Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 23:55:47, Boudewijn Rempt va escriure: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > I did not suggest at any point that "you" should give "me" any money. > > (Note > > this is your words with "you" and "me", i've never made this about any > > specific project nor person). > > Irrelvant, substitute "Krita Foundation" or "Timothee Giet" or "KDE e.V." > where applicable, surely you understand that. > > >> That's so extremely basic that I have no idea how to start explaining > >> this > >> in a more clear way, so here's a question: > >> > >> You mentioned > >> > >> "You say that fund raising is not a zero-sum game, that's right, and > >> that's the reason why i said "some percentage" should be payed by the > >> "specificly raised funds" and not 100%." > >> > >> in your other answer to a mail of mine. That basically boils down to > >> imposing a KDE e.V. tax to projects in the KDE community that raise funds > >> for their project. > > > > How would the KDE e.V. impose any tax? > > You say "i said "some percentage" should be payed by the "specificly > raised funds" " -- which is pretty much the definition of a tax. I don't > know how KDE e.V. would impose that percentage, but I guess you thought > about that when making the suggestion. No, if i was giving you 100 and now i give you "only" 50, that's not a tax. > > To repeat my original proposal in case it was misunderstood; I am > > suggesting that it may make sense that projects that run their own > > fundraisers should share the cost of sprints since they're generating > > their own income. > Why? Heck, a lot of people attending sprints these days are generating > their own income. Why shouldn't they share the costs? They do, they pay for their own food and they spend their holidays doing KDE work instead of being on a beach/mountain/home/wherever with their friends/family/alone/whatever. > Not that I don't think we should cut down on support for sprints. The > Calligra sprint was big failure, at least one person only attending > because they got a free trip out of it. That has nothing to do with this discussion. I hope it was reported to the board and organizer so this free-loader either didn't get sponsored or won't be sponsored again. > And heck again, Krita only had > sprints in 2005 (self-funded, since nobody knew about sprints back then), > 2010, 2011 and 2014... It's not like Krita's wasting KDE e.V.'s money > while it's flush with cash itself. Again it's you bringing the names, not me. > >> Projects that raise money for development are making KDE bigger. > > > > As said in the paragraphs above, i don't think anybody would disagree with > > this, but can't speak for everybody. > > I feel your logic boils down to this: > > * you see projects doing fund raisers, and sometimes even making their > goals > > * you see those projects asking for the same support from KDE e.V. as > projects who don't do that > > * you feel that's unfair. They got money -- why are they asking KDE e.V. > for support? > > And then it goes on from there to the rationalization that it is unfair > because projects that do fund raisers take money that would otherwise be > donated to KDE e.V., so it's fair that they pay for what other projects > would get funded from KDE e.V. Ok, let's ignore that some money of those fund rasiers may or may not go to the KDE e.V. if the fund raiser did not happen and go back to your previous example. X and Y are to childs, their parents pay for everything they need. X has grown and is generating some money on its own, cool! Congratz to him for starting to be a grown up person. Their parents have decided that since X is making some money he'll have to buy its own clothes from now on, they will still pay the clothes for Y because he's still a child. Of course the parents still take care of the big things like holidays that neither X nor Y can afford. In the future the situation may change and X loses his job, parents will obviously go back to buying his clothes. I think that this conveys the idea of what i am proposing quite well. What part do you disagree with? Cheers, Albert > > Boudewijn > > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: I did not suggest at any point that "you" should give "me" any money. (Note this is your words with "you" and "me", i've never made this about any specific project nor person). Irrelvant, substitute "Krita Foundation" or "Timothee Giet" or "KDE e.V." where applicable, surely you understand that. That's so extremely basic that I have no idea how to start explaining this in a more clear way, so here's a question: You mentioned "You say that fund raising is not a zero-sum game, that's right, and that's the reason why i said "some percentage" should be payed by the "specificly raised funds" and not 100%." in your other answer to a mail of mine. That basically boils down to imposing a KDE e.V. tax to projects in the KDE community that raise funds for their project. How would the KDE e.V. impose any tax? You say "i said "some percentage" should be payed by the "specificly raised funds" " -- which is pretty much the definition of a tax. I don't know how KDE e.V. would impose that percentage, but I guess you thought about that when making the suggestion. I don't see how the KDE eV would nothing but encourage people to get more funding, but i obviously can't speak for a organization as big as the KDE eV is. You are on the board, which means you can be a spokesperson, so I want to know for whom you are speaking. To repeat my original proposal in case it was misunderstood; I am suggesting that it may make sense that projects that run their own fundraisers should share the cost of sprints since they're generating their own income. Why? Heck, a lot of people attending sprints these days are generating their own income. Why shouldn't they share the costs? And heck, again, why stop at sprints? There's the cost of hardware, of the e.V. office -- all providing shared benefits for all projects. Not that I don't think we should cut down on support for sprints. The Calligra sprint was big failure, at least one person only attending because they got a free trip out of it. And heck again, Krita only had sprints in 2005 (self-funded, since nobody knew about sprints back then), 2010, 2011 and 2014... It's not like Krita's wasting KDE e.V.'s money while it's flush with cash itself. Projects that raise money for development are making KDE bigger. As said in the paragraphs above, i don't think anybody would disagree with this, but can't speak for everybody. I feel your logic boils down to this: * you see projects doing fund raisers, and sometimes even making their goals * you see those projects asking for the same support from KDE e.V. as projects who don't do that * you feel that's unfair. They got money -- why are they asking KDE e.V. for support? And then it goes on from there to the rationalization that it is unfair because projects that do fund raisers take money that would otherwise be donated to KDE e.V., so it's fair that they pay for what other projects would get funded from KDE e.V. Boudewijn ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 23:07:55, Boudewijn Rempt va escriure: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > >> This needs to be very clear, or otherwise all discussion is useless: a > >> KDE > >> project doing a fund raiser does not steal money from KDE e.V. > > > > Obviously it does not steal money from our bank. > > > > Again, are you saying that there's noone in the world that will think "I > > already donated to this Okular fundraiser this year so i am not going to > > donate to the general KDE fundraiser"? > > I am saying that this is a fallacy that KDE e.V. should not base its > policy on. You've made this point before, and it just doesn't work that > way -- if you do fund-raising, you create your story, you do your > publicity, your work, you get or fail to get your funding, and whether or > not anyone else who is known to the people _you_ know are doing a fund > raiser is irrelevant. You don't build policy on "you did a fund-raiser, > too, so I got less money, so give me money!" I did not suggest at any point that "you" should give "me" any money. (Note this is your words with "you" and "me", i've never made this about any specific project nor person). > That's so extremely basic that I have no idea how to start explaining this > in a more clear way, so here's a question: > > You mentioned > > "You say that fund raising is not a zero-sum game, that's right, and > that's the reason why i said "some percentage" should be payed by the > "specificly raised funds" and not 100%." > > in your other answer to a mail of mine. That basically boils down to > imposing a KDE e.V. tax to projects in the KDE community that raise funds > for their project. How would the KDE e.V. impose any tax? > Is that your own idea, or does that reflect the trend of thought of the > board? This is not my idea nor the boards idea, this is something Mario brought up and i decided to explore, i can tell you i may not even be in favor of it, i'm just opening it up for dicussion since i think it's an interesting discussion to have. > Ultimately, the answer to that question, of whether KDE will impose a > fund-raising tax, forbid fund-raising, keep supporting projects that do > fund-raising or do something else I cannot think of now will determine, > will be vital. It'll mean projects will have to start do sums, > cold-heartedly. I don't see how the KDE eV would nothing but encourage people to get more funding, but i obviously can't speak for a organization as big as the KDE eV is. > But, to come back to the beginning: your contention that KDE e.V is > missing out on money because people donating to Okular aren't donating to > KDE e.V. is bogus. It's household economics: my living-in kid is earning > some extra money in their saturday job in a shop, so they should start > paying rent. It's not real-world economics. Your living-in kid is earning money now, are you still paying for everything they need as you did before they had a job? Or maybe you're just paying some percentage and he pays the rest? To repeat my original proposal in case it was misunderstood; I am suggesting that it may make sense that projects that run their own fundraisers should share the cost of sprints since they're generating their own income. > Projects that raise money for development are making KDE bigger. As said in the paragraphs above, i don't think anybody would disagree with this, but can't speak for everybody. Cheers, Albert ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: This needs to be very clear, or otherwise all discussion is useless: a KDE project doing a fund raiser does not steal money from KDE e.V. Obviously it does not steal money from our bank. Again, are you saying that there's noone in the world that will think "I already donated to this Okular fundraiser this year so i am not going to donate to the general KDE fundraiser"? I am saying that this is a fallacy that KDE e.V. should not base its policy on. You've made this point before, and it just doesn't work that way -- if you do fund-raising, you create your story, you do your publicity, your work, you get or fail to get your funding, and whether or not anyone else who is known to the people _you_ know are doing a fund raiser is irrelevant. You don't build policy on "you did a fund-raiser, too, so I got less money, so give me money!" That's so extremely basic that I have no idea how to start explaining this in a more clear way, so here's a question: You mentioned "You say that fund raising is not a zero-sum game, that's right, and that's the reason why i said "some percentage" should be payed by the "specificly raised funds" and not 100%." in your other answer to a mail of mine. That basically boils down to imposing a KDE e.V. tax to projects in the KDE community that raise funds for their project. Is that your own idea, or does that reflect the trend of thought of the board? Ultimately, the answer to that question, of whether KDE will impose a fund-raising tax, forbid fund-raising, keep supporting projects that do fund-raising or do something else I cannot think of now will determine, will be vital. It'll mean projects will have to start do sums, cold-heartedly. But, to come back to the beginning: your contention that KDE e.V is missing out on money because people donating to Okular aren't donating to KDE e.V. is bogus. It's household economics: my living-in kid is earning some extra money in their saturday job in a shop, so they should start paying rent. It's not real-world economics. Projects that raise money for development are making KDE bigger. Boudewijn ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
Le 30/12/2014 22:04, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : Well, you are assuming that people willing to help KDE are the same as >the one helping a specific project. This is not necessary true, in the >case of GCompris the audience goes beyond KDE, I can't measure it but >for sure some money we got on our graphic fund raising does not comes >from our KDE supporters. How can the audience go beyond KDE if GCompris is just a subset of KDE? Some users come to GCompris because they like it. Some will discover and join the KDE community. But despite our communication efforts we won't convert all of them as KDE supporters behind this very application. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 20:41:52, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: > Le 30/12/2014 19:52, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : > > El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:29:47, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: > >> Le 30/12/2014 18:49, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : > >>> El Dilluns, 22 de desembre de 2014, a les 21:00:25, Mario Fux va escriure: > Good morning dear KDE people > > After KDE's first fundraiser (crowdfunding attempt) in 2012 [1] we had > (or > it's still ongoing) six more this year: > - For the Randa Meetings 2014 [2] > - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] > - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] > - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] > - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] > - Kommander [8] > > Money is not an easy topic > but avoiding it doesn't solve the problems. And if people don't know > about > certain things like that they should coordinate with KDE e.V. in the > case > of money they won't. So it's on us to tell the community and tell new > members of the community. > >>> > >>> This is an interesting topic too and i wanted to bring it up for some > >>> time. > >>> > >>> I'd say the type of fundraiser can be split into two types: > >>>* KDE generic > >>> > >>> - For the Randa Meetings 2014 > >>> - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising > >>> > >>>* Project specific > >>> > >>> - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development > >>> [3] > >>> - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] > >>> - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising > >>> [5] > >>> - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] > >>> - Kommander [8] > >>> > >>> I'm all for specific projects doing fundraisers for their own things > >>> (though as said in the previous email i'd like some more coordination > >>> happening), don't think i'm not. > >>> > >>> But, > >>> > >>> Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers > >>> request > >>> funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. > >>> > >>> KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those > >>> projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own > >>> fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. > >>> > >>> What would people think if for those projects that have run "big" > >>> fundraisers (we don't want to put off people that did a 100€ fundraiser) > >>> the KDE eV would only sponsor part of a sprint and the rest of the money > >>> should come from the money they raised independently? > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> My feeling is that projects begging for money > > > > I'd suggest you don't use "begging for money", it doesn't have a good > > sound ;) > True, bad wordings. > > >> one way or another are > >> either the most active or have a good plan for it. > > > > I don't understand what you mean with this sentence to be honest. > > I just mean to say that requesting money is a sign that the project is > alive. > > >> The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which > >> may be the best candidate for the requested fund. > > > > I don't think It would punish anyone, it think it makes money distribution > > fairer. > > Sure the discussion is to find the best way to share a scarce resource, > money. My point was that having independent funds or not may not be the > best criteria. Sure we have to take this in account so the whole > discussion is more about by how much to value this criteria in the > decision process. > > >> What concerns me is that some projects by their nature may be easier to > >> fund independently. Other low level project with deep or hidden code > >> which are of major importance for the KDE infrastructure are > >> disadvantaged. > >> > >> Why don't we give KDE eV funds by comparing what the requester want to > >> do with the money and what is the added value to KDE as a whole. > > > > Because as i said, the world has a limited amount of money and so does the > > KDE eV. > > > > When project X asks money for itself instead of asking money for KDE eV, > > it's probable that if person Y donates, then person Y may not donate to > > general KDE eV fund raisers since he'll think (i already donated) so > > project X gets a donation and not the KDE eV. > > Well, you are assuming that people willing to help KDE are the same as > the one helping a specific project. This is not necessary true, in the > case of GCompris the audience goes beyond KDE, I can't measure it but > for sure some money we got on our graphic fund raising does not comes > from our KDE supporters. How can the audience go beyond KDE if GCompris is just a subset of KDE? Cheers, Albert > > Bruno. > > ___ > kde-community mailing list
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 20:14:40, Boudewijn Rempt va escriure: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > Because as i said, the world has a limited amount of money and so does the > > KDE eV. > > > > When project X asks money for itself instead of asking money for KDE eV, > > it's probable that if person Y donates, then person Y may not donate to > > general KDE eV fund raisers since he'll think (i already donated) so > > project X gets a donation and not the KDE eV. > > > > Then when project X does a sprint he is asking for funds that come from > > the > > KDE eV even if by running a "specialized fundraiser" it maybe made those > > funds to be smaller. > > That's a logical error. It's just not true and it's certainly not > 'provable'. Yeah, obviously i don't have proof, neither do you. But do you really say there's noone in the world that go by the rationale i mentioned? > In the first place, there's no 'limited amount of money in the world' -- > not since the first country went off the gold standard in any case. Let's not go there :) > There's plenty of money, we only have to find others than companies than > Nokia and Intel to give it to us. > > So, in the second place, projects like GCompris and Krita actually do that > and reach beyond the usual reach of KDE as a free software umbrella > organization and bring in more money. It expands the pool from which we > fish, and may actually introduce new people to KDE... > > This needs to be very clear, or otherwise all discussion is useless: a KDE > project doing a fund raiser does not steal money from KDE e.V. Obviously it does not steal money from our bank. Again, are you saying that there's noone in the world that will think "I already donated to this Okular fundraiser this year so i am not going to donate to the general KDE fundraiser"? Cheers, Albert > If we as as community truly believes it does, it's time to add a rider to > the KDE manifesto forbidding KDE projects from doing fund-raising (and, I > guess, commercial involvement, since it's the same thing). > > > > Boudewijn > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
On 30 December 2014 at 19:52, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:29:47, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: >> The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which >> may be the best candidate for the requested fund. > > I don't think It would punish anyone, it think it makes money distribution > fairer. The world isn't fair in the first place, neither the market where find your employer is. Orgs such as companies and universities fund internal projects based on competition, and metrics are based on goals of these orgs. And there's validation after completion based on how close to the goal the org moved. I know the e.V. isn't here for developing the software or services, so guess some questions won't be answered. Instead, goals of individuals or at most sub-projects are and will be visible in this discussion. Since the e.V. isn't for developing but for supporting, correct me if I am wrong but it is not going to set objectives related to to development goals, for example: - by 2016 make the file manager #1 in popularity on FOSS OSes - by 2017 ship a leading Qt office document library that companies use so much that it brings EUR200k in funds every year - by 2017 make 20% of the budget coming from Android apps we ship (not by donations from Plasma users but, from the regular payments on the free market) - put whatever fits here (outside of the long tail of FOSS desktop environments) -- regards, Jaroslaw Staniek KDE: : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org Calligra Suite: : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org Kexi: : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi Qt Certified Specialist: : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:45:51, Boudewijn Rempt va escriure: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] > > > > Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request > > funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. > > > > KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those > > projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own > > fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. > > I've been expecting this, and in fact, I've been facing that idea already > in 2014: KDE e.V. could not help out with the siggraph presence of Krita. Because there's a limited amount of money KDE eV has, do you think it makes KDE eV happy it couldn't help there? > We still did provide publicity for KDE, by prominently display KDE's logo > in the booth and on the leaflets we were handing out, which could be > considered really valuable for KDE, especially since we were reaching a > set of people who, if they had heard of KDE before at all, were pretty > much uniformly negative towards KDE, and now they got some positive > impressions. In other words, Krita sponsored KDE e.V. in this case. Cool :) Given that Krita is a KDE project, i'd expect this is natural. > Also keep this in mind: Krita's fundraisers are not meant to provide for > the usual costs any KDE project faces: they are meant to pay for > development time, something KDE e.V. cannot do. This is a misconception, there's nothing in the KDE eV bylaws that forbid it to pay for development time, it's just something it has decided not to do. > Asking for Krita to pay > for sprints means asking the Krita Foundation to cut down on support for > development. > > Finally, I understand the reaction -- oooh, look, they got _20k euros! > they are rich! I understand that it makes some people feel that those 20k > were a loss for KDE e.V. It's not true, because doing fund-raising isn't a > zero-sum game, and different projects are targeting different audiences. > The money is used for different purposes. Money raised by Krita is not > money lost by KDE e.V., it is not money stolen by Krita from KDE e.V. > 'common pot'. Krita is not double-dipping in the same moneybag. You say that fund raising is not a zero-sum game, that's right, and that's the reason why i said "some percentage" should be payed by the "specificly raised funds" and not 100%. > And compared to the cost of developing Krita, 20k just a bagatelle. To > keep Krita moving as fast as in 2014, I need about 10k a month. Which is > an extremely cheap and non-commercial estimate. I don't think you have to convince anyone in this list that software development is expensive. I don't think you're asking for the KDE eV to fund salaries for the hundreds of developers, translators, artists, we have either. > And moreover, I don't have 10k a month : which is why I asked Intel, KDE > e.V. and others to support Krita's stand at Siggraph (and promised > exposure in return) and KDE e.V. to support our sprint in Deventer (which > was further supported by me personally, taking care of accomodation in my > own place). > > If asking for that sort of support is 'a bit unfair', then how long until > using KDE's infrastructure is considered 'a bit unfair' for projects that > manage to get some funding? Especially when a project like Krita is a > relatively _heavy_ burden on the infrastructure, which I totally admit. Given we don't pay our sysadmins, i'd say the monetary burden Krita brings us is not really that big to be honest. > This is a big discussion, and I am not sure I want to be a real part of > that discussion: when I was approached by the board about the thorny > question of what to do now that KDE project has some money of its own that > wasn't coming to the KDE e.V., I had to beg for more time and a > postponement of the discussion until 2015. > > After all, I am on the dole now, because right now, nobody can afford to > pay for my work on Krita development, and I need to get 2.9 released. I'm sorry nobody can pay your Krita time. > Until that's fixed, I guess that I'll go on expecting KDE e.V. to continue > to support Krita, a KDE project, with the usual support extended to every > other KDE project. Well, we're discussing this right now right here, if you decide to abstain for the discussion then later you can't complain if you don't like the results :) Cheers, Albert > > Boudewijn > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
On 30 December 2014 at 19:55, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:29:47, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: >> Le 30/12/2014 18:49, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : >> > El Dilluns, 22 de desembre de 2014, a les 21:00:25, Mario Fux va escriure: >> >> Good morning dear KDE people >> >> >> >> After KDE's first fundraiser (crowdfunding attempt) in 2012 [1] we had >> >> (or >> >> it's still ongoing) six more this year: >> >> - For the Randa Meetings 2014 [2] >> >> - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] >> >> - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] >> >> - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] >> >> - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] >> >> - Kommander [8] >> >> >> >> Money is not an easy topic >> >> but avoiding it doesn't solve the problems. And if people don't know >> >> about >> >> certain things like that they should coordinate with KDE e.V. in the case >> >> of money they won't. So it's on us to tell the community and tell new >> >> members of the community. >> > >> > This is an interesting topic too and i wanted to bring it up for some >> > time. >> > >> > I'd say the type of fundraiser can be split into two types: >> > * KDE generic >> > >> >- For the Randa Meetings 2014 >> >- Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising >> > >> > * Project specific >> > >> >- For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] >> >- For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] >> >- Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] >> >- New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] >> >- Kommander [8] >> > >> > I'm all for specific projects doing fundraisers for their own things >> > (though as said in the previous email i'd like some more coordination >> > happening), don't think i'm not. >> > >> > But, >> > >> > Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request >> > funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. >> > >> > KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those >> > projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own >> > fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. >> > >> > What would people think if for those projects that have run "big" >> > fundraisers (we don't want to put off people that did a 100€ fundraiser) >> > the KDE eV would only sponsor part of a sprint and the rest of the money >> > should come from the money they raised independently? >> >> Hi, >> >> My feeling is that projects begging for money one way or another are >> either the most active or have a good plan for it. >> >> The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which >> may be the best candidate for the requested fund. >> >> What concerns me is that some projects by their nature may be easier to >> fund independently. > > You're saying they are easier to fund independently, but they should still > have access to the common pot? Seems a bit counter-intuitive to me to be > honest. It is not if we are talking about fund raisers reaching people and organizations that have no idea what KDE Plasma is, and have no interest in knowing. Exploring areas where if people are get mildly interested in hearing what FOSS is, we have to admit nice-to-have situation happened but that was not the goal. From my experience, people are not interested in doctrines, in my books it's most of the population. The point of fund raising is to get the funds, and often use it to develop what cannot be developed in free time. And use the remaining to raise more and regularly, a vital practice. To be honest I'm not doing that because it's so expensive for me at the moment. Intuition based on a "common pot" metaphor assumes everyone knows and understands what "KDE" is. A few of us expressed interest in knowing the statistics of our user base. I am so happy to own some and have to say again, KDE Plasma isn't in the top 2 for a cross-platform app. So the "common" pot is not so common, it's rather part of the long tail. > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community -- regards, Jaroslaw Staniek KDE: : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org Calligra Suite: : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org Kexi: : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi Qt Certified Specialist: : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
Le 30/12/2014 19:55, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:29:47, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: Le 30/12/2014 18:49, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : El Dilluns, 22 de desembre de 2014, a les 21:00:25, Mario Fux va escriure: Good morning dear KDE people After KDE's first fundraiser (crowdfunding attempt) in 2012 [1] we had (or it's still ongoing) six more this year: - For the Randa Meetings 2014 [2] - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] - Kommander [8] Money is not an easy topic but avoiding it doesn't solve the problems. And if people don't know about certain things like that they should coordinate with KDE e.V. in the case of money they won't. So it's on us to tell the community and tell new members of the community. This is an interesting topic too and i wanted to bring it up for some time. I'd say the type of fundraiser can be split into two types: * KDE generic - For the Randa Meetings 2014 - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising * Project specific - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] - Kommander [8] I'm all for specific projects doing fundraisers for their own things (though as said in the previous email i'd like some more coordination happening), don't think i'm not. But, Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. What would people think if for those projects that have run "big" fundraisers (we don't want to put off people that did a 100€ fundraiser) the KDE eV would only sponsor part of a sprint and the rest of the money should come from the money they raised independently? Hi, My feeling is that projects begging for money one way or another are either the most active or have a good plan for it. The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which may be the best candidate for the requested fund. What concerns me is that some projects by their nature may be easier to fund independently. You're saying they are easier to fund independently, but they should still have access to the common pot? Seems a bit counter-intuitive to me to be honest. It is counter-intuitive by the way you tell it. Now if you say that at the KDE eV level it is just about helping the projects based on the value of the money request they make, it because less confusing. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
Le 30/12/2014 19:52, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:29:47, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: Le 30/12/2014 18:49, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : El Dilluns, 22 de desembre de 2014, a les 21:00:25, Mario Fux va escriure: Good morning dear KDE people After KDE's first fundraiser (crowdfunding attempt) in 2012 [1] we had (or it's still ongoing) six more this year: - For the Randa Meetings 2014 [2] - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] - Kommander [8] Money is not an easy topic but avoiding it doesn't solve the problems. And if people don't know about certain things like that they should coordinate with KDE e.V. in the case of money they won't. So it's on us to tell the community and tell new members of the community. This is an interesting topic too and i wanted to bring it up for some time. I'd say the type of fundraiser can be split into two types: * KDE generic - For the Randa Meetings 2014 - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising * Project specific - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] - Kommander [8] I'm all for specific projects doing fundraisers for their own things (though as said in the previous email i'd like some more coordination happening), don't think i'm not. But, Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. What would people think if for those projects that have run "big" fundraisers (we don't want to put off people that did a 100€ fundraiser) the KDE eV would only sponsor part of a sprint and the rest of the money should come from the money they raised independently? Hi, My feeling is that projects begging for money I'd suggest you don't use "begging for money", it doesn't have a good sound ;) True, bad wordings. one way or another are either the most active or have a good plan for it. I don't understand what you mean with this sentence to be honest. I just mean to say that requesting money is a sign that the project is alive. The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which may be the best candidate for the requested fund. I don't think It would punish anyone, it think it makes money distribution fairer. Sure the discussion is to find the best way to share a scarce resource, money. My point was that having independent funds or not may not be the best criteria. Sure we have to take this in account so the whole discussion is more about by how much to value this criteria in the decision process. What concerns me is that some projects by their nature may be easier to fund independently. Other low level project with deep or hidden code which are of major importance for the KDE infrastructure are disadvantaged. Why don't we give KDE eV funds by comparing what the requester want to do with the money and what is the added value to KDE as a whole. Because as i said, the world has a limited amount of money and so does the KDE eV. When project X asks money for itself instead of asking money for KDE eV, it's probable that if person Y donates, then person Y may not donate to general KDE eV fund raisers since he'll think (i already donated) so project X gets a donation and not the KDE eV. Well, you are assuming that people willing to help KDE are the same as the one helping a specific project. This is not necessary true, in the case of GCompris the audience goes beyond KDE, I can't measure it but for sure some money we got on our graphic fund raising does not comes from our KDE supporters. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: Because as i said, the world has a limited amount of money and so does the KDE eV. When project X asks money for itself instead of asking money for KDE eV, it's probable that if person Y donates, then person Y may not donate to general KDE eV fund raisers since he'll think (i already donated) so project X gets a donation and not the KDE eV. Then when project X does a sprint he is asking for funds that come from the KDE eV even if by running a "specialized fundraiser" it maybe made those funds to be smaller. That's a logical error. It's just not true and it's certainly not 'provable'. In the first place, there's no 'limited amount of money in the world' -- not since the first country went off the gold standard in any case. There's plenty of money, we only have to find others than companies than Nokia and Intel to give it to us. So, in the second place, projects like GCompris and Krita actually do that and reach beyond the usual reach of KDE as a free software umbrella organization and bring in more money. It expands the pool from which we fish, and may actually introduce new people to KDE... This needs to be very clear, or otherwise all discussion is useless: a KDE project doing a fund raiser does not steal money from KDE e.V. If we as as community truly believes it does, it's time to add a rider to the KDE manifesto forbidding KDE projects from doing fund-raising (and, I guess, commercial involvement, since it's the same thing). Boudewijn ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:29:47, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: > Le 30/12/2014 18:49, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : > > El Dilluns, 22 de desembre de 2014, a les 21:00:25, Mario Fux va escriure: > >> Good morning dear KDE people > >> > >> After KDE's first fundraiser (crowdfunding attempt) in 2012 [1] we had > >> (or > >> it's still ongoing) six more this year: > >> - For the Randa Meetings 2014 [2] > >> - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] > >> - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] > >> - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] > >> - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] > >> - Kommander [8] > >> > >> Money is not an easy topic > >> but avoiding it doesn't solve the problems. And if people don't know > >> about > >> certain things like that they should coordinate with KDE e.V. in the case > >> of money they won't. So it's on us to tell the community and tell new > >> members of the community. > > > > This is an interesting topic too and i wanted to bring it up for some > > time. > > > > I'd say the type of fundraiser can be split into two types: > > * KDE generic > > > >- For the Randa Meetings 2014 > >- Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising > > > > * Project specific > > > >- For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] > >- For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] > >- Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] > >- New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] > >- Kommander [8] > > > > I'm all for specific projects doing fundraisers for their own things > > (though as said in the previous email i'd like some more coordination > > happening), don't think i'm not. > > > > But, > > > > Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request > > funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. > > > > KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those > > projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own > > fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. > > > > What would people think if for those projects that have run "big" > > fundraisers (we don't want to put off people that did a 100€ fundraiser) > > the KDE eV would only sponsor part of a sprint and the rest of the money > > should come from the money they raised independently? > > Hi, > > My feeling is that projects begging for money one way or another are > either the most active or have a good plan for it. > > The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which > may be the best candidate for the requested fund. > > What concerns me is that some projects by their nature may be easier to > fund independently. You're saying they are easier to fund independently, but they should still have access to the common pot? Seems a bit counter-intuitive to me to be honest. Cheers, Albert ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 19:29:47, Bruno Coudoin va escriure: > Le 30/12/2014 18:49, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : > > El Dilluns, 22 de desembre de 2014, a les 21:00:25, Mario Fux va escriure: > >> Good morning dear KDE people > >> > >> After KDE's first fundraiser (crowdfunding attempt) in 2012 [1] we had > >> (or > >> it's still ongoing) six more this year: > >> - For the Randa Meetings 2014 [2] > >> - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] > >> - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] > >> - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] > >> - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] > >> - Kommander [8] > >> > >> Money is not an easy topic > >> but avoiding it doesn't solve the problems. And if people don't know > >> about > >> certain things like that they should coordinate with KDE e.V. in the case > >> of money they won't. So it's on us to tell the community and tell new > >> members of the community. > > > > This is an interesting topic too and i wanted to bring it up for some > > time. > > > > I'd say the type of fundraiser can be split into two types: > > * KDE generic > > > >- For the Randa Meetings 2014 > >- Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising > > > > * Project specific > > > >- For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] > >- For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] > >- Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] > >- New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] > >- Kommander [8] > > > > I'm all for specific projects doing fundraisers for their own things > > (though as said in the previous email i'd like some more coordination > > happening), don't think i'm not. > > > > But, > > > > Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request > > funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. > > > > KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those > > projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own > > fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. > > > > What would people think if for those projects that have run "big" > > fundraisers (we don't want to put off people that did a 100€ fundraiser) > > the KDE eV would only sponsor part of a sprint and the rest of the money > > should come from the money they raised independently? > > Hi, > > My feeling is that projects begging for money I'd suggest you don't use "begging for money", it doesn't have a good sound ;) > one way or another are > either the most active or have a good plan for it. I don't understand what you mean with this sentence to be honest. > The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which > may be the best candidate for the requested fund. I don't think It would punish anyone, it think it makes money distribution fairer. > What concerns me is that some projects by their nature may be easier to > fund independently. Other low level project with deep or hidden code > which are of major importance for the KDE infrastructure are disadvantaged. > > Why don't we give KDE eV funds by comparing what the requester want to > do with the money and what is the added value to KDE as a whole. Because as i said, the world has a limited amount of money and so does the KDE eV. When project X asks money for itself instead of asking money for KDE eV, it's probable that if person Y donates, then person Y may not donate to general KDE eV fund raisers since he'll think (i already donated) so project X gets a donation and not the KDE eV. Then when project X does a sprint he is asking for funds that come from the KDE eV even if by running a "specialized fundraiser" it maybe made those funds to be smaller. Cheers, Albert > > Bruno. > > > > > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote: - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. I've been expecting this, and in fact, I've been facing that idea already in 2014: KDE e.V. could not help out with the siggraph presence of Krita. We still did provide publicity for KDE, by prominently display KDE's logo in the booth and on the leaflets we were handing out, which could be considered really valuable for KDE, especially since we were reaching a set of people who, if they had heard of KDE before at all, were pretty much uniformly negative towards KDE, and now they got some positive impressions. In other words, Krita sponsored KDE e.V. in this case. Also keep this in mind: Krita's fundraisers are not meant to provide for the usual costs any KDE project faces: they are meant to pay for development time, something KDE e.V. cannot do. Asking for Krita to pay for sprints means asking the Krita Foundation to cut down on support for development. Finally, I understand the reaction -- oooh, look, they got _20k euros! they are rich! I understand that it makes some people feel that those 20k were a loss for KDE e.V. It's not true, because doing fund-raising isn't a zero-sum game, and different projects are targeting different audiences. The money is used for different purposes. Money raised by Krita is not money lost by KDE e.V., it is not money stolen by Krita from KDE e.V. 'common pot'. Krita is not double-dipping in the same moneybag. And compared to the cost of developing Krita, 20k just a bagatelle. To keep Krita moving as fast as in 2014, I need about 10k a month. Which is an extremely cheap and non-commercial estimate. And moreover, I don't have 10k a month : which is why I asked Intel, KDE e.V. and others to support Krita's stand at Siggraph (and promised exposure in return) and KDE e.V. to support our sprint in Deventer (which was further supported by me personally, taking care of accomodation in my own place). If asking for that sort of support is 'a bit unfair', then how long until using KDE's infrastructure is considered 'a bit unfair' for projects that manage to get some funding? Especially when a project like Krita is a relatively _heavy_ burden on the infrastructure, which I totally admit. This is a big discussion, and I am not sure I want to be a real part of that discussion: when I was approached by the board about the thorny question of what to do now that KDE project has some money of its own that wasn't coming to the KDE e.V., I had to beg for more time and a postponement of the discussion until 2015. After all, I am on the dole now, because right now, nobody can afford to pay for my work on Krita development, and I need to get 2.9 released. Until that's fixed, I guess that I'll go on expecting KDE e.V. to continue to support Krita, a KDE project, with the usual support extended to every other KDE project. Boudewijn ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
Le 30/12/2014 18:49, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : El Dilluns, 22 de desembre de 2014, a les 21:00:25, Mario Fux va escriure: Good morning dear KDE people After KDE's first fundraiser (crowdfunding attempt) in 2012 [1] we had (or it's still ongoing) six more this year: - For the Randa Meetings 2014 [2] - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] - Kommander [8] Money is not an easy topic but avoiding it doesn't solve the problems. And if people don't know about certain things like that they should coordinate with KDE e.V. in the case of money they won't. So it's on us to tell the community and tell new members of the community. This is an interesting topic too and i wanted to bring it up for some time. I'd say the type of fundraiser can be split into two types: * KDE generic - For the Randa Meetings 2014 - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising * Project specific - For Krita: open source digital painting | Accelerate Development [3] - For Tupi: 2D Animation Software for Everyone! [4] - Make the World a Better Place! - KDE End of Year 2014 Fundraising [5] - New Unified Graphics for GCompris [6] - Kommander [8] I'm all for specific projects doing fundraisers for their own things (though as said in the previous email i'd like some more coordination happening), don't think i'm not. But, Sometimes that projects that have had project specific fundraisers request funds from the KDE eV to run a sprint. KDE eV funds are not unlimited, so for me sometimes it seems that those projects are being a bit unfair to the rest by running their own fundraisers and then also asking for money from the common pot. What would people think if for those projects that have run "big" fundraisers (we don't want to put off people that did a 100€ fundraiser) the KDE eV would only sponsor part of a sprint and the rest of the money should come from the money they raised independently? Hi, My feeling is that projects begging for money one way or another are either the most active or have a good plan for it. The rule you propose would 'punish' at KDE eV level these projects which may be the best candidate for the requested fund. What concerns me is that some projects by their nature may be easier to fund independently. Other low level project with deep or hidden code which are of major importance for the KDE infrastructure are disadvantaged. Why don't we give KDE eV funds by comparing what the requester want to do with the money and what is the added value to KDE as a whole. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
