[kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned
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? 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 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
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 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: 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
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: 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 23:55:47, 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
