Re: [Debconf-team] not a registration fee, but...
On 23/10/12 10:04, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 09:06:51PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>> On 22/10/12 20:45, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
>>
>>> My issue with a registration fee is on principle. We organize a
>>> DebConf because it gives value to Debian. Important work is done
>>> there. Most attendees do pay a sensible cost to be there — Besides
>>> the travel fees (some of which we sponsor), we all pay with our
>>> volunteer time. Some won't have a family vacation because they
>>> devote that time to DebConf. Some are losing money because they
>>> work as contractors. Some are lucky and just have to face
>>> accumulation of work.
>>>
>>> Going to DebConf is not a vacation. It is an investment. We all
>>> work hard, each on their own area. I do not think we should
>>> insinuate there is a charge for being part of this.
>>>
> Fully ACK for Gunnar. We have some principles in DebConf and we should
> not break these.
>
>
>> Just to be clear: I agree with the principle of that. But if we
>> advertise a fee, people can use that as a justification to claim
>> funding from various sources.
>>
> People can (and always have been) used traveling costs as justification
> to claim funding. There is no need for any extra proof that DebConf
> needs sponsoring.
>
>
Those are only private travel costs that people are claiming, it is good
that people can obtain funds for that, but it doesn't help the DebConf
budget itself.
> I also do not agree to the principle Daniel suggested to spread the
> gathering of sponsors to <number of participants> shoulders. Our
> primary goal is to develop Debian (currently fixing RC bugs) and not to
> keep people busy to ask around for money. IMHO the main organisers of
> DebConf always did a good and way more effective job in gathering
> sponsors than single persons could do - and I use this chance to thank
> all those people involved into this hereby.
>
Andreas, you are completely correct to focus on this point. But keep in
mind the fact that DebConf13 in Switzerland will not be cheap, and
distributing the fundraising workload is just one of many alternatives.
So while you are not a fan of this concept, would you say this proposal
is the `lesser evil' compared to the discussion about not providing
meals at DebConf, or the option to leave out DebCamp week?
Right now, every possible cost cutting option has been unpopular. But
we know that we have to do something different for DC13 given the size
of the budget, and we will have to find which one is the `lesser evil'.
To take this concept off on another tangent, could we create private
sponsorship pages for individuals, e.g. http://pocock.debconf.org for
people to collect small donations and give publicity to their donors?
By doing this through DebConf, it may also make the donations tax
deductible (and maybe we could even tap into things like UK gift aid,
another 30% bonus for funds coming from the UK)
Reply to: