Re: [Debconf-team] [Debconf-discuss] "Anonymous donation" to Debconf 13
Hi,
On Montag, 3. Dezember 2012, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > The "anonymous donations" we got offered were rejected (by us)
> Why do you use scare quotes ?
for two reasons: a.) because they are not anonymous to me and b.) because I'm
not as fluent in english writing as others.
> I'm sorry to keep making trouble, but strings-attached offers of
> substantial amounts of money from anonymous donors are a serious
> matter. Even if the decision for Debconf13 is already finalised, we
> need to have transparency.
and you seriously think, the only way to achieve transparency are some ad-hoc
mails to -project? Organizing DebConf has been done transparently and in the
open since years, this is nothing new to us. (And yet still, there are aspects
of organizing a conference which cannot be done as open as one wishes (mostly
due to time constraints)).
> Your statement that these offers were rejected by the Debconf team
> doesn't seem consistent with the story I heard which is
I'm sorry that your sources of stories are not correct all the time.
(Actual thats quite normal with stories though. Ask 2 people about 1 story and
you get 3 replies :)
> (as far as I
> can make out) that the donors got cold feet and downgraded their offer
> from a donation to a loan, which latter obviously wasn't useful to
> Debconf. See for example Philipp Hug's email:
> http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20121102.150947.08f4206c.en.html
> Philipp says "it's now clear that they only wanted to provide DebConf
> with liquidity", which suggests that at some earlier point this wasn't
> clear and the suggestion appeared to be a donation.
The donors offer was a mix of load and donation (and indeed not fully thought
to the end) and they withdraw it basically at the same time we rejected it.
And, we choose to reject their offer before we had the 2nd meeting confirming
Le Camp. (And when we decided for the 1st time to go to Le Camp, this offer
wasnt on the table.) So, despite contrary claims (from someone who claims to
be able to read my mind..) this anonymous load/donation was never a factor
when deciding about the best possible venue for DebConf13.
Reality is sometimes more complicated than stories tell.
>
> Please would you also answer the rest of my questions.
> Particularly critical are:
>
> 6. Were the proposed donors in positions of authority or governance in
> relation to Debconf ?
no
> 3. Were any conditions attached ? If so what were the conditions ?
>
> It has been alleged that the conditions attached were that we hold
> DC13 at Le Camp. Again, would you please confirm or deny.
yes they were attached to Le Camp. I dont see this particularily good or bad,
as every year we have sponsors who donate because its in "their" country and
we also do activly seek for local sponsors for a venue - before and after a
venue has decided.
> I think the whole project is entitled to full and frank answers to all
> of my questions.
I disagree (at least about anyone having the right to come along at any time
and asking whatever silly question based on some stories. Those doing DebConf
organisation are volunteers and can and must decide on their own how to spend
their time best. And yes these volunteers need to work within the project, but
that doesnt mean every question has to be answered immediatly).
But please, lets not have *this* discussion *now* *also*. There will still be
plenty of time for this - eg we do have regular DebConf/Debian workshops at
DebConf.
cheers,
Holger
Reply to: