Re: [Debconf-discuss] "Anonymous donation" to Debconf 13
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 30/11/12 20:00, David Prévot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le 30/11/2012 14:44, Ian Jackson a écrit :
>> I have heard some disturbing rumours regarding Debconf13, site
>> choice and funding. It seems to be difficult to find clear facts
>> and of course I don't want to be spreading unverified rumours.
>
> I fail to understand, if you really “don't want to be spreading
> unverified rumours”, why are you posting this kind of questions to
> two other wider mailing lists?
>
> Hopefully, another message from the initial mailing list you just
> quoted, sent two days later, with a pretty explicit subject
> (“[Debconf-team] Correction of rumors and comments about anonymous
> financial support for LeCamp”), may answer your questions the easy
> way.
Actually, I felt the label `rumors' was a little bit generous in the
circumstances, and it doesn't answer to questions substantially
Right up to 25 October, Holger was skeptical about Le Camp's budget
and was concerned about spending hard earned sponsor money on
"gourmet" luxury:
http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20121025.200948.bca7a335.en.html
"100k for food is just insane. We are neither GourmetConf (*) nor
should we. "
26-28 October, he visited Switzerland, met with local team members at
Le Camp, and on IRC reported that the budget was now OK due to the 40k
of anonymous sponsorship, and that is about where he stopped looking
at other options
<h01ger> and hug will arrange with the 2 anons to manage this properly.
(i delegated this detail to have it taken care by a budget minded
careful person. so not me just waving this)
<pocock> h01ger: what is meant by `anons'?
<h01ger> anonymous
moray, as you dont seem to be on #-sponsors atm:
<darst> I liked holger's estimate since it firmly paired amounts with
sponsors
<pocock> h01ger: they may be anonymous, but are they aware of the risk
profile? are they local sponsors or long term sponsors?
h01ger: and are they only willing to sponsor at Le Camp, or anywhere
in CH?
<h01ger> pocock, anon is anon and they are aware of the risk. and so
that -team doesnt only have to trust me i trust hug with clearing pesky
details. #-psonsors yetserday has some pesky details on this too
<darst> but h01ger's estimates are still not enough to balance, not close
<h01ger> darst, but close enough. we also estimated 50k income from
professinals+coorporate
and then wrote on 29 October that the money is
http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20121029.132401.59bef7b6.en.html
"secured"
When a DebConf chair refers to the money as "secured", that is not
just a rumor, that suggests it was a serious factor in the decision
making process.
So while you are right to point out the money is no longer part of the
budget since Philipp's email, it did appear to win Holger's support
for Le Camp and thus the subsequent discussions and decisions.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=F6DJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: