Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Lionel Laské]

Cool. Good news.

Please Laura, keep us inform about the work done.

Best regards.

   Lionel.


2017-09-29 20:10 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :

>
> Thank you very much Sameer!
>
> I have updated the wiki decisions
>  page
> and hope to schedule the maintenance tasks for Sugar Network implementation
> in Perú ASAP.
>
> Achieving sustainability in the future will depend on the implementation
> team's capacity to understand, follow and complete the upstreaming process
> so that specific design features that have proof to facilitate
> collaborative learning on Sugar Network make it to the latest version of
> Sugar and therefore expand on more territories.
>
> Regards and thank you once more to all board members that supported this
> request.
>
> Laura V
>
>
>
> 2017-09-28 21:29 GMT-05:00 Sameer Verma :
>
>> Sorry, but I've been traveling, so didn't see this.
>>
>> For a one time maintenance, I'll give it a +1. However, this project
>> needs to find better ways to sustain.
>>
>> Sameer
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Laura Vargas 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > 2017-09-26 21:44 GMT-05:00 Chris Leonard :
>> >>
>> >> top-posting because of thread length.
>> >>
>> >> 1) The original request was posted 2017-04-02, how urgent can it
>> really be
>> >> if it has been impossible to find someone to step up and volunteer 20
>> >> minutes to do this in the past six months?
>> >
>> >
>> > Unfortunately in Perú we had a +2 months Teacher's Strike after mid-term
>> > vacations. Current political climate at Min-Edu is very unstable and
>> slowly
>> > classes are going back to normal. Now that learners are back to schools,
>> > they are back working within Sugar Network.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2) Has any other maintenance been performed on this server in the last
>> six
>> >> months?  If yes, why has CAPTCHA not been added already?  If no, is
>> this
>> >> truly a viable service if no one will maintain it?
>> >
>> >
>> > Samuel and Sebastian have help with the main maintenance of the server
>> where
>> > it is hosted. Still, the maintenance we need now is on the code and the
>> data
>> > base.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> 3)  What is the justification for $500 in costs when it takes 7 steps
>> and
>> >> 20 minutes to implement reCAPTCHA according the developer's own
>> estimate.
>> >>
>> >> https://codelabs.developers.google.com/codelabs/reCAPTCHA/index.html#0
>> >>
>> >
>> > I guess we can do with less if necessary but it requires hours
>> described in
>> > the proposal. The request I made will cover re-creating a development
>> > environment, integration of the captcha forms, documentation and of
>> course
>> > cleaning the Spam.
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> 4) Is there any expiration time limit on motions to the SLOBs?   Maybe
>> >> after 6 months it should go to a fresh vote as circumstances can
>> obviously
>> >> change?
>> >
>> >
>> > Yes usually the window for voting is seven days. I am requesting SLOBs
>> to
>> > consider Sameer's vote if possible because l have failed to find other
>> ways
>> > to sponsor this maintenance.
>> >
>> > Thanks for your interest
>> >
>> > Laura V
>> >
>> >>
>> >> cjl
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Laura Vargas 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Dear Sameer,
>> >>>
>> >>> You probably missed this motion as we didn't get your vote.
>> >>>
>> >>> Today, we are still in need of funding due to recurrent *spam
>> attacks* we
>> >>> have had during previous months, and given the fact that we are
>> serving a
>> >>> large group of active users during the local school year, I hope the
>> board
>> >>> can accept your late vote.
>> >>>
>> >>> The motion presented by Lionel and Seconded by Samson states:
>> >>>
>> >>> Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>> >>> Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
>> Technical
>> >>> Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>> >>> interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further investments
>> on
>> >>> Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
>> support of
>> >>> the platform.
>> >>>
>> >>> So far, we got:
>> >>>
>> >>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
>> >>> 1 vote against (Walter)
>> >>> 1 abstain (Adam)
>> >>> 1 recuse (Laura)
>> >>>
>> >>> I know you hope to bring your skills and expertise to contribute to
>> the
>> >>> strategic direction of Sugar the project, and its implementations, so
>> I ask
>> >>> for your support for this implementation serving +40,000 learners.
>> >>>
>> >>> I hope for your positive vote.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards and blessings from Perú.
>> >>>
>> >>> Laura
>> >>>
>> >>> 2017-04-21 14:54 GMT-05:00 Adam Holt :
>> 
>>  I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am
>>  torn.
>> 
>>  On 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

Thank you very much Sameer!

I have updated the wiki decisions
 page
and hope to schedule the maintenance tasks for Sugar Network implementation
in Perú ASAP.

Achieving sustainability in the future will depend on the implementation
team's capacity to understand, follow and complete the upstreaming process
so that specific design features that have proof to facilitate
collaborative learning on Sugar Network make it to the latest version of
Sugar and therefore expand on more territories.

Regards and thank you once more to all board members that supported this
request.

Laura V



2017-09-28 21:29 GMT-05:00 Sameer Verma :

> Sorry, but I've been traveling, so didn't see this.
>
> For a one time maintenance, I'll give it a +1. However, this project
> needs to find better ways to sustain.
>
> Sameer
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2017-09-26 21:44 GMT-05:00 Chris Leonard :
> >>
> >> top-posting because of thread length.
> >>
> >> 1) The original request was posted 2017-04-02, how urgent can it really
> be
> >> if it has been impossible to find someone to step up and volunteer 20
> >> minutes to do this in the past six months?
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately in Perú we had a +2 months Teacher's Strike after mid-term
> > vacations. Current political climate at Min-Edu is very unstable and
> slowly
> > classes are going back to normal. Now that learners are back to schools,
> > they are back working within Sugar Network.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2) Has any other maintenance been performed on this server in the last
> six
> >> months?  If yes, why has CAPTCHA not been added already?  If no, is this
> >> truly a viable service if no one will maintain it?
> >
> >
> > Samuel and Sebastian have help with the main maintenance of the server
> where
> > it is hosted. Still, the maintenance we need now is on the code and the
> data
> > base.
> >
> >>
> >> 3)  What is the justification for $500 in costs when it takes 7 steps
> and
> >> 20 minutes to implement reCAPTCHA according the developer's own
> estimate.
> >>
> >> https://codelabs.developers.google.com/codelabs/reCAPTCHA/index.html#0
> >>
> >
> > I guess we can do with less if necessary but it requires hours described
> in
> > the proposal. The request I made will cover re-creating a development
> > environment, integration of the captcha forms, documentation and of
> course
> > cleaning the Spam.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> 4) Is there any expiration time limit on motions to the SLOBs?   Maybe
> >> after 6 months it should go to a fresh vote as circumstances can
> obviously
> >> change?
> >
> >
> > Yes usually the window for voting is seven days. I am requesting SLOBs to
> > consider Sameer's vote if possible because l have failed to find other
> ways
> > to sponsor this maintenance.
> >
> > Thanks for your interest
> >
> > Laura V
> >
> >>
> >> cjl
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Laura Vargas 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dear Sameer,
> >>>
> >>> You probably missed this motion as we didn't get your vote.
> >>>
> >>> Today, we are still in need of funding due to recurrent *spam attacks*
> we
> >>> have had during previous months, and given the fact that we are
> serving a
> >>> large group of active users during the local school year, I hope the
> board
> >>> can accept your late vote.
> >>>
> >>> The motion presented by Lionel and Seconded by Samson states:
> >>>
> >>> Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
> >>> Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical
> >>> Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
> >>> interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on
> >>> Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term support
> of
> >>> the platform.
> >>>
> >>> So far, we got:
> >>>
> >>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
> >>> 1 vote against (Walter)
> >>> 1 abstain (Adam)
> >>> 1 recuse (Laura)
> >>>
> >>> I know you hope to bring your skills and expertise to contribute to the
> >>> strategic direction of Sugar the project, and its implementations, so
> I ask
> >>> for your support for this implementation serving +40,000 learners.
> >>>
> >>> I hope for your positive vote.
> >>>
> >>> Regards and blessings from Perú.
> >>>
> >>> Laura
> >>>
> >>> 2017-04-21 14:54 GMT-05:00 Adam Holt :
> 
>  I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am
>  torn.
> 
>  On Apr 21, 2017 3:49 PM, "Walter Bender" 
>  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote
> according
> >> to the Conflict of Interest Policy of 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Sameer Verma]

Sorry, but I've been traveling, so didn't see this.

For a one time maintenance, I'll give it a +1. However, this project
needs to find better ways to sustain.

Sameer

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>
>
> 2017-09-26 21:44 GMT-05:00 Chris Leonard :
>>
>> top-posting because of thread length.
>>
>> 1) The original request was posted 2017-04-02, how urgent can it really be
>> if it has been impossible to find someone to step up and volunteer 20
>> minutes to do this in the past six months?
>
>
> Unfortunately in Perú we had a +2 months Teacher's Strike after mid-term
> vacations. Current political climate at Min-Edu is very unstable and slowly
> classes are going back to normal. Now that learners are back to schools,
> they are back working within Sugar Network.
>>
>>
>> 2) Has any other maintenance been performed on this server in the last six
>> months?  If yes, why has CAPTCHA not been added already?  If no, is this
>> truly a viable service if no one will maintain it?
>
>
> Samuel and Sebastian have help with the main maintenance of the server where
> it is hosted. Still, the maintenance we need now is on the code and the data
> base.
>
>>
>> 3)  What is the justification for $500 in costs when it takes 7 steps and
>> 20 minutes to implement reCAPTCHA according the developer's own estimate.
>>
>> https://codelabs.developers.google.com/codelabs/reCAPTCHA/index.html#0
>>
>
> I guess we can do with less if necessary but it requires hours described in
> the proposal. The request I made will cover re-creating a development
> environment, integration of the captcha forms, documentation and of course
> cleaning the Spam.
>
>
>>
>> 4) Is there any expiration time limit on motions to the SLOBs?   Maybe
>> after 6 months it should go to a fresh vote as circumstances can obviously
>> change?
>
>
> Yes usually the window for voting is seven days. I am requesting SLOBs to
> consider Sameer's vote if possible because l have failed to find other ways
> to sponsor this maintenance.
>
> Thanks for your interest
>
> Laura V
>
>>
>> cjl
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Laura Vargas 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Sameer,
>>>
>>> You probably missed this motion as we didn't get your vote.
>>>
>>> Today, we are still in need of funding due to recurrent *spam attacks* we
>>> have had during previous months, and given the fact that we are serving a
>>> large group of active users during the local school year, I hope the board
>>> can accept your late vote.
>>>
>>> The motion presented by Lionel and Seconded by Samson states:
>>>
>>> Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>>> Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical
>>> Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>>> interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on
>>> Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term support of
>>> the platform.
>>>
>>> So far, we got:
>>>
>>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
>>> 1 vote against (Walter)
>>> 1 abstain (Adam)
>>> 1 recuse (Laura)
>>>
>>> I know you hope to bring your skills and expertise to contribute to the
>>> strategic direction of Sugar the project, and its implementations, so I ask
>>> for your support for this implementation serving +40,000 learners.
>>>
>>> I hope for your positive vote.
>>>
>>> Regards and blessings from Perú.
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>> 2017-04-21 14:54 GMT-05:00 Adam Holt :

 I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am
 torn.

 On Apr 21, 2017 3:49 PM, "Walter Bender" 
 wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according
>> to the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.
>>
>> So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the
>> voting period by email:
>>
>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
>> 1 vote against (Walter)
>> no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)
>
>
> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
> votes.
>
> -walter
>>
>>
>>
>> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1],
>> Motion has failed.
>>
>> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
>> way.
>>
>> Regards and blessings to all,
>>
>> Laura V
>>
>> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>>
>> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>>>
>>> Well as I said +1.
>>>
>>> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>>>
>>> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

2017-09-26 21:44 GMT-05:00 Chris Leonard :

> top-posting because of thread length.
>
> 1) The original request was posted 2017-04-02, how urgent can it really be
> if it has been impossible to find someone to step up and volunteer 20
> minutes to do this in the past six months?
>

Unfortunately in Perú we had a +2 months Teacher's Strike

after mid-term vacations. Current political climate at Min-Edu is very
unstable and slowly classes are going back to normal. Now that learners are
back to schools, they are back working within Sugar Network.

>
> 2) Has any other maintenance been performed on this server in the last six
> months?  If yes, why has CAPTCHA not been added already?  If no, is this
> truly a viable service if no one will maintain it?
>

Samuel and Sebastian have help with the main maintenance of the server
where it is hosted. Still, the maintenance we need now is on the code and
the data base.


> 3)  What is the justification for $500 in costs when it takes 7 steps and
> 20 minutes to implement reCAPTCHA according the developer's own estimate.
>
> https://codelabs.developers.google.com/codelabs/reCAPTCHA/index.html#0
>
>
I guess we can do with less if necessary but it requires hours described in
the proposal. The request I made will cover re-creating a development
environment, integration of the captcha forms, documentation and of course
cleaning the Spam.



> 4) Is there any expiration time limit on motions to the SLOBs?   Maybe
> after 6 months it should go to a fresh vote as circumstances can obviously
> change?
>

Yes usually the window for voting is seven days. I am requesting SLOBs to
consider Sameer's vote if possible because l have failed to find other ways
to sponsor this maintenance.

Thanks for your interest

Laura V


> cjl
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Sameer,
>>
>> You probably missed this motion as we didn't get your vote.
>>
>> Today, we are still in need of funding due to recurrent *spam attacks* we
>> have had during previous months, and given the fact that we are serving a
>> large group of active users during the local school year, I hope the board
>> can accept your late vote.
>>
>> The motion presented by Lionel and Seconded by Samson states:
>>
>> Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>> Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical
>> Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>> interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on
>> Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term support
>> of the platform.
>>
>> So far, we got:
>>
>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
>> 1 vote against (Walter)
>> 1 abstain (Adam)
>> 1 recuse (Laura)
>>
>> I know you hope to bring your skills and expertise to contribute to the
>> strategic direction of Sugar the project, and its implementations, so I ask
>> for your support for this implementation serving +40,000 learners.
>>
>> I hope for your positive vote.
>>
>> Regards and blessings from Perú.
>>
>> Laura
>>
>> 2017-04-21 14:54 GMT-05:00 Adam Holt :
>>
>>> I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am torn.
>>>
>>> On Apr 21, 2017 3:49 PM, "Walter Bender" 
>>> wrote:
>>>


 On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas 
 wrote:

>
> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according
> to the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.
>
> So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the
> voting period by email:
>
> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
> 1 vote against (Walter)
> no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)
>

 I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
 votes.

 -walter

>
>
> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1],
> Motion has failed.
>
> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
> way.
>
> Regards and blessings to all,
>
> Laura V
>
> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>
> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>
>> Well as I said +1.
>>
>> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>>
>> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
>> > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas <
>> la...@somosazucar.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
>> >>
>> >> 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[James Cameron]

thanks chris, interesting questions.  i'll have a go at answering
based on my observations.

1) urgency will grow as the problem continues to be unresolved, and a
customer has probably complained to their contractor; but it is hard
to find a volunteer to work on something that is used mostly by one
country, has not been pushed upstream to sugar labs github, and relies
on an old version of sugar.  faced the same issues with fedora 18 and
sugar; continual uphill battle.

2) as there is no public maintenance log, we've no idea what
maintenance has been performed; but the same could be said of other
infrastructure we use; there's common agreement among some
administrators to report maintenance to systems@, archives are public;
but not all maintenance is reported; reporting costs time that could
otherwise be spent on maintenance.

3) good question; my guess is in order to attract the right bid, but
there's lots of other things sugar labs could pay developers for if
they wanted to focus on strategic rather than tactical outcomes.

4) yes, there are expiration times, but in the forwarded mail walter
as chair offered to extend it and there was no dissent that i could
find, so it would be up to a board member to dissent which would reset
the process and call for another vote.

another way to look at it is that sugar labs has money which could be
spent, and has a hard time spending it on travel.  ;-)

yet another way to look at it is that a local lab needs funding and is
looking at sugar labs as a source for that.

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:44:47PM -0400, Chris Leonard wrote:
> top-posting because of thread length.
> 
> 1) The original request was posted 2017-04-02, how urgent can it really be if
> it has been impossible to find someone to step up and volunteer 20 minutes to
> do this in the past six months? 
> 
> 2) Has any other maintenance been performed on this server in the last six
> months?  If yes, why has CAPTCHA not been added already?  If no, is this truly
> a viable service if no one will maintain it?
> 
> 3)  What is the justification for $500 in costs when it takes 7 steps and 20
> minutes to implement reCAPTCHA according the developer's own estimate. 
> 
> [1]https://codelabs.developers.google.com/codelabs/reCAPTCHA/index.html#0
> 
> 4) Is there any expiration time limit on motions to the SLOBs?   Maybe after 6
> months it should go to a fresh vote as circumstances can obviously change?
> 
> cjl
> 
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Laura Vargas <[2]la...@somosazucar.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> Dear Sameer,
> 
> You probably missed this motion as we didn't get your vote.
> 
> Today, we are still in need of funding due to recurrent *spam attacks* we
> have had during previous months, and given the fact that we are serving a
> large group of active users during the local school year, I hope the board
> can accept your late vote.
> 
> The motion presented by Lionel and Seconded by Samson states:
> 
> Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on 
> Sugar 
> Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical Service
> Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid interruption 
> of
> service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on Sugar Network will
> be correlated to discussion about long-term support of the platform.
> 
> So far, we got:
> 
> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
> 1 vote against (Walter) 
> 1 abstain (Adam)
> 1 recuse (Laura)
> 
> I know you hope to bring your skills and expertise to contribute to the
> strategic direction of Sugar the project, and its implementations, so I 
> ask
> for your support for this implementation serving +40,000 learners.
> 
> I hope for your positive vote.
> 
> Regards and blessings from Perú.
>
> Laura
>
> 2017-04-21 14:54 GMT-05:00 Adam Holt <[3]h...@laptop.org>:
> 
> I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am
> torn.
> 
> On Apr 21, 2017 3:49 PM, "Walter Bender" <[4]walter.ben...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas <[5]
> la...@somosazucar.org> wrote:
> 
> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote
> according to the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.
> 
> So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during
> the voting period by email: 
> 
> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
> 1 vote against (Walter) 
> no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions) 
> 
> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register
> their votes.
> 
> -walter 
> 
> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion
> [1], Motion has failed.

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Chris Leonard]

top-posting because of thread length.

1) The original request was posted 2017-04-02, how urgent can it really be
if it has been impossible to find someone to step up and volunteer 20
minutes to do this in the past six months?

2) Has any other maintenance been performed on this server in the last six
months?  If yes, why has CAPTCHA not been added already?  If no, is this
truly a viable service if no one will maintain it?

3)  What is the justification for $500 in costs when it takes 7 steps and
20 minutes to implement reCAPTCHA according the developer's own estimate.

https://codelabs.developers.google.com/codelabs/reCAPTCHA/index.html#0

4) Is there any expiration time limit on motions to the SLOBs?   Maybe
after 6 months it should go to a fresh vote as circumstances can obviously
change?

cjl


On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> Dear Sameer,
>
> You probably missed this motion as we didn't get your vote.
>
> Today, we are still in need of funding due to recurrent *spam attacks* we
> have had during previous months, and given the fact that we are serving a
> large group of active users during the local school year, I hope the board
> can accept your late vote.
>
> The motion presented by Lionel and Seconded by Samson states:
>
> Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on Sugar
> Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical Service
> Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid interruption of
> service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on Sugar Network
> will be correlated to discussion about long-term support of the platform.
>
> So far, we got:
>
> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
> 1 vote against (Walter)
> 1 abstain (Adam)
> 1 recuse (Laura)
>
> I know you hope to bring your skills and expertise to contribute to the
> strategic direction of Sugar the project, and its implementations, so I ask
> for your support for this implementation serving +40,000 learners.
>
> I hope for your positive vote.
>
> Regards and blessings from Perú.
>
> Laura
>
> 2017-04-21 14:54 GMT-05:00 Adam Holt :
>
>> I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am torn.
>>
>> On Apr 21, 2017 3:49 PM, "Walter Bender"  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas 
>>> wrote:
>>>

 As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according
 to the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.

 So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the
 voting period by email:

 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
 1 vote against (Walter)
 no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)

>>>
>>> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
>>> votes.
>>>
>>> -walter
>>>


 Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion
 has failed.

 Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
 way.

 Regards and blessings to all,

 Laura V

 https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision

 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :

> Well as I said +1.
>
> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>
> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
> > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas <
> la...@somosazucar.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
> >>
> >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
> >>
> >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
> >> please
> >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
> >> posting.
> >>
> >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do
> ask on
> >> time.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Laura V
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
> >>
> >>> +1 for me.
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
> wrote:
> >>>
>  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks
> on
>  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
> Technical
>  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to
> avoid
>  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further
> investments on
>  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
> support
>  of
>  the platform.
> 
>  Please second this motion to start the vote.
> 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

Dear Sameer,

You probably missed this motion as we didn't get your vote.

Today, we are still in need of funding due to recurrent *spam attacks* we
have had during previous months, and given the fact that we are serving a
large group of active users during the local school year, I hope the board
can accept your late vote.

The motion presented by Lionel and Seconded by Samson states:

Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on Sugar
Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical Service
Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid interruption of
service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on Sugar Network will
be correlated to discussion about long-term support of the platform.

So far, we got:

3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
1 vote against (Walter)
1 abstain (Adam)
1 recuse (Laura)

I know you hope to bring your skills and expertise to contribute to the
strategic direction of Sugar the project, and its implementations, so I ask
for your support for this implementation serving +40,000 learners.

I hope for your positive vote.

Regards and blessings from Perú.

Laura

2017-04-21 14:54 GMT-05:00 Adam Holt :

> I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am torn.
>
> On Apr 21, 2017 3:49 PM, "Walter Bender"  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according
>>> to the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.
>>>
>>> So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the voting
>>> period by email:
>>>
>>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
>>> 1 vote against (Walter)
>>> no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)
>>>
>>
>> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
>> votes.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion
>>> has failed.
>>>
>>> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
>>> way.
>>>
>>> Regards and blessings to all,
>>>
>>> Laura V
>>>
>>> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>>>
>>> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>>>
 Well as I said +1.

 Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP

 On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
 > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
 >
 > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
 > wrote:
 >
 >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
 >>
 >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
 >>
 >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
 >> please
 >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
 >> posting.
 >>
 >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do
 ask on
 >> time.
 >>
 >>
 >> Regards,
 >>
 >> Laura V
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
 >>
 >>> +1 for me.
 >>>
 >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
 wrote:
 >>>
  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks
 on
  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
 Technical
  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further
 investments on
  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
 support
  of
  the platform.
 
  Please second this motion to start the vote.
 
  Best regards.
 
   Lionel.
 
  2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
 
 > Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
 >
 > The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and
 then
 > another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will
 understand
 > they
 > are called to vote.
 >
 > I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
 >
 > Blessings and regards
 > Laura V
 >
 >
 > 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
 >
 >> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
 >> can't
 >> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
 >>
 >> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other
 requests
 >> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
 >>
 >> Lionel.
 >>

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

2017-04-24 22:24 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :

>
> Hi Laura
>
>
Hola Dave


> I sympathize with your concern for active users.
>

I recommend you read the translation
 of "Como hacer
un proptotipo?" made by Valerie Taylor last week. Valerie found the
document (with the proper license) posted on the Sugar Network related to
the Context [1] by the Demo user.

Having this Context in Sugar Network allow us (the Community = users +
supporters) to keep multiple asynchronous dialogs about the ideas proposed
on the document by the original autors Antonio Lafuente y Patricia
Horrillo, about prototyping

.

"The Adventure of Learning is a space of encounter and exchange around
learning to discover what practices, atmospheres, spaces and agents make
communities work; Their whys and their commotions, or in other words, their
yearnings and protocols."

Sugar Network has proved to be a useful prototype for the network of sugar
users. Open Data from it's stats-viewer
 is available for analysis.

I personally, would like it to feel more "like a game" for the second
version. Something like SUNSET
.

;D

Regards and blessings


[1] http://network.sugarlabs.org/article/453451141ee711e7b149525400e4dcb5

-- 
* I SomosAZUCAR.Org*

“Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
~ Laura Victoria

Happy Learning!
#LaMAgiaDelTiempo
#LearningByDoing
#Projects4good
#IMakeATSugarLabs
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Dave Crossland]

Hi Laura

I sympathize with your concern for active users. But my recommendation is
to use this as motivation to shut down Sugar Network.

In my opinion: Everything associated with the old Python codebase has
entered terminal decline, is no longer sustainable, and should be archived
and turned off. All efforts should be on Sugarizer, all XO hardware should
be abandoned. If kids have xo computers that they use, let them use them,
but no more updates and no more network services.

Perhaps the shut down message should inform users where in github to get
the source to self host, and or, who to contact to get paid support.

On Apr 24, 2017 5:53 AM, "Laura Vargas"  wrote:

>
>> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
>> votes.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>>>
>>>
> Walter,
>
> Now that motion failed, I'm totally out of ideas on how to achieve our
> maintenance goals. Spam was not a problem for the first 3 years of Sugar
> Network and now it consumes lot's of the User Interface and thus children
> attention. I really can't sleep relaxed while this is happening.
>
> Maybe, you can reformulate the motion in a manner that suits your approval
> criteria?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Laura
>
>
>>
>>> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion
>>> has failed.
>>>
>>> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
>>> way.
>>>
>>> Regards and blessings to all,
>>>
>>> Laura V
>>>
>>> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>>>
>>> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>>>
 Well as I said +1.

 Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP

 On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
 > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
 >
 > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
 > wrote:
 >
 >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
 >>
 >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
 >>
 >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
 >> please
 >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
 >> posting.
 >>
 >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do
 ask on
 >> time.
 >>
 >>
 >> Regards,
 >>
 >> Laura V
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
 >>
 >>> +1 for me.
 >>>
 >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
 wrote:
 >>>
  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks
 on
  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
 Technical
  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further
 investments on
  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
 support
  of
  the platform.
 
  Please second this motion to start the vote.
 
  Best regards.
 
   Lionel.
 
  2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
 
 > Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
 >
 > The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and
 then
 > another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will
 understand
 > they
 > are called to vote.
 >
 > I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
 >
 > Blessings and regards
 > Laura V
 >
 >
 > 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
 >
 >> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
 >> can't
 >> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
 >>
 >> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other
 requests
 >> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
 >>
 >> Lionel.
 >>
 >>
 >> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
 >>
 >>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I
 would
 >>> love to open the discussion for long-term support.
 >>>
 >>> Regards
 >>>
 >>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender <
 walter.ben...@gmail.com>:
 >>>
 
 
  On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas
   wrote:
 
 > We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
 > retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we
 ran out
 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

>
>
> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
> votes.
>
> -walter
>
>>
>>
Walter,

Now that motion failed, I'm totally out of ideas on how to achieve our
maintenance goals. Spam was not a problem for the first 3 years of Sugar
Network and now it consumes lot's of the User Interface and thus children
attention. I really can't sleep relaxed while this is happening.

Maybe, you can reformulate the motion in a manner that suits your approval
criteria?

Thanks in advance,

Laura


>
>> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion
>> has failed.
>>
>> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
>> way.
>>
>> Regards and blessings to all,
>>
>> Laura V
>>
>> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>>
>> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>>
>>> Well as I said +1.
>>>
>>> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>>>
>>> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
>>> > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
>>> >>
>>> >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
>>> >>
>>> >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
>>> >> please
>>> >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
>>> >> posting.
>>> >>
>>> >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do ask
>>> on
>>> >> time.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >>
>>> >> Laura V
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
>>> >>
>>> >>> +1 for me.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>>  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>>>  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
>>> Technical
>>>  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>>>  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further
>>> investments on
>>>  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
>>> support
>>>  of
>>>  the platform.
>>> 
>>>  Please second this motion to start the vote.
>>> 
>>>  Best regards.
>>> 
>>>   Lionel.
>>> 
>>>  2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>> 
>>> > Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
>>> >
>>> > The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
>>> > another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will
>>> understand
>>> > they
>>> > are called to vote.
>>> >
>>> > I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
>>> >
>>> > Blessings and regards
>>> > Laura V
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
>>> >
>>> >> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
>>> >> can't
>>> >> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>>> >>
>>> >> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other
>>> requests
>>> >> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>>> >>
>>> >> Lionel.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>> >>
>>> >>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would
>>> >>> love to open the discussion for long-term support.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender >> >:
>>> >>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas
>>>  >>  > wrote:
>>> 
>>> > We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
>>> > retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we
>>> ran out
>>> > of
>>> > resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>>> >
>>> 
>>>  This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
>>>  resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as
>>>  opposed to a
>>>  one-time patch.
>>> 
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> >
>>> > Laura
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender <
>>> walter.ben...@gmail.com>:
>>> >
>>> >> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What
>>> is
>>> >> not clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as
>>> >> opposed to
>>> >> being done by volunteers.
>>> >>
>>> >> -walter
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

2017-04-21 14:48 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :

>
>
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according to
>> the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.
>>
>> So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the voting
>> period by email:
>>
>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
>> 1 vote against (Walter)
>> no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)
>>
>
> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
> votes.
>
>
I believe you are wrong Walter. From [1]:

"The headlines are the date that the motion is agreed, disagreed, or - in
the case of motions to be voted on via email within 7 days of posting which
did not get voted on - failed by timing out."

For me it is clear SLOBs that when a motion gets seconded, SLOBs are called
to take a decision and communicate by email within 7 days of the posting.

Lionel posted the Motion on April 13 plus 7 days, votes counted until April
20.

Sameer and Adam failed to vote on time.


[1] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Decisions

Laura

-walter
>
>>
>>
>> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion
>> has failed.
>>
>> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
>> way.
>>
>> Regards and blessings to all,
>>
>> Laura V
>>
>> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>>
>> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>>
>>> Well as I said +1.
>>>
>>> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>>>
>>> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
>>> > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
>>> >>
>>> >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
>>> >>
>>> >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
>>> >> please
>>> >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
>>> >> posting.
>>> >>
>>> >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do ask
>>> on
>>> >> time.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >>
>>> >> Laura V
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
>>> >>
>>> >>> +1 for me.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>>  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>>>  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
>>> Technical
>>>  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>>>  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further
>>> investments on
>>>  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
>>> support
>>>  of
>>>  the platform.
>>> 
>>>  Please second this motion to start the vote.
>>> 
>>>  Best regards.
>>> 
>>>   Lionel.
>>> 
>>>  2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>> 
>>> > Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
>>> >
>>> > The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
>>> > another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will
>>> understand
>>> > they
>>> > are called to vote.
>>> >
>>> > I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
>>> >
>>> > Blessings and regards
>>> > Laura V
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
>>> >
>>> >> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
>>> >> can't
>>> >> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>>> >>
>>> >> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other
>>> requests
>>> >> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>>> >>
>>> >> Lionel.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>> >>
>>> >>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would
>>> >>> love to open the discussion for long-term support.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender >> >:
>>> >>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas
>>>  >>  > wrote:
>>> 
>>> > We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
>>> > retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we
>>> ran out
>>> > of
>>> > resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>>> >
>>> 
>>>  This begs the question, what is next? How will 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Adam Holt]

I abstain as I see real arguments on both sides, and apologize I am torn.

On Apr 21, 2017 3:49 PM, "Walter Bender"  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according to
>> the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.
>>
>> So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the voting
>> period by email:
>>
>> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
>> 1 vote against (Walter)
>> no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)
>>
>
> I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
> votes.
>
> -walter
>
>>
>>
>> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion
>> has failed.
>>
>> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other
>> way.
>>
>> Regards and blessings to all,
>>
>> Laura V
>>
>> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>>
>> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>>
>>> Well as I said +1.
>>>
>>> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>>>
>>> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
>>> > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
>>> >>
>>> >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
>>> >>
>>> >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
>>> >> please
>>> >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
>>> >> posting.
>>> >>
>>> >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do ask
>>> on
>>> >> time.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >>
>>> >> Laura V
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
>>> >>
>>> >>> +1 for me.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>>  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>>>  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
>>> Technical
>>>  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>>>  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further
>>> investments on
>>>  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
>>> support
>>>  of
>>>  the platform.
>>> 
>>>  Please second this motion to start the vote.
>>> 
>>>  Best regards.
>>> 
>>>   Lionel.
>>> 
>>>  2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>> 
>>> > Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
>>> >
>>> > The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
>>> > another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will
>>> understand
>>> > they
>>> > are called to vote.
>>> >
>>> > I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
>>> >
>>> > Blessings and regards
>>> > Laura V
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
>>> >
>>> >> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
>>> >> can't
>>> >> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>>> >>
>>> >> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other
>>> requests
>>> >> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>>> >>
>>> >> Lionel.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>> >>
>>> >>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would
>>> >>> love to open the discussion for long-term support.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender >> >:
>>> >>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas
>>>  >>  > wrote:
>>> 
>>> > We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
>>> > retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we
>>> ran out
>>> > of
>>> > resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>>> >
>>> 
>>>  This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
>>>  resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as
>>>  opposed to a
>>>  one-time patch.
>>> 
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> >
>>> > Laura
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender <
>>> walter.ben...@gmail.com>:
>>> >
>>> >> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What
>>> is
>>> >> not clear to me is why this 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Walter Bender]

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Laura Vargas  wrote:

>
> As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according to
> the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.
>
> So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the voting
> period by email:
>
> 3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
> 1 vote against (Walter)
> no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)
>

I think we can wait a bit longer for Adam and Sameer to register their
votes.

-walter

>
>
> Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion
> has failed.
>
> Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other way.
>
> Regards and blessings to all,
>
> Laura V
>
> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision
>
> 2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :
>
>> Well as I said +1.
>>
>> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>>
>> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
>> > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
>> >>
>> >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
>> >>
>> >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
>> >> please
>> >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
>> >> posting.
>> >>
>> >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do ask
>> on
>> >> time.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Laura V
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
>> >>
>> >>> +1 for me.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>>  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>>  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
>> Technical
>>  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>>  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further investments
>> on
>>  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term
>> support
>>  of
>>  the platform.
>> 
>>  Please second this motion to start the vote.
>> 
>>  Best regards.
>> 
>>   Lionel.
>> 
>>  2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>> 
>> > Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
>> >
>> > The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
>> > another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will
>> understand
>> > they
>> > are called to vote.
>> >
>> > I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
>> >
>> > Blessings and regards
>> > Laura V
>> >
>> >
>> > 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
>> >
>> >> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
>> >> can't
>> >> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>> >>
>> >> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other
>> requests
>> >> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>> >>
>> >> Lionel.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>> >>
>> >>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would
>> >>> love to open the discussion for long-term support.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards
>> >>>
>> >>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender > >:
>> >>>
>> 
>> 
>>  On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas
>>  >  > wrote:
>> 
>> > We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
>> > retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran
>> out
>> > of
>> > resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>> >
>> 
>>  This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
>>  resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as
>>  opposed to a
>>  one-time patch.
>> 
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Laura
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender <
>> walter.ben...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is
>> >> not clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as
>> >> opposed to
>> >> being done by volunteers.
>> >>
>> >> -walter
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas <
>> >> la...@somosazucar.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hello all,
>> >>>
>> >>> 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

As I have come to understand I, Laura was ineligible to vote according to
the Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy.

So, we had 6 eligible votes with the following results during the voting
period by email:

3 votes on favor (Ignacio, Samson and Lionel)
1 vote against (Walter)
no votes received from Adam and Sameer (count as abstentions)


Since a clear majority on favor is required to pass a Motion[1], Motion has
failed.

Thank you all that supported the motion! We hope we'll find some other way.

Regards and blessings to all,

Laura V

https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Requesting_a_SLOBs_decision

2017-04-17 10:42 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez :

> Well as I said +1.
>
> Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP
>
> On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
> > -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
> >>
> >> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
> >>
> >> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
> >> please
> >> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
> >> posting.
> >>
> >> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do ask on
> >> time.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Laura V
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
> >>
> >>> +1 for me.
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské" 
> wrote:
> >>>
>  Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
>  Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the
> Technical
>  Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
>  interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further investments
> on
>  Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term support
>  of
>  the platform.
> 
>  Please second this motion to start the vote.
> 
>  Best regards.
> 
>   Lionel.
> 
>  2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
> 
> > Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
> >
> > The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
> > another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will
> understand
> > they
> > are called to vote.
> >
> > I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
> >
> > Blessings and regards
> > Laura V
> >
> >
> > 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
> >
> >> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
> >> can't
> >> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
> >>
> >> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other
> requests
> >> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
> >>
> >> Lionel.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
> >>
> >>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would
> >>> love to open the discussion for long-term support.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
> >>>
> 
> 
>  On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas
>    > wrote:
> 
> > We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
> > retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran
> out
> > of
> > resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
> >
> 
>  This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
>  resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as
>  opposed to a
>  one-time patch.
> 
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Laura
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender  >:
> >
> >> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is
> >> not clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as
> >> opposed to
> >> being done by volunteers.
> >>
> >> -walter
> >>
> >> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas <
> >> la...@somosazucar.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello all,
> >>>
> >>> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the
> >>> Sugar Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
> >>>
> >>> I hope this documents covers all the information required by
> >>> SLOB's to make a decision.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
> 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Ignacio Rodríguez]

Well as I said +1.

Lets hope everything gets resolved ASAP

On 4/17/17, Walter Bender  wrote:
> -1 from me. It seems an arbitrary and unscalable request.
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> Ignacio, I believe you'll need to state your vote again :D
>>
>> Since I am the requesting party, my vote will be "abstain".
>>
>> For all other slobs that haven't vote yet: Adam, Sameer and Walter,
>> please
>> keep in mind motions need to be voted on via email within 7 days of
>> posting.
>>
>> In case any of you slobs require additional information please do ask on
>> time.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Laura V
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-13 9:07 GMT-05:00 Samson Goddy :
>>
>>> +1 for me.
>>>
>>> On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské"  wrote:
>>>
 Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on
 Sugar Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical
 Service Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid
 interruption of service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on
 Sugar Network will be correlated to discussion about long-term support
 of
 the platform.

 Please second this motion to start the vote.

 Best regards.

  Lionel.

 2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :

> Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
>
> The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
> another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will understand
> they
> are called to vote.
>
> I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
>
> Blessings and regards
> Laura V
>
>
> 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
>
>> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we
>> can't
>> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>>
>> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other requests
>> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>>
>> Lionel.
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>
>>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would
>>> love to open the discussion for long-term support.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>>>


 On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas
  wrote:

> We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
> retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out
> of
> resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>

 This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
 resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as
 opposed to a
 one-time patch.

>
> Regards
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>
>> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is
>> not clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as
>> opposed to
>> being done by volunteers.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas <
>> la...@somosazucar.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the
>>> Sugar Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>>>
>>> I hope this documents covers all the information required by
>>> SLOB's to make a decision.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>>>
 Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free
 Software Conservancy Staff,


 I would like to add the following request to the upcoming
 April's Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting:



 Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.

 Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during
 previous months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large
 group of
 active users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting
 funds to
 perform the following technical services:


 -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Samson Goddy]

+1 for me.

On Apr 13, 2017 11:25 AM, "Lionel Laské"  wrote:

> Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on Sugar
> Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical Service
> Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid interruption of
> service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on Sugar Network will
> be correlated to discussion about long-term support of the platform.
>
> Please second this motion to start the vote.
>
> Best regards.
>
>  Lionel.
>
> 2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>
>> Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
>>
>> The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
>> another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will understand they
>> are called to vote.
>>
>> I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
>>
>> Blessings and regards
>> Laura V
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
>>
>>> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we can't
>>> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>>>
>>> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other requests
>>> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>>>
>>> Lionel.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>>
 Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would love
 to open the discussion for long-term support.

 Regards

 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :

>
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
>> retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out of
>> resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>>
>
> This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
> resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as opposed to 
> a
> one-time patch.
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>>
>>> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not
>>> clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to 
>>> being
>>> done by volunteers.
>>>
>>> -walter
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hello all,

 As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the
 Sugar Network urgent maintenance project proposal.

 I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's
 to make a decision.


 Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,

 Laura



 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :

> Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
> Conservancy Staff,
>
>
> I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's
> Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting:
>
>
>
> Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.
>
> Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous
> months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of 
> active
> users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to 
> perform
> the following technical services:
>
>
> -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
> -  Clean the Spam comments
>
> Active users this could help: +40,000
> Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva,
> Laura Victoria Vargas
> Funds required:  USD $500
>
>
> I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated
> with any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as 
> I
> continue serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.
>
> Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges
> that many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical 
> service
> contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs 
> Oversight
> Board to approve the required funds.
>
> According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
> Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear 
> nor
> read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.
>
> Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote
> discussions of this 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Lionel Laské]

Motion: Urgent maintenance budget of 500$ for fixing spam attacks on Sugar
Network. Detail of the tasks to do are described in the Technical Service
Request provided by Laura. It's an one shot motion to avoid interruption of
service for Sugar Network users. Further investments on Sugar Network will
be correlated to discussion about long-term support of the platform.

Please second this motion to start the vote.

Best regards.

 Lionel.

2017-04-12 14:22 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :

> Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!
>
> The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then
> another SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will understand they
> are called to vote.
>
> I would appreciate if you guys can do this.
>
> Blessings and regards
> Laura V
>
>
> 2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :
>
>> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we can't
>> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>>
>> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other requests
>> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>>
>> Lionel.
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>>
>>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would love
>>> to open the discussion for long-term support.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>>>


 On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas 
 wrote:

> We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
> retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out of
> resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>

 This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
 resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as opposed to a
 one-time patch.

>
> Regards
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>
>> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not
>> clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to 
>> being
>> done by volunteers.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the
>>> Sugar Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>>>
>>> I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's
>>> to make a decision.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>>>
 Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
 Conservancy Staff,


 I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's
 Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting:



 Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.

 Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous
 months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active
 users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to 
 perform
 the following technical services:


 -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
 -  Clean the Spam comments

 Active users this could help: +40,000
 Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
 Victoria Vargas
 Funds required:  USD $500


 I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated
 with any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I
 continue serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.

 Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges
 that many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical 
 service
 contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs 
 Oversight
 Board to approve the required funds.

 According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
 Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
 read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.

 Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote
 discussions of this matter.*


 Blessings and thanks in advance!


 Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof.
 Hilda
 Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
 Attachment 3: 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

Thank you Lionel, Samson and Ignacio!

The formal procedure requires a SLOB to propose "A motion" and then another
SLOB to second it. In this way all other SLOBs will understand they are
called to vote.

I would appreciate if you guys can do this.

Blessings and regards
Laura V


2017-04-09 11:36 GMT-05:00 Lionel Laské :

> I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we can't
> leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.
>
> So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other requests
> without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.
>
> Lionel.
>
>
> 2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :
>
>> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would love to
>> open the discussion for long-term support.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without
 retribution since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out of
 resources and can't afford to dedicate the required time.

>>>
>>> This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
>>> resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as opposed to a
>>> one-time patch.
>>>

 Regards

 Laura



 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :

> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not
> clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to 
> being
> done by volunteers.
>
> -walter
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the Sugar
>> Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>>
>> I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's
>> to make a decision.
>>
>>
>> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>>
>>> Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
>>> Conservancy Staff,
>>>
>>>
>>> I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's
>>> Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.
>>>
>>> Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous
>>> months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active
>>> users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to 
>>> perform
>>> the following technical services:
>>>
>>>
>>> -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
>>> -  Clean the Spam comments
>>>
>>> Active users this could help: +40,000
>>> Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
>>> Victoria Vargas
>>> Funds required:  USD $500
>>>
>>>
>>> I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated
>>> with any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I
>>> continue serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.
>>>
>>> Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges
>>> that many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical 
>>> service
>>> contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs 
>>> Oversight
>>> Board to approve the required funds.
>>>
>>> According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
>>> Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
>>> read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.
>>>
>>> Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote
>>> discussions of this matter.*
>>>
>>>
>>> Blessings and thanks in advance!
>>>
>>>
>>> Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof.
>>> Hilda
>>> Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
>>> Attachment 3: Spam Comments on Sugar Network
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laura V.
>>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>>
>>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>>
>>> Happy Learning!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>
>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>>
>> ___
>> SLOBs mailing list
>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Lionel Laské]

I'm agree with the idea to think to the long-term but I think we can't
leave loyal Sugar user without their tools.

So +1 to process this TSR considering we can't process other requests
without thinking to the long term support of Sugar Network.

Lionel.


2017-04-08 16:39 GMT+02:00 Laura Vargas :

> Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would love to
> open the discussion for long-term support.
>
> Regards
>
> 2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without retribution
>>> since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out of resources and
>>> can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>>>
>>
>> This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be
>> resolved? It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as opposed to a
>> one-time patch.
>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>>>
 This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not
 clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to being
 done by volunteers.

 -walter

 On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas 
 wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the Sugar
> Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>
> I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's to
> make a decision.
>
>
> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>
>> Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
>> Conservancy Staff,
>>
>>
>> I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's
>> Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting:
>>
>>
>>
>> Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.
>>
>> Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous
>> months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active
>> users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to 
>> perform
>> the following technical services:
>>
>>
>> -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
>> -  Clean the Spam comments
>>
>> Active users this could help: +40,000
>> Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
>> Victoria Vargas
>> Funds required:  USD $500
>>
>>
>> I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated
>> with any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I
>> continue serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.
>>
>> Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges that
>> many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical service
>> contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs Oversight
>> Board to approve the required funds.
>>
>> According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
>> Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
>> read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.
>>
>> Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote
>> discussions of this matter.*
>>
>>
>> Blessings and thanks in advance!
>>
>>
>> Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof.
>> Hilda
>> Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
>> Attachment 3: Spam Comments on Sugar Network
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>
>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “No paradox, no progress.”
> ~ Niels Bohr
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>


 --
 Walter Bender
 Sugar Labs
 http://www.sugarlabs.org
 

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laura V.
>>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>>
>>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>>
>>> Happy Learning!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “No paradox, no progress.”
> ~ Niels Bohr
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> 

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

Once we solve the urgent need to neutralize Spam attacks, I would love to
open the discussion for long-term support.

Regards

2017-04-08 9:34 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :

>
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without retribution
>> since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out of resources and
>> can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>>
>
> This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be resolved?
> It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as opposed to a one-time
> patch.
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>>
>>> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not
>>> clear to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to being
>>> done by volunteers.
>>>
>>> -walter
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hello all,

 As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the Sugar
 Network urgent maintenance project proposal.

 I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's to
 make a decision.


 Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,

 Laura



 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :

> Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
> Conservancy Staff,
>
>
> I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's
> Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting:
>
>
>
> Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.
>
> Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous
> months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active
> users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to perform
> the following technical services:
>
>
> -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
> -  Clean the Spam comments
>
> Active users this could help: +40,000
> Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
> Victoria Vargas
> Funds required:  USD $500
>
>
> I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated with
> any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I 
> continue
> serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.
>
> Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges that
> many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical service
> contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs Oversight
> Board to approve the required funds.
>
> According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
> Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
> read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.
>
> Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote
> discussions of this matter.*
>
>
> Blessings and thanks in advance!
>
>
> Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof.
> Hilda
> Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
> Attachment 3: Spam Comments on Sugar Network
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “No paradox, no progress.”
> ~ Niels Bohr
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>
>


 --
 Laura V.
 * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*

 “No paradox, no progress.”
 ~ Niels Bohr

 Happy Learning!


 ___
 SLOBs mailing list
 sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
 http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Walter Bender
>>> Sugar Labs
>>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>
>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>



-- 
Laura V.
* I SomosAZUCAR.Org*

“No paradox, no progress.”
~ Niels Bohr

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

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Walter Bender]

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without retribution
> since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out of resources and
> can't afford to dedicate the required time.
>

This begs the question, what is next? How will the next issue be resolved?
It seems a long-term solution should be discussed as opposed to a one-time
patch.

>
> Regards
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> 2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :
>
>> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not clear
>> to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to being done
>> by volunteers.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the Sugar
>>> Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>>>
>>> I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's to
>>> make a decision.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>>>
 Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
 Conservancy Staff,


 I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's Sugar
 Labs Oversight Board meeting:



 Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.

 Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous
 months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active
 users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to perform
 the following technical services:


 -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
 -  Clean the Spam comments

 Active users this could help: +40,000
 Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
 Victoria Vargas
 Funds required:  USD $500


 I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated with
 any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I continue
 serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.

 Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges that
 many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical service
 contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs Oversight
 Board to approve the required funds.

 According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
 Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
 read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.

 Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote discussions
 of this matter.*


 Blessings and thanks in advance!


 Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof.
 Hilda
 Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
 Attachment 3: Spam Comments on Sugar Network


 --
 Laura V.
 * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*

 “No paradox, no progress.”
 ~ Niels Bohr

 Happy Learning!



>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laura V.
>>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>>
>>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>>
>>> Happy Learning!
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> SLOBs mailing list
>>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “No paradox, no progress.”
> ~ Niels Bohr
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>


-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org

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

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Laura Vargas]

We have supported Sugar Network on a voluntary basis without retribution
since it's deployment on 2014. Unfortunately we ran out of resources and
can't afford to dedicate the required time.

Regards

Laura


2017-04-08 9:24 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :

> This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not clear
> to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to being done
> by volunteers.
>
> -walter
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the Sugar
>> Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>>
>> I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's to
>> make a decision.
>>
>>
>> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>>
>>> Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
>>> Conservancy Staff,
>>>
>>>
>>> I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's Sugar
>>> Labs Oversight Board meeting:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.
>>>
>>> Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous
>>> months, and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active
>>> users during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to perform
>>> the following technical services:
>>>
>>>
>>> -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
>>> -  Clean the Spam comments
>>>
>>> Active users this could help: +40,000
>>> Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
>>> Victoria Vargas
>>> Funds required:  USD $500
>>>
>>>
>>> I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated with
>>> any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I continue
>>> serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.
>>>
>>> Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges that
>>> many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical service
>>> contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs Oversight
>>> Board to approve the required funds.
>>>
>>> According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
>>> Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
>>> read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.
>>>
>>> Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote discussions
>>> of this matter.*
>>>
>>>
>>> Blessings and thanks in advance!
>>>
>>>
>>> Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof. Hilda
>>> Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
>>> Attachment 3: Spam Comments on Sugar Network
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laura V.
>>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>>
>>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>>
>>> Happy Learning!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>
>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>>
>> ___
>> SLOBs mailing list
>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>



-- 
Laura V.
* I SomosAZUCAR.Org*

“No paradox, no progress.”
~ Niels Bohr

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

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Walter Bender]

This document helps clarify what work needs to be done. What is not clear
to me is why this is work that needs to be funded as opposed to being done
by volunteers.

-walter

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the Sugar
> Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>
> I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's to
> make a decision.
>
>
> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>
>> Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
>> Conservancy Staff,
>>
>>
>> I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's Sugar
>> Labs Oversight Board meeting:
>>
>>
>>
>> Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.
>>
>> Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous months,
>> and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active users
>> during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to perform the
>> following technical services:
>>
>>
>> -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
>> -  Clean the Spam comments
>>
>> Active users this could help: +40,000
>> Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
>> Victoria Vargas
>> Funds required:  USD $500
>>
>>
>> I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated with
>> any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I continue
>> serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.
>>
>> Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges that
>> many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical service
>> contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs Oversight
>> Board to approve the required funds.
>>
>> According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
>> Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
>> read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.
>>
>> Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote discussions
>> of this matter.*
>>
>>
>> Blessings and thanks in advance!
>>
>>
>> Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof. Hilda
>> Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
>> Attachment 3: Spam Comments on Sugar Network
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>
>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “No paradox, no progress.”
> ~ Niels Bohr
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>


-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org

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

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Ignacio Rodríguez]

It's +1 from me as well.

I've seen what this guys have done in past, and by keeping the support of
Sugar Network, we indirectly increase our users (not sugarlabs directly,
but sugar itself).

So I think it benefits all :)

Sorry for my bad English,
Ignacio
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Technical Service Request - Project: Sugar Network

[Samson Goddy]

+1 from me.

Samson

On Apr 8, 2017 1:43 PM, "Laura Vargas"  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> As per SLOB's request in yesterday's meeting, I'm attaching the Sugar
> Network urgent maintenance project proposal.
>
> I hope this documents covers all the information required by SLOB's to
> make a decision.
>
>
> Regards from the Peruvian Amazon forest,
>
> Laura
>
>
>
> 2017-04-02 23:58 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :
>
>> Dear Community members, Oversight Board Members and Free Software
>> Conservancy Staff,
>>
>>
>> I would like to add the following request to the upcoming April's Sugar
>> Labs Oversight Board meeting:
>>
>>
>>
>> Our dear *Sugar Network is in #urgent need of maintenance*.
>>
>> Due the the recurrent *spam attacks *we have had during previous months,
>> and due to the fact that we are serving a large group of active users
>> during the local school year, I'm hereby requesting funds to perform the
>> following technical services:
>>
>>
>> -  The addition of a "Captcha" identifier for the 3 main forms.
>> -  Clean the Spam comments
>>
>> Active users this could help: +40,000
>> Name of who is actually doing the work: Luis Sebastian Silva, Laura
>> Victoria Vargas
>> Funds required:  USD $500
>>
>>
>> I openly declare the existence of conflict of interest associated with
>> any funding request presented by me and/or my husband as long as I continue
>> serving as a Sugar Labs Oversight Board member.
>>
>> Notwithstanding the above, I understand Conservancy acknowledges that
>> many PLC (Project Leadership Committee) Persons are technical service
>> contractors and therefore it would be doable for the Sugar Labs Oversight
>> Board to approve the required funds.
>>
>> According to the Software Freedom Conservancy Conflict of Interest
>> Policy, a conflicted PLC Person must abstain from and must not hear nor
>> read the pre-vote discussions of the matter.
>>
>> Therefore* I will not vote nor participate in any pre-vote discussions
>> of this matter.*
>>
>>
>> Blessings and thanks in advance!
>>
>>
>> Attachment 1: Artwork shared at Sugar Network - English Class Prof. Hilda
>> Attachment 2: Official Conflict of Interest Policy of Conservancy
>> Attachment 3: Spam Comments on Sugar Network
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>
>> “No paradox, no progress.”
>> ~ Niels Bohr
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “No paradox, no progress.”
> ~ Niels Bohr
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep