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

2014-12-30 Thread Bruno Coudoin


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

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

2014-12-30 Thread Boudewijn Rempt

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

2014-12-30 Thread Bruno Coudoin


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

2014-12-30 Thread Jaroslaw Staniek
On 30 December 2014 at 19:52, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org 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

2014-12-30 Thread Albert Astals Cid
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

2014-12-30 Thread Albert Astals Cid
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

2014-12-30 Thread Bruno Coudoin


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

2014-12-30 Thread Boudewijn Rempt

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

2014-12-30 Thread Albert Astals Cid
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

2014-12-30 Thread Boudewijn Rempt

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

2014-12-30 Thread Albert Astals Cid
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