Insider manipulation of DC13 site selection, and apparent coverup
For a period during the deliberations for DC13 site selection some
"anonymous" "donors" were offering money to Debconf on condition that
Vaumarcus was selected. This offer (actually a loan) was withdrawn
when the donors got cold feet.
These "anonymous donors" were in fact not third parties at all. They
were persons in positions of responsibility helping to organise
Debconf 13. At least one the Debconf chairs knew this; furthermore
this information was not disclosed to at least one other Debconf
chair, who therefore remained ignorant of the true circumstances and
was dependent on rumour and hearsay.
Worse, the only public statement on this the matter by members of the
Debconf organisation wrongly claims that the "donors" were not in
positions of authority or governance in relation to Debconf.
I'm told that the DC13 contract with the venue has already been
signed, although this information is not public as far as I can tell.
If it had not then I would have asked for:
- Withdrawal of the "anonymous donors" from Debconf organisation
- Reconsideration of the choice of Switzerland as host country
- Reconsideration of the site selection by a committee not
tainted by this manipulation
As it is it is difficult to see the best way forward. If it is
possible to hold a Debconf without the participation of the "anonymous
donors" in positions of responsibility, they should be asked to step
aside.
I have also heard that - perhaps in response to agitation from people
like myself - the DC13 fundraising group have "further extended the
culture of secrecy" (as my source puts it) by moving to a
newly-restricted repository.
As far as I can tell (murk still abounds) these problems arise from
the attitudes of the DC13 local team. Switzerland is known abroad for
many things. One of them is its culture of banking secrecy. I would
like it to be completely clear to everyone that within Debconf a
culture of banking secrecy, or of secrecy in general, is wholly
unacceptable.
Now we are unfortunately stuck with the situation. In some sense the
local team have the entire project over a barrel because they can
threaten to walk away and leave us with a large bill. So perhaps I am
doing harm by posting this message. However, I really felt I couldn't
sit on this information any longer.
At the very least we should make sure that nothing like this can ever
happen again.
Ian.
Timeline as far as I know:
On the 30th of November an informant emailed me with various
allegations which now seem to have been substantially true.
As a result I asked, in public, amongst other things:
> 6. Were the proposed donors in positions of authority or governance in
> relation to Debconf ? Examples of people in positions of authority
> or governance in relation to Debconf include the DPL, the DPL
> helpers tasked with Debconf-related tasks, people involved with
> Debconf accounting on behalf of SPI or FFIS, and of course members
> of the Debconf global or local teams.
On the 4th of December one of the Debconf chairs, Holger, responded in
public:
> 6. Were the proposed donors in positions of authority or governance in
> relation to Debconf ?
no
My informant had told me the alleged names of the "anonymous donors"
and that did not accord with the answer I was given. So I immediately
wrote to another of the Debconf chairs, who had already emailed me to
tell me they didn't know the details either, to put these names to
Holger and ask Holger to consider whether his answer needed to be
corrected.
On the 6th of December a member of one of the DC13 teams responded to
me in private email with the contradictory answer:
> 6. Were the proposed donors in positions of authority or governance in
> relation to Debconf ? Examples of people in positions of authority
> or governance in relation to Debconf include the DPL, the DPL
> helpers tasked with Debconf-related tasks, people involved with
> Debconf accounting on behalf of SPI or FFIS, and of course members
> of the Debconf global or local teams.
According to your examples, yes.
I chased the other Debconf chair again and they chased Holger, but
without success. I asked the DC13 team member's permission to forward
their email to -discuss. They consented but said they thought it
wouldn't help improve the situation. I didn't want to drop them in
it.
However, that DC13 team member did tell me that the DPL was fully
informed, with all the details, before the DPL approved the DC13
budget.
I also asked a senior and respected project member for advice about
how to proceed, as I felt I needed a second opinion. Unfortunately
they weren't able to recommend more besides perhaps starting further
private discussions.
Today, having slept on it I think I can sit on this no longer.
--
Reply to: