These are some good ideas. A laptop and a further budget should the SFC
need it would be completely possible to do as a second and third votes.
I'd actually have a laptop after the trial period for example.
Interesting that the SFC didn't push us to give them more room when we
asked them (three times) about the budgeting levels, but if they find
themselves needing more later, we can hold that required vote. Maybe
they are finding their feet and will come back, but I don't believe
it's going to be a big problem to have this process continue.
We can't keep hitting the emergency break when there's future details
to be worked out. Momentum is a resource we shouldn't waste.
On Fri, 2022-02-11 at 09:37 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
I really like the job description and I'm excited to see progress
something that I think is important to have moving forward with the
project. However, I do have some concerns with what is written.
The budget seems way too low. I'm not sure how the number of $50K was
arrived at, but in my experience payroll taxes in the US are about
40%. And the last time we talked to SFC about a full-time position
they recommended 60% with benefits. Not sure if what the policy at
SFC is regarding part-time work and benefits, but US tradition is
that part-time work does not include benefits. But, my understanding
is that in Europe payroll taxes are roughly at that point (they don't
make benefits optional). So I think we need to budget: $45K * 1.6 =
$72K at least for salary. I'd recommend $75K.
Also, I think we need to budget some "startup costs" with bringing on
someone new. Specifically a laptop that they can use for work but
perhaps also a good microphone and camera. Maybe that is the extra
$3K I rounded above, but I'd say we should expect others and make the
The committees for selection is really interesting. I've not done a
two stage anonymized selection process like that before, but I do
like the idea there. I think that we either need to have a process
for selecting the members of the committees or a list of names. I'd
suggest a list of names to make the process easier. But I think it
our responsibility as members of the PLC to ensure the selection of
folks is equitable and represents the project. Also, I think we
should name someone to shepherd this through (annoy people about
deadlines to review resumes, etc.) It is something we're bad at, and
why we're hiring this position as they'd be the person to do it in
the future, but I think we need someone with that responsibility to
make this successful.
Sadly, the voting options on this referendum are reductive and
clearly chosen to decrease collaboration. That leaves me to vote b,
as I think the proposal as stated (and sent without source) will not
work, though I do not agree with the text associated with the option.
On Feb 10 2022, at 4:40 pm, Martin Owens <doctormo(a)geek-2.com> wrote:
> Dear Inkscape Leadership Committee,
> Your attention is required for the following vote. Following our
> meetings with the SFC we have concluded the final job description
> the hiring process details. A big thank you to everyone who has put
> much time in this long process.
> - Background -
> The final documents are attached as a PDF. The first is our
> notes condensed for review. The second is the full process for
> worked out with the SFC and the final part is the actual job
> description to be sent to the SFC for advertising.
> A small about of the budget has been set aside for any SFC
> administration costs. The job salary is $30-$45k while the budget
> $50k for the full year.
> - Vote -
> a. Send the Job Description and confirm the budget of $50k for the
> full year contract.
> b. Do not hire a project coordinator
> This vote will be open until Friday Feburary 18th 2022. Please get
> vote in before or on that date.
> Thanks everyone.
> Let's move the project forwards!
> Inkscape Board of Directors mailing list --
> To unsubscribe send an email to
Inkscape Board of Directors mailing list --
To unsubscribe send an email to