Re: [Debconf-team] sponsorship allocation team & request
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> wrote:
> If we're getting to this stage, then something has gone wrong with the
> travel sponsorship already. People are expected (and told) to just
> list the amount they *must* have sponsorship for in order to be able
> to travel. Given that, offering 20% or 30% of that amount is not going
> to help.
The amount of money that one *must receive*, and the amount that is
*really helpful* aren't necessary the same. And I think people are
usually inclined to ask for the second one. Last year we actually
talked about having two fields. A "must" and a "would be nice"
field... What happened with that?
> Do we believe that people are asking for more than they need?
Sometimes, yes. Sometimes, no. But that's not really the point of
the even distribution of money instead of the bucket filling. Bucket
filling means that the people that are last in the queue might not get
anything at all. With even distribution, if we get 80% of the asked
travel sponsorship money, we can help everybody with 80% of what they
asked instead of leaving 20% of people with nothing.
I do believe that we would have to make priority queues, putting
people that we absolutely want to sponsor in one queue, and people
that would be nice to sponsor in the other, and then be more generous
with the first queue (aiming for 100% if possible) and give only as
much as is available for the second one.
--
Besos,
Marga
Reply to: