On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:04:53PM -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
I vote Yes and C, but I want to propose that we donate the money in
My thought is 3 separate $1,200 donations separated by 6 months each.
My main reasoning is to ensure there is a balance between income and
expenditures since we already have a good amount of money budgeted to
be spent this year, we don't really know how the fundraising is going
and can't ask Bradley for more frequent updates, and we won't have any
income from Google from SoC this year.
Actually, Bradley has resumed more frequent updates lately.
Here's where we're at currently:
FY2012 12-Mar-02 - 13-Feb-28 Inc:Inkscape:Donations $6,389.29 $6,389.29
FY2013 13-Mar-05 - 14-Feb-28 Inc:Inkscape:Donations $7,637.61 $7,637.61
FY2014 14-Mar-03 - 15-Feb-28 Inc:Inkscape:Donations $13,066.98 $13,066.98
FY2015 15-Mar-01 - 15-Mar-16 Inc:Inkscape:Donations $2,778.88 $2,778.88
FY2014 14-Dec-05 - 15-Feb-28 Assets:PayPal $6,153.39 $6,153.39
FY2015 15-Mar-01 - 15-Mar-16 Assets:PayPal $2,275.68 $2,275.68
The general fund has an income of around $6-7k per year, or an income
rate of about $500/month. I had been concerned previously that the
hackfest would steal all our donors and starve the general fund, but you
can see even though people are definitely favoring to donate to the
hackfest, we're still getting general fund donations (just for first
half of March we're already at $2778 - $2275 = $503).
And with $8k received so far for the hackfest, it is looking a lot more
likely that we'll be able to cover most of the expenses directly, and
maybe end up cash positive.
I am still not fond that the fsa includes the donation language,
because it seems as if they don't trust us. It will be a donation (or
donations), and us pledging should be good enough for them.
True; it seems odd to specify a donation in the FSA itself. Certainly,
I could see it included in the FSA text if it's considered a required
membership fee we must pay. If it truly is up to us to optionally
choose whether or not to donate and/or how much, then you could argue
maybe it would be better handled as an independent matter?
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Bryce Harrington
> A majority vote of the current board members is required for the following
> proposal relating to retroactive payment to SFC.
> 1. In light of the services provided by the Software Freedom Consortium to
> date, given on voluntary basis, should we provide a retroactive
> donation to the SFC?
> [ ] Yes, donate to SFC in thanks for their past support.
> [ ] No. We should pay only the required 10% fee going forward
> from date of signature of the new FSA.
> 2. Assuming we should donate to the SFC, how much should we donate to
> [ ] a. 10% of gross income since we have been a member (9 years).
> [ ] b. 10% of gross income since initiation of FSA #2 discussions
> [ ] c. A flat amount of $400 per year that we have been a member
> (2009). This amounts to $3600.
> [ ] d. A flat amount of $400 per year since FSA #2 (2012).
> This amounts to $1200.
> [ ] e. Some other amount:
> Tav writes,
> "I agree with Josh and Ted that a donation to the SFC is appropriate for
> their past work on our behalf. Can we agree on the amount? I would
> propose $400 for each year we have been a member. We have been a member
> for 9 years so that would be $3600.
> This assumes that the 10% kicks in on the date the new FSA is approved.
> We were asked by Bradley to provide 10% of our revenue to SFC in 2012:
> (b) As I've discussed with a number of you, including Jon, Josh and
> Tavmjong, Inkscape has received fiscal sponsorship services
> from Conservancy at no charge since 2006. Back when
> Conservancy was founded, I was an SFLC employee and SFLC was
> subsidizing my time -- effectively donating staff time to
> Conservancy. This ceased in early 2008, and I served as a
> volunteer for Conservancy on nights/weekends until 2011, when I
> became a full-time employee -- which was the only way to keep
> it going with the services it promises (the other option would
> have been to shut down Conservancy). Since then, to maintain
> legal services as part of the service plan once SFLC shrunk
> further, we hired Tony as well. We get a lot done with a staff
> of two, but obviously we need financial resources to be able to
> provide these services.
> Conservancy's Board of Directors voted about a year ago that
> all member projects should be required to give 10% of their
> earmarked revenue to support Conservancy to continue to provide
> services. This is a standard way for a fiscal sponsor to
> operate, and we were lucky before that we weren't required to
> do this, and I'd been waiting to bother Inkscape with this
> since you are one of our older members. (We haven't taken a new
> member for anything other than 10% in a few years, BTW). I
> hope a 10% arrangement as we use with other projects now will
> be acceptable to you, and I and Tony are happy to discuss
> further this issue.
> In December 2012, we voted generally favorable to paying the 10% fee
> going forward from 2012. There were questions regarding pass-thru of
> Google SOC payments and so on, but generally favored the basic idea:
> For comparison, Software in the Public Interest (SPI), an organization
> analogous to the SFC, provides similar services and takes 5% of net
> (after credit card, etc. fees):
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> Inkscape-board mailing list