crossland wrote: > Where are the strategic plans for previous years that include Vision, > Mission, Goals, Objectives and Tasks? :) I am keen to see these :) ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Motion: to undertake a fund raising drive.
On 4 June 2016 at 15:25, Walter Bender wrote: > I am all for raising funds but we need to articulate the reason why we need > them. I feel frustrated that no one has seconded this motion. The 2 emails below are the reason that I began discussing the solicitation of donations from members, and having just looked at Laura's spreadsheet - since the ledger file itself is not yet available to me - I want to be clear about why I have posted this motion and hope that it will be seconded and approved. It seems the general fund has __JUST__ enough resources to pay for the Translations-Community Manager position this year: Last year $9,000 was donated, and as I expect Chris will invoice $1,000/month for the 8 months of May through December 2016, then it seems we have $1,000 left in the general fund. Where did this $9,000 come from? I guess some is GSOC and GCI mentor fees. Any other sources? Last year we spent $700 on trademark registration. When will the next renewal be due? We also spent $550 last year and $825 in 2013 on 'development.' What happened, and will we need to spend anything again this year in a similar way? In any case, it seems that there is no budget for a Finance Manager office at the moment, nor a Social Media Manager office, not a Sugar Summit, unless we start soliciting donations to the general fund. Cheers Dave -- Forwarded message -- From: Lionel Laské Date: 7 May 2016 at 13:27 Subject: Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [Sugar-devel] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss To: Adam Holt Cc: iaep , "OLPC para usuarios, docentes, voluntarios y administradores" , Sugar-dev Devel , SLOBs Sorry to be once again the devil's advocate but I think SugarLabs has no resource to pay for a Financial Manager. We can't both support the cost of a SFC and the cost of a Financial Manager. I think the job done by SFC and nice reports by Adam and Laura (and others) are enough for a small organization - without regular budget - like SugarLabs. If we need to have a Financial Manager so we need to think seriously to exit of SFC. Best regards from France. Lionel. -- Forwarded message -- From: Laura Vargas Date: 11 May 2016 at 13:35 Subject: Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss To: Dave Crossland Cc: Chris Leonard , iaep , Sugar-dev Devel , "OLPC para usuarios, docentes, voluntarios y administradores" , SLOBs 2016-05-12 2:08 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland : > On 11 May 2016 at 14:05, Laura Vargas wrote: >> >> there are ~US$65,000 available for planning/distributing among >> activities/teams/projects etc. > > I think its essential that this be spent in ways that led directly to further > income, to grow the project. I agree that there is a need for income strategies as well. Still, the idea of annual budget is to plan the expenses so that the most areas of an organization can produce results in what they do. It would be ideal to count with a somehow stable basic income, and therefore it would make sense to promote a motion for Lionel's idea of a yearly membership fee. Of course it would have to contemplate the exemptions of minors and members who actually don't have resources to pay. Been more than 80 members, a yearly fee of US$100 with an estimated ~50% of exemptions would put in SL general fund ~US$4.000 per year, probably enough for basic operations. ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss
Hi I went over Caryl's google doc again after re-reading the below, and I must say that I am no longer surprised by Adam's comments at the SLOB meeting on Friday; it seems that these clearly expressed points were not addressed in the text that Caryl submitted. Adam, please review the Google Doc with my comments and let me know if this resolves your concerns. On 6 May 2016 at 10:06, Adam Holt wrote: > The financial spring cleaning CarylB, DaveC and others have worked hard on > within > https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit > is promising, but seems premature in my opinion, until its mechanics are > better understood: > > - Even if we suppose that $X remains $200 (as it has been for many years, > not Board involvement for expenses under $200), Financial Manager potential > monthly stipend $Y still remains too vague. Should $Y be $100 per month or > what? > > - The prior "month" is very poorly defined, making the Financial Manager's > life impossible, if for example SL Board meets on Friday March 1st, and a > financial report summarizing February must be submitted "72 hours in > advance" by February 25th realistically, then the Financial Manager must > have worked for the prior week to get this right Feb 18-to-25th. If s/he > is away that week for a family/professional emergency, and does not want to > be fired then s/he must do the work Feb 10-to-17th, and as such has pulled > the numbers from SFConservancy's system on February 10th, just over a week > after the prior SL board meeting. So perhaps the only practical thing she > can do is run a report on the prior month of January? And even if s/he > tries to do that, SFConservancy has explained to me that they often take a > month-or-so to get all receipts entered into their system, so the Financial > Manager cannot in fact get hard information about January. My understanding > from SFConservancy is that on February 10th, we could only get hard info on > December's financials, and even then there's no absolute guarantee, as > receipts come in very late at times. > > On the one hand it sounds ridiculous, in the age where most of us obtain > live bank statements online, that we cannot get confirmed up-to-date > financials until 2 months later! But what other options are there? Should > we accept known-imprecise financial reporting in exchange for recency? And > if so, aren't we really asking for a rolling report of the prior ~3 months > every time? Let`s spell it out, if in fact those are the true duties of the > Financial Manager -- to provide a rolling estimates (estimates, to the best > of his/her professional ability) of the prior 3 months of expenses/income > and balance on the last day of each month? > > - Dismissal notice could be a lot more precise: "Failure to carry out these > 2 duties for more than one meeting will result in removal and appointment of > another Finance Manager." Can s/he miss one or both duties once per 6-month > period due to death of a close family member? Is s/he fired immediately for > missing one or both dutires twice, even if separated by 2 years? If so, we > need to spell it out. If conversely we want to fire the Financial Manager > immediately, for failing to fulfill 1 duty or the other, then we should say > that more explicitly. ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] A Better Idea...
Hi I'm in NY and Caryl is in CA so evenings will be best for me On 7 June 2016 at 18:15, Laura Vargas wrote: > Thanks Dave and Caryl, > > Looks like we are getting the hang of it! We as a Committe should schedule a > weekly meeting to live chat with important updates/news and pending > decisions. > > I propose to have the meeting every Monday Morning. > > Will this work for you two? > > Regards and Blessings > > > > 2016-06-07 22:20 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland : >> >> On 6 June 2016 at 23:26, Laura Vargas wrote: >> > I created a public pad for the Committee at https://titanpad.com/SLFC >> >> I have updated this, please check it > > > > > -- > Laura V. > I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org > > Identi.ca/Skype acaire > IRC kaametza > > Happy Learning! > -- Cheers Dave ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] A Better Idea...
Thanks Dave and Caryl, Looks like we are getting the hang of it! We as a Committe should schedule a weekly meeting to live chat with important updates/news and pending decisions. I propose to have the meeting every Monday Morning. Will this work for you two? Regards and Blessings 2016-06-07 22:20 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland : > On 6 June 2016 at 23:26, Laura Vargas wrote: > > I created a public pad for the Committee at https://titanpad.com/SLFC > > I have updated this, please check it > -- Laura V. I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org Identi.ca/Skype acaire IRC kaametza Happy Learning! ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Fwd: Google for Nonprofits Affiliation Request Sent
Hi Google's non-profit sign up process is rather unclear, I did my best :) -- Forwarded message -- From: Date: 7 June 2016 at 16:10 Subject: Google for Nonprofits Affiliation Request Sent To: d.crossl...@gmail.com Hello, This email is to confirm that we have sent your request for administrative access to the current administrator(s) of the Google for Nonprofits membership account for Software Freedom Conservancy Inc. The current administrator(s) have 14 days to respond to your request. If the administrator(s) do not respond within 14 days, a Google representative will review the request and may transfer ownership of the Google for Nonprofits membership account to you if they can verify that you are a member of the organisation. Sincerely, The Google for Nonprofits Team Application Information: Charity ID: 41-2203632 Organisation: Software Freedom Conservancy Inc -- Cheers Dave ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Go Social via Social Media (Proposal/Motion)
On 7 June 2016 at 16:50, samson goddy wrote: > Sure I am going to use your help on that. Let me know your G+ profiles and I'll add you to the YouTube Channel that I've set up: https://www.youtube.com/c/SugarlabsOrg-EN ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Go Social via Social Media (Proposal/Motion)
Sure I am going to use your help on that. > From: d...@lab6.com > Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:02:56 -0600 > Subject: Re: Go Social via Social Media (Proposal/Motion) > To: samsongo...@hotmail.com > CC: sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org; market...@lists.sugarlabs.org; > iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org; sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org; wal...@sugarlabs.org > > Hi Samson > > On 7 June 2016 at 13:39, samson goddy wrote: > > I was suppose to draft just the youtube proposal > > This was the discussion that led to this document: > > On 2 June 2016 at 18:28, samson goddy wrote: > > On 2 June 2016 at 23:06, Dave Crossland wrote: > >> On 2 June 2016 at 04:58, Sean DALY wrote: > >>> On 1 June 2016 at 20:34, Samuel Greenfeld wrote: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Social+Media+Guidelines > > CloudStack's and the ASF's media & brand management policies probably > are a > good set to start with as well. > >>> > >>> I support Samuel's suggestion to regroup our social media accounts and > >>> publish a posting policy modelled on Cloudstack's. > >> > >> Samson, would you be willing to draft a policy, a regrouping plan, > >> and a content plan? > > > > Sure I can do that, maybe me and you do work on it next week. > > I think your doc covers the regrouping plan; would you be willing to > draft 2 more documents, a posting policy, and and a content plan? > > Cheers > Dave ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Go Social via Social Media (Proposal/Motion)
Hi Samson On 7 June 2016 at 13:39, samson goddy wrote: > I was suppose to draft just the youtube proposal This was the discussion that led to this document: On 2 June 2016 at 18:28, samson goddy wrote: > On 2 June 2016 at 23:06, Dave Crossland wrote: >> On 2 June 2016 at 04:58, Sean DALY wrote: >>> On 1 June 2016 at 20:34, Samuel Greenfeld wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Social+Media+Guidelines CloudStack's and the ASF's media & brand management policies probably are a good set to start with as well. >>> >>> I support Samuel's suggestion to regroup our social media accounts and >>> publish a posting policy modelled on Cloudstack's. >> >> Samson, would you be willing to draft a policy, a regrouping plan, >> and a content plan? > > Sure I can do that, maybe me and you do work on it next week. I think your doc covers the regrouping plan; would you be willing to draft 2 more documents, a posting policy, and and a content plan? Cheers Dave ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Libre Learning Lab: Call For Papers (Oct 7-10 @ MIT)
Hi http://librelearnlab.org/about has opened its call for papers: http://librelearnlab.org/call-proposals Stefania Druga will keynote - http://librelearnlab.org/keynote-speakers -- Cheers Dave ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Go Social via Social Media (Proposal/Motion)
[ Here is the full text of the doc, by Samson with editing assistance by myself ] Concerning SL vision 2016, I think that SL should add social media as one of our main ways to get new members. With the big name we have, we should use that as an advantage to get people into our community - but we aren’t. Let me use myself as an example, I am a very active user in the social world (facebook, twitter, instagram, and YouTube) even though I don’t have a smartphone or a laptop of my own to use regularly. I have over 560 followers on twitter. According to twitter official report, my tweets receive more than 1.9k impressions per day. For the past 28 days I have gotten over 42.4k impressions. My lowest impression is about 50 on a tweet. My highest tweet is about 4,800 on a tweet. Now imagine if SL can get this number of impressions by activeness alone on twitter. Same goes to facebook, also posting images on instagram. We can get more than 400 impressions a day via twitter, Also facebook and instagram. If we do the math correctly, SL can get over 600 people a day from social media to sugarlabs.org. That’s valuable traffic for our sites. How do we get started with this new development? It’s very simple; I propose the following motion: Motion: create a “Social Media Manager,” role, similar to the translation manager position, paid $1,000/month plus discretionary use of an advertising budget of $100/month. I believe that the role will not be taken seriously if it is volunteer driven. I am in charge of the social accounts of my church,another non-profit organization. Their social media marketing was also not taken seriously until the church made a modestly paid role. The church community and I both saw it as a responsibility when the role was paid; and my work was effective, as now we have over 4,000 followers on facebook. Money should be spent in order to gain more. More social media followers will lead to more active members which will lead to member donations. I know it’s a non-profit organization but that does not mean we shouldn’t grow. To get my contract approved by SLOBs. I spent almost 100 USD (21,000 naira) in cyber cafes answering questions that were not related to my project, so if anyone does not understand this proposal, I strongly suggest they make research on the internet first before asking questions, because I will not answer if the questions are not relevant. I believe in the growth of SL, but I think we can’t grow big if we are not doing well on social media. Even if I am not experienced in business, based on the fact that I am still young and not yet a college graduate, this seems essential to any non-profit business. I always thank God for Nigeria because even if the government is not doing well, we Nigerians always find a way to thrive with any little chance we find because of the way we think and live. Social media is now essential for all organizations in all countries, including Nigeria. According to our last report on activities.sugarlabs.org our weekly download is getting lower and lower, though over 11 million activities have been downloaded in total. What we need to do to get SL growing bigger: 1. SL needs to get a official YouTube account and channel: a. We need a Gmail account to create the account. b. We need to monetize our videos using Google adsense to create more funds for SL. c. We will verify our YouTube channel. d. We will show live workshops in the channel. E.g. turtle art day 2. Make our twitter page live again: a. We will regain access to @sugarlabs and shut down @sugar_labs b. We will verify @sugarlabs account c. We will boost (paying fees)our important tweets, like recruitment for GSOC and GCI, our stable releases, etc. d. We will run hashtag campaigns 3 Make our Facebook account live again: We already own a facebook account, with almost 700 followers but low engagement from followers. a. We need to verify our facebook page(in progress) with a verified page. We will stream live video of workshops or related projects. b. We will post 5 times a day c. We will boost our important posts d. We will request SL members on facebook to share our posts with their friends. Facebook owns an app market that enable javascript projects to run on facebook. For example, people play games on facebook while chatting: Sometimes I play “Pool Live Pro” while I update my profile or chat with friends. So we will port sugarizer to the platform. 4. Make use of instagram: a. We will post minimum 5 pictures of SL projects a day b. We will request SL members on instagram to refer SL page to their followers 5. Make use of linkedIn: a. We will update the community page on LinkedIn b. We will ask every member on LinkedIn to update their profile to show their involvement in Sugar Labs. 6. Make use of Google+ a. We will make use of Google+ by posting our upcoming meetings b. We will also post videos of Sugar labs 7. Make use of Online Media
[IAEP] Go Social via Social Media (Proposal/Motion)
Hello Everyone, I and Dave came up with this proposal on how to make this organization bigger. I was suppose to draft just the youtube proposal as promised. So we came up with a better idea to go into the social world explained by the proposal[1]. About the sugar Vision 2016, i think that supporting this motion will make things happen. Don't make the $ in the proposal affect your judgement. P.S This way is one of the major way i think will benefit SL. The proposal is drafted in google doc check link below. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fKvuQ6ZgCD87n9FS_8yybOvUCeZBnZgzwGJX8xgQwjw/edit?usp=sharing [1] regards Samson Goddy / Dave Crossland ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] A Better Idea...
On 6 June 2016 at 23:26, Laura Vargas wrote: > I created a public pad for the Committee at https://titanpad.com/SLFC I have updated this, please check it ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Motion: to consider email votes on motions only valid if they are sent to both the SLOBs and IAEP mailing lists.
Motion: to consider email votes on motions only valid if they are sent to both the SLOBs and IAEP mailing lists. ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOB] Motion (1 of 2) GSoC Stipends
On 4 June 2016 at 08:08, Adam Holt wrote: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Tony Anderson wrote: >> >> I second the motion and approve it. > > > I hope we all work together to find a way to compromise, but in any case my > opinion is already well-known, as stated a month ago: > > Mentors/tutors/teachers are insufficiently recognized, just like the > Mentoring organization is insufficiently recognized. > > My personal belief is that *both* need to be recognized far more, likely > starting equally with a 50/50 split or some such/similar distribution of > funds, inspired by Lionel Laske's thoughtful articulation of the many social > infrastructure / accounting infrastructure / mentoring infrastructure / > constructionist infrastructure investments OLPC France has very successfully > achieved. Among many other organizational infrastructures (technology and > non-technology community tools) backstopping the lives of > volunteer-community-hackers-of-all-kind increasingly far easier, as we can > do too! Underlying a much stronger future for all~ I believe this is an 'abstain' vote, since it wasn't sent to the SLOBs list...? ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SL member list/joining criterion
On 7 June 2016 at 05:23, Bert Freudenberg wrote: > > Where can I read more about the proposal to let only paying members vote? It will be in an email from me to the IAEP list; however, I ended up not proposing this formally, and instead posting the following 3 formal motions (which I have been recording in https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Decisions as Adam asked of me.) FAILED MOTION 2016-25 To request a membership donation from each currently active Sugar Labs Member to be allocated to the General Fund for the calendar year of 2016, and a public statement about how they use Sugar and why they are involved in Sugar Labs to post on the website; there is no penalty for not paying a membership or not providing a statement; by default members who donate will be kept private, and requested to opt-in to be recognised. The donation requested will be $12 USD from members who self-identify as low-income (such as students); $36 USD from general members; $120 from members who can opt-in to be placed prominently on the website; and $600 from members who can (privately if they wish) submit a release codename, subject to SLOB approval. (not seconded) FAILED MOTION 2016-26 To request donations from Sugar Labs Members, to be allocated to the General Fund through the SFC. The annual donation requested will be $12 USD from members who self-identify as low-income (such as students); $36, $120, or $600 USD from general members. (not seconded) PENDING MOTION 2016-37 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. The last one is open for voting by SLOBs until this Saturday (11th) but so far has not been seconded. ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SL member list/joining criterion
Didn't we all rebutt this proposal previously? Do I need to state my objections again? Basically; look at who doesn't requre membership donations: GNOME, Fedora, etc - Projects were most members contribute Who even does membership donations? I think somebody said the GNU Foundation, but it's a *Foundation*, and people probably just want to donate to RMS. There are great people in the SL community, but I wouldn't say we have a person with an reputation like RMS. Thanks, Sam On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote: On 16.05.2016, at 02:06, Dave Crossland wrote: I suggest develop a 'super list' with as many possible members as possible, and then make persistent attempts to contact them until they pay a membership donation, ask for a membership bursary so they don't have to pay the fee personally, or tell us to go away :) Where can I read more about the proposal to let only paying members vote? (I’m excited about the current energy in the community but can’t follow everything closely due to volume of emails) - Bert - ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SL member list/joining criterion
On 16.05.2016, at 02:06, Dave Crossland wrote: > I suggest develop a 'super list' with as many possible members as possible, > and then make persistent attempts to contact them until they pay a membership > donation, ask for a membership bursary so they don't have to pay the fee > personally, or tell us to go away :) Where can I read more about the proposal to let only paying members vote? (I’m excited about the current energy in the community but can’t follow everything closely due to volume of emails) - Bert - smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Why do you contribute to Sugar?
Sugar has made me see things differently, it has given me an oppurtunity to learn and to grow, not everyone in my area know about sugar and I'm lucky to, this area of my life has never been the same since i met some persons in sugar, i strive to learn more one of the reasons being to contribute to sugar, sugar has given a platform where you can create whatever you want to see(via sugar activities). Sugar has made learning interactive, i remember back then in junior high, we used to learn french with the sugar platform on our XO's. I love being part of sugar and I'll always be part of this great organization. Thanks Ibiam Chihurumnaya On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Sam Parkinson wrote: > Here is my reflection too: > > I contribute to Sugar because the current EduTech used in ACT schools is > so boring. Sugar shows that we can make awesome software for schools, > rather than the meh software like managebac or google classrrom. We can > best integrate collaboration, journalling, reflection and creation - > tailoring the whole experience to education. > > Thanks, > Sam > > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 5:33 PM, tkk...@nurturingasia.com wrote: > > Good to hear what others have to say .. here is my own reflection: I > worked with Sugar till today as I have personally tested it with children > from the gifted to the developmentally delay; and made many > video-recordings of children using it over the years under many different > circumstances. It works - Sugar simplicity and flexibility makes it my best > choice as a clinical or educational tools, to help children be empowered in > their learning. T.K Kang > > -Original Message- From: Walter Bender [ > mailto:walter.ben...@gmail.com ] Sent: Monday, > June 6, 2016 07:28 AM To: 'Dave Crossland' Cc: iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org > Subject: Re: [IAEP] Why do you contribute to Sugar? On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at > 7:20 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: > > In thread "A Better Idea..." on 5 June 2016 at 16:41, Sean DALY < > sdaly...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Perhaps trying to thrash out texts is not the best approach - maybe we > should start with why we the volunteers are convinced about Sugar, and > think about distilling our Vision from that. > > I like this suggestion! I request that everyone subscribed to this list > reply to this thread with a short message about why they are convinced > about Sugar. I'll go first :) I am convinced about Sugar because I believe > learning through self-discovery is a powerful way for young people to > become good people, good citizens, and to find some particular talents to > develop to the maximum; and I believe Sugar is software that encourages > such learning. ___ IAEP -- It's > An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > > See [1 and 2]. But to gist: At Sugar Labs we make a collection of > Free/Libre Software tools that learners use to *explore*, *discover*, > *create*, and *reflect*. We distribute these tools freely and encourage our > users to appropriate them, taking ownership and responsibility for their > learning. To me, one important goal at Sugar Labs is to have our user > community engage in the development process. Towards this end, we have > provided scaffolding to support our users in their exploration of the tools > themselves and how the tools are built. This has not been just an > intellectual exercise. We design for end-user contributions, and we have > seen learners taking ownership and the responsibility that comes with > ownership. Sugar users, even when they don’t made contributions to the > code, are active learners, who are immersed in a culture where they are > encouraged to create as well as consume. [1] > http://people.sugarlabs.org/walter/docs/Learning-to-Change-the-World-Chapter-4.pdf > [2] > http://sites.ed.gov/oese/2016/04/open-discussion-on-the-role-of-education-technologies-in-early-childhood-stem-education/ > -- > Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org < > http://www.sugarlabs.org> > > ___ IAEP -- It's An Education > Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > > > ___ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
