[kde-community] Fundraiser money handling/redistribution - Re: KDE fundraisers and things we've learned

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dimarts, 30 de desembre de 2014, a les 23:55:47, Boudewijn Rempt va 
escriure:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > I did not suggest at any point that "you" should give "me" any money.
> > (Note
> > this is your words with "you" and "me", i've never made this about any
> > specific project nor person).
> 
> Irrelvant, substitute "Krita Foundation" or "Timothee Giet" or "KDE e.V."
> where applicable, surely you understand that.
> 
> >> That's so extremely basic that I have no idea how to start explaining
> >> this
> >> in a more clear way, so here's a question:
> >> 
> >> You mentioned
> >> 
> >> "You say that fund raising is not a zero-sum game, that's right, and
> >> that's the reason why i said "some percentage" should be payed by the
> >> "specificly raised funds" and not 100%."
> >> 
> >> in your other answer to a mail of mine. That basically boils down to
> >> imposing a KDE e.V. tax to projects in the KDE community that raise funds
> >> for their project.
> > 
> > How would the KDE e.V. impose any tax?
> 
> You say "i said "some percentage" should be payed by the "specificly
> raised funds" " -- which is pretty much the definition of a tax. I don't
> know how KDE e.V. would impose that percentage, but I guess you thought
> about that when making the suggestion.

No, if i was giving you 100 and now i give you "only" 50, that's not a tax.

> > To repeat my original proposal in case it was misunderstood; I am
> > suggesting that it may make sense that projects that run their own
> > fundraisers should share the cost of sprints since they're generating
> > their own income.
> Why? Heck, a lot of people attending sprints these days are generating
> their own income. Why shouldn't they share the costs? 

They do, they pay for their own food and they spend their holidays doing KDE 
work instead of being on a beach/mountain/home/wherever with their 
friends/family/alone/whatever.

> Not that I don't think we should cut down on support for sprints. The
> Calligra sprint was big failure, at least one person only attending
> because they got a free trip out of it. 

That has nothing to do with this discussion. I hope it was reported to the 
board and organizer so this free-loader either didn't get sponsored or won't 
be sponsored again.

> And heck again, Krita only had
> sprints in 2005 (self-funded, since nobody knew about sprints back then),
> 2010, 2011 and 2014... It's not like Krita's wasting KDE e.V.'s money
> while it's flush with cash itself.

Again it's you bringing the names, not me.

> >> Projects that raise money for development are making KDE bigger.
> > 
> > As said in the paragraphs above, i don't think anybody would disagree with
> > this, but can't speak for everybody.
> 
> I feel your logic boils down to this:
> 
> * you see projects doing fund raisers, and sometimes even making their
> goals
> 
> * you see those projects asking for the same support from KDE e.V. as
> projects who don't do that
> 
> * you feel that's unfair. They got money -- why are they asking KDE e.V.
> for support?
> 
> And then it goes on from there to the rationalization that it is unfair
> because projects that do fund raisers take money that would otherwise be
> donated to KDE e.V., so it's fair that they pay for what other projects
> would get funded from KDE e.V.

Ok, let's ignore that some money of those fund rasiers may or may not go to 
the KDE e.V. if the fund raiser did not happen and go back to your previous 
example.

X and Y are to childs, their parents pay for everything they need.

X has grown and is generating some money on its own, cool! Congratz to him for 
starting to be a grown up person.

Their parents have decided that since X is making some money he'll have to buy 
its own clothes from now on, they will still pay the clothes for Y because 
he's still a child.

Of course the parents still take care of the big things like holidays that 
neither X nor Y can afford.

In the future the situation may change and X loses his job, parents will 
obviously go back to buying his clothes.

I think that this conveys the idea of what i am proposing quite well. What 
part do you disagree with?

Cheers,
  Albert

> 
> Boudewijn
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community