Hi, On Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2012, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > Richard Darst <r...@zgib.net> writes: > > A while ago, I talked with some people about the DC13 local > > organization. There were some interesting things about it
thanks for bringing this up now, Richard. I do think it's important we update http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/MoneyFlow to reflect the reality for DebConf13 as soon as possible. (And keep the old info from DC12.) > > First off, DC13.ch plans on having all DC13 money go through it. > > For example, most years, sponsors pay to etiher SPI or FFIS, and > > then the money is transferred to wherever it is needed, or used in the > > hempsiphere for travel sponsorship. It allows transfer of money from > > continent to continent from year to year. well, indeed I see no point why eg travel-sponsorhip (should we have it) should go via d13.ch if it ends up in .de or .us. But I do expect mosts expenses to be paid in .ch. > > The DC13 plan involves having all money go to DC13.ch, wherever it > > comes from. [Or: not physically moving the money, but acconting it as > > DC13.ch assets]. This would subject all money to Swiss financial > > rules. And this is why VAT was such a concern. I understand this as dc13.ch maintaining a budget, which is obviouly wrong, as I expect those doing this do this together in debconf-team svn^wgit. I'm very happy seeing Phillipp and Richard work together on this the way they do. If thats the dc13 plan (which I believe it is), yay. Please correct me if I miss something. > > I had tried to suggest some of the money not go through DC13.ch, but > > it seems since DC13.ch is defined as running DebConf13, and Debconf13 > > is a certain event, that gets legally iffy. I'm sure we can (and should) do DebConf13 in a way, that involves dc13.ch doing (as in moneyflow) DebConf13 locally, while of course various other organisations can pay whatever costs directly. If SPI/ffis cover costs, it's not dc13.ch's business. > I'm a bit surprised that this comes up now. We discussed this with > several people during DC12 (including the Debian auditors present) and > they all seemed to agree to our assessment of the situation. Also some > of the points were raised and mentioned during the discussion about the > DebConf 13 association. But it may not have been obvious to everyone > then because it was framed a bit differently. Whatever was discussed and agreed during DC12 is not documented on http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/MoneyFlow - so let's do this now. > Also the timing of this discussion is a bit bad. I would prefer to > postpone this issue until after the decision if we want to stay with the > plan to have DebConf 13 at Le Camp or if we want to go somewhere else is > taken. I don't these two issues are related and this issue is not very > pressing. Though we should decide about this soon afterwards. I think we can well do this in parallel, and it's not urgent now anyway. cheers, Holger _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
