On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:44:34 +0200, Ana Guerrero <ana@debian.org> wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:40:19PM -0400, Richard Darst wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I created this page last night > > http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/SponsorshipReview > > to use for drafting plans for a sponsorship review. So far that is > > just my work, so other people should update it to make it a) agreeable > > to the global team b) not be so poorly written. > > > > Here is a proposed list of what we should do now: > > > > - I send mail to all attendees, saying > > - We need to review sponsorship. > > - Fill in Travel -> What are you doing for debian? > > - If you are going to DebCamp, make sure you have a good debcamp > > reason. > > > > - I have a text file for reviewing debcamp work plans. I'll make a > > similar thing for reviewing DebConf sponsorship, so that it is > > easier than having to slog through pentabarf. > > > > - If you want to volunteer to review DebCamp or DebConf sponsorships, > > reply to this mail. If you can lead one or both of these team, say > > so. Ana has volunteered - Ana, can you lead the teams? > > > > - Teams collect lists of people somewhere, and the teams report the > > results of their searching, then the global team decides where to draw > > the line based on what our demographics look like. > > > BTW, we have discussed this extensively by IRC and there is people who likes > the idea and people who does not. Given not everybody is in IRC or was around > when we discussed this, if you have argments against or in favour, please participate! I was not able to attend the IRC discussion yesterday, although I did spend some time reading the backlog. I'm sorry it got so heated, but I am glad to see people kissed and made up. I don't want to extend this argument further, because I think we are converging on a good compromise. However, I want to say a few things anyways. You can take it as my opinion, and not an attempt to re-open the discussion. I hope that you read it with an open mind and consider the things said, but there is no obligation to reply to any point below to clarify or convince me otherwise. I've already read what everyone had to say on irc and on the lists, I know what people think about these things, so just read what I think and consider it, no need to reply. I think these things: * i have great hopes that in the next two months additional sponsorship can come in. I believe it is possible that we can do it. * however, I'm a fiscal realist, and I think that at this point the amount we are behind is frightening and we should be doing something about it *in addition to continuing to find more sponsors*, and trying harder to do so. I do not think that this detracts from that process, we have enough people to do both in parallel. Not doing so in parallel of pushing harder for sponsors is irresponsible. I do not think that this should discourage or de-motivate people. In fact I think the opposite, we should be MORE motivated to find the money so we can in the end do everything we want. so I have hopes we can do it, and will continue as if we can, but I am also trying to be realistic about our current situation. * if we get enough money on the last day, great! If we don't, then it is too late. I am afraid of when we have crossed the line of 'too late'. * we have the right to refuse sponsorship for anyone at any time for any reason. i do not buy the argument that we promised everyone sponsorship unless too many people applied. We said we would try our best, that is just saying we will *try our best* and we are doing that. it is not a promise that we will do it no matter what. Because of my reading of this, I do not think that we would not be going back on any promise whatsoever. we made no promises anywhere, we didn't use the word promise at all and we are currently trying our best and are going to continue to do that. * we dont want to be jerks, or screw people over, but nobody is entitled to anything free from us at all. i think that if any food/board sponsorship retractions cause someone to have issues because of things that they have already planned or purchased, we can be reasonable and reconsider for those people. I think this can be worked out with people, so that those who are from disadvantaged economic situations are not penalized. * to me it would be ideal if Debian did not have to give money to Debconf, but I'm not going to block that from happening, it just would be the ideal * it would also be ideal if Debconf had a surplus to pass on to bosnia, like we have received from spain. I think it would be a crying shame if we ate the largest surplus ever and then passed on a debt. * i'm not feeling negative about any of this, I think it is great that we are checking, double-checking, auditing and keeping our numbers sane.... I think that is a positive thing for us to be doing. I also think that this can provide some healthy competition internally! lets prove these numbers wrong and go out there and get the sponsorship to make this happen! * there are people who really shouldn't have sponsorship, especially during debcamp. i think we are converging on how to deal with that now, so I wont dwell on it * I think Jimmy's suggestion that we collect the criteria now and then only apply them after june 10th reconfirmation and a re-evaluation of our situation is reasonable. micah
Attachment:
pgpFt5OxF1w3X.pgp
Description: PGP signature