Re: questions about audit and budget processes
On 03/03/16 19:16, martin f krafft wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> as I said before, you raise points that are (a) mostly valid and
> (b) not new. I don't want to discuss this without concrete steps
> coming of it, and all you ever do is ask questions.
>
> Allow me to refute your point about portfolio management though,
> and offer two ideas about alternative uses of the money.
>
> also sprach Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.pro> [2016-03-03 15:18
> +0100]:
>> Why wouldn't people also potentially volunteer some time for
>> portfolio management?
>
> I'd consider this a really bad idea. Portfolio management is
> perhaps *the* profession that benefits the most from a professional
> (or at least one of them), contract-based separation between client
> and actor, with extrinsic motivation of the actor. Even that's
> impossible to properly tie down, but I certainly would never want
> to see some people point fingers at others and claiming that they
> have lost us money because the markets didn't do as they'd have
> hoped.
>
> Would these volunteers invest in Microsoft? Google? Apple? Nestlé?
> Weapons manufacturers? Companies that exploit resources?
>
That's not fair, you shouldn't make a list like that without including
tobacco companies.
Anyhow, I understand the point you are making, I'd be interested to
know if many other people feel the same reluctance or have other opinions.
>> Personally I'd rather avoid seeing Debian become either a lender
>> or borrower, unless the transaction was very conservative or
>> highly strategic.
>
> FSconservancy would be highly strategic, and while we don't have
> any other uses for the money, they can use it to defend our cause,
> and we'd benefit even if the loan was never repaid.
>
In that case, donors should have given money directly to Conservancy,
although I personally don't mind if some Debian money went that way.
> An alternative use of our money would be to spend it on sprints,
> outsourcing of tasks, such as accountancy (and organisation of
> sprints/events) to third parties, as well as using some of it to
> design and fund a proper marketing campaign.
>
> I'll eat a broom (with stick, German idiom) if we didn't manage to
> replace the substance with a cash flow before it's depleted,
> assuming it's done properly with enough freedom and the project's
> backing.
>
I would agree that spending it productively is a form of investment.
There are valid arguments for spending the whole lot in just one year,
some organizations do this to show their donors that they have
pressing uses for more money.
Regards,
Daniel
Reply to: