[kde-usa] KDE U.S. NPO

[Steve Hay]

Just some thoughts, as a newcomer here:

It sounds like there are four possibilities which have not been ruled
out: (1) ASF, (2) SPI, (3) SFC, (4) no sponsor. From here, one
possibility is to downselect and further investigate a subset of these
options. (It sounds like Jeff has done this in the past. He
downselected to SFC on the basis of patent protection and provided a
proposal to the Board.) However, it sounds like the Board prefers to
have a more explicit comparison of the options. What about putting
together an analysis of all four options and make a recommendation
from that?

I have not looked at ASF (Option 1), but it does look like the costs
and benefits of SPI membership (Option 2) is laid out pretty clearly
on their website, so that information (as Jeff said) seems pretty much
at hand. If we have a good idea about what these organizations do for
us, then the no sponsor (Option 4) research is done. Remaining tasks
would be to get the pertinent ASF information and compare the options.

I personally have no expertise in the non-profit area. I am just an
engineer. But living in DC, I have a few friends that work in the
non-profit area and I will poke around to see if I can get any input
or advice from them.

Steve

On 5/9/12, Lydia Pintscher <lydia at kde.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Jeff Mitchell <mitchell at kde.org> wrote:
>> On 5/9/2012 6:06 AM, Claudia Rauch wrote:
>>> On 9 May 2012 03:12, Steve Hay <hay.steve at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Jeff,
>>>>
>>>> Is this a matter of the board having other priorities and putting this
>>>> issue
>>>> aside, or are there issues being raised with the terms which have been
>>>> offered? Would it make sense to get a proposal from SPI as well, so the
>>>> two
>>>> can be directly compared?
>>>
>>> I think it is mostly a matter of other priorities, but Lydia, maybe
>>> you can comment. I suppose it won't hurt to get a proposal from SPI.
>>
>> I think it's both other priorities and the fact that what the SFC offers
>> has come at increasingly high of a (financial) cost, making it a much
>> less obvious decision.
>>
>> In the past we've looked at ASF, SPI, going it ourselves, and other
>> possibilities. I'm not sure it's worth getting a proposal from SPI at
>> this point (actually I'm not even sure what they would put in a proposal
>> as IIRC they're pretty up-front about what services they provide). The
>> SFC's patent indemnity bits were a very strong argument in their favor
>> as those of us in the U.S. can imagine.
>>
>> Really we're just waiting for the board to make a decision about whether
>> the SFC's particular benefits outweigh the financial cost. Once they
>> make that decision, we'll either be going with the SFC, or we'll have
>> another look at the other umbrella orgs and options, including SPI.
>
> Hmm I guess this is where the problem is then. We don't currently have
> a concrete proposal on the board's table that we can say yes or no to.
> And it wasn't high enough on the priority list to follow up and get
> such a proposal. Sorry :/
> If one of the previous things is considered as such a proposal by you
> then please do follow up on that again because at least I don't
> remember one right that was a yes/no one.
> Personally I'd absolutely love to see someone look into SPI as an
> option closer if someone has the time for it.
>
>
> Cheers
> Lydia
>
> --
> Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
> KDE Community Working Group / KDE e.V. board member
> http://kde.org - http://open-advice.org
>


-- 
Sent from my iRetina BrainPad