On 4/3/24 06:09, Peter Valentin wrote:
Hiya
I'd like to continue to support you
BUT I do NOT want to continue to support Paypal !
@ https://www.debian.org/donations.en.html
one is mislead to assume it is possible to donate withOUT using Paypal
if one goes via »Click & Pledge«
BUT »Click & Pl
Hi Peter,
Am 03.04.24 um 15:09 schrieb Peter Valentin:
I'd like to continue to support you
BUT I do NOT want to continue to support Paypal !
@ https://www.debian.org/donations.en.html
one is mislead to assume it is possible to donate withOUT using Paypal
if one goes via »Click & Pledge«
BUT »Cl
On 15/12/2014 16:09, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Brian Gupta wrote:
>> If you aren't a Paypal user, and don't wish to use Paypal, adding Paypal
>> support will have minimum impact on the processes you have been using.
[...]
> When I have suggested a few years back to accept
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Brian Gupta wrote:
> If you aren't a Paypal user, and don't wish to use Paypal, adding Paypal
> support will have minimum impact on the processes you have been using.
> There a a number of things that should be made clear:
> 1) We have no plans to EVER make Paypal the only wa
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Brian Gupta wrote:
> As someone who's pretty heavily involved in fundraising for Debian, I'd like
> to
> express my support for adding Paypal to the list of official methods to donate
> to Debian.
And if I can add a data point, PayPal is already mentioned on the donation
page
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> On 17/11/2014 10:15, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> On 17/11/14 at 16:09 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>>>
However, this is not a reason to bounce my email from -www@ to -project@
wi
On 17/11/2014 10:15, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 17/11/14 at 16:09 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>>
>>> However, this is not a reason to bounce my email from -www@ to -project@
>>> without making it clear that you did that (by forwarding it instead
On 17/11/14 at 16:09 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > However, this is not a reason to bounce my email from -www@ to -project@
> > without making it clear that you did that (by forwarding it instead of
> > bouncing it, for example).
>
> FTR, I
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> However, this is not a reason to bounce my email from -www@ to -project@
> without making it clear that you did that (by forwarding it instead of
> bouncing it, for example).
FTR, I was the one who bounced the message, not David.
--
bye,
Hi David,
On 16/11/14 at 18:31 -0400, David Prévot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le 16/11/2014 15:23, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > (resending to -www@, #681501 is now archived)
>
> Resending to project, and setting follow-up-to accordingly: this is
> about the public image of the project, it’s not limited to
Hi,
Le 16/11/2014 15:23, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> (resending to -www@, #681501 is now archived)
Resending to project, and setting follow-up-to accordingly: this is
about the public image of the project, it’s not limited to the point of
view and opinions of the people currently behind the websit
Hi,
Per http://www.spi-inc.org/donations/, PayPal donations may be made through
Network For Good:
https://www.networkforgood.org/donation/ExpressDonation.aspx?ORGID2=11-3390208
Thanks!
Luca
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:39:51PM +0100, Gisela Neira wrote:
> I want to how I can donate Dabian Proye
I want to how I can donate Dabian Proyect per paypal..., please...
Thanks,
Gisi
On 05/05/2013 05:05 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 12:14:36AM +0300, Vladislav Zorov wrote:
If it's possible to accept PayPal, an even better solution would be to just
use PayPal's donate button, thus most users will only need one click and
their PayPal passw
[ Cc += debian-sponsors-discuss ]
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 12:14:36AM +0300, Vladislav Zorov wrote:
> >> If it's possible to accept PayPal, an even better solution would be to just
> >> use PayPal's donate button, thus most users will only need one click and
> >> their PayPal password, avoiding the
Hi, Simon!
On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Simon Paillard wrote:
> However, the problem is that SPI / click&pledge applies mainly to US donators
> (example ffis is best for european donators).
That's not quite true, I'm from Bulgaria and it was much easier for me
to donate by credit card than b
Hello
[ raised on -www, CC'ing debian-project ]
Thanks Vladislav for your email.
On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 04:32:00AM +0300, Vladislav Zorov wrote:
> I've been using Debian for many years and many different purposes, so,
> of course, I wanted to donate. I went to debian.org, expecting to find
> a
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> + It would be preferable if the organizations holding assets in
> + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of
> + such assets, as an example:
It seems strange to use a conditional with no condition.
I suggest:
+ It is preferre
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I think it would be better to formulate a requirement that it must be a
> not-for-profit organization, but leave the choice on the tax-beneficial
> status to the people doing the actual organization.
I think there are many benefits from being a tax-beneficial
On 16 Jun 2006, Florian Weimer told this:
> Shouldn't this be parallel to the second instance below, that is
> "designated by the Project Leader or their Delegate(s)", instead of
> requiring delegation?
Right.
I think the following pseudo diff is pretty close to where I
want it
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 07:27:17AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 07:27:08AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: [...]
> > > Which countries can have no suitable organisations?
> >
> > I don't know, but I don't want to gamble on it not being an issue
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 07:27:08AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: [...]
> > Which countries can have no suitable organisations?
>
> I don't know, but I don't want to gamble on it not being an issue.
I've looked into this in the past and every example country
sug
* Manoj Srivastava:
>
> 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
>4.1. Powers
> Together, the Developers may:
> +6. Together with the Project Leader make decisions about
> + property held
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:51:02PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > I think that's the very case where we need the time to examine the
> > private vetting process, since there may be no external communication
> > before the announcement.
>
> Why wouldn't
4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
4.1. Powers
Together, the Developers may:
-6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about
- property held in trust for purposes re
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:51:02PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I think that's the very case where we need the time to examine the
> private vetting process, since there may be no external communication
> before the announcement.
Why wouldn't we just have a public vetting process that takes two
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 07:27:08AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The DPL could 'unvet' the first one and then vet the second one. [...]
>
> Even if it was vetted and failed, it was still vetted, unless there's
> time travel. I suggest that the vetting limit
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The DPL could 'unvet' the first one and then vet the second one. [...]
Even if it was vetted and failed, it was still vetted, unless there's
time travel. I suggest that the vetting limit wouldn't make sense.
> The point of the exercise is to avoid hav
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 14 Jun 2006, Don Armstrong said:
> > My fear is that some newly founded organization is veted by some
> > future Evil DPL, assets are transfered and dispersed wihtout
> > allowing some lead time for people to examine the situtation.
>
> what is eno
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Err, Would Evil DPL actually pay that much attention to the
> constitution?
Probably not, but who would hold them to the constitution?
Or would the constitution be rewritten to match DPL actions
after they've been actively working against its
On 14 Jun 2006, Don Armstrong said:
[Snipping away stuff that needs more thought to reply to]
>> Well, I am not sure. §4.2.2.2 means that such a decision by the DPL
>> can be immediately put on hold, well before any funds are
>> committed. I don't see how delaying decisions to authorize or
>> u
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060613 20:08]:
> Should we move the bit about SPI to an external no-foundation
> document? I would be open to that, but it would be nice if I see
> some indication other people agree with aj and me.
Has anyone asked the lawyers about the consequen
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 13 Jun 2006, Don Armstrong uttered the following:
> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> 9.1. Authority
> >>
> >> +3. Debian Developers are not agents or employees of such
> >> + organizations holding assets in trust for Deb
On 13 Jun 2006, Don Armstrong uttered the following:
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See
>> + §9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a
>> + electronic mailing list designated by theProject Lea
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See
> + §9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a
> + electronic mailing list designated by theProject Leader's
> + Delegate(s), which is accessible to all de
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian
> is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's
> Developers are currently members of SPI by virtue of their status as
> Developers.
s/currently members of/eligib
Hi,
Here is a version that incorporates suggestions from other
folks.
4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
4.1. Powers
Together, the Developers may:
-6. Together with the Project Le
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 09:39:33AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 12 Jun 2006, Anthony Towns uttered the following:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:46:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> ===
> >> 5. Project Leader
>
On 12 Jun 2006, Anthony Towns uttered the following:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:46:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> ===
>> 5. Project Leader
>> 5.1. Powers
>> The Project Leader may:
>> + 10. In consultation with the
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:46:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> ===
> 5. Project Leader
>5.1. Powers
> The Project Leader may:
> + 10. In consultation with the developers, make decisions affecting
> + prope
Wouter Verhelst wrote on 11/06/2006 09:54:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 02:39:45PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>>This should refer to another text listing the vetted organizations.
>>One outside the constitution so it can be changed as needed.
>
>
> That's usually bad practice in a constit
"Joe Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Money means "currency". Like with currency, plurals are not used to indicate
> the amount of the currency. However, when when talking about multiple types
> of currency (multiple types of money) you do use the plural.
Not necessarily multiple currencies, but any
"Wouter Verhelst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isn't "money" a word that cannot have a plural form? Not being a native
English speaker, it's pretty hard for me to tell, obviously...
Money means "currency". Like with currency, plurals are not used to indicate
th
Don't donate to feminist organizations. Donate to
fathers 4 justice or something similar instead. Why
donate to a organization that likes and apreciates
you, as a man, less and less. Debian respects freedom
of speech for women, they can complain about men all
they want and say whatever they want, t
Hi Manoj!
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-12 15:47]:
> OK, How about this:
(... Manojs suggestion ...)
That sounds fine imo.
Thanks for the work.
yours Martin
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian GNU/Linux - The Universal Operating System
Martin Klaffenboeck wrote:
> Ist unter
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:46:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> OK, How about this:
Heh. I was going to draft a proposal myself, after a bit of discussion.
Anyway, I guess it doesn't really matter who pushes it forward :-)
Some comments:
[...]
> ==
On 12 Jun 2006, MJ Ray said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> How about simplifying the strictures in the constitution to
>> something like this:
>
> That seems a substantial power transfer to the DPL, with the related
> loss of scrutiny. It may not cause problems now, but it's quite a
>
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 09:23:53AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > How about simplifying the strictures in the constitution to
> > something like this:
>
> That seems a substantial power transfer to the DPL, with the related loss
> of scrutiny. It may not
OK, How about this:
4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
4.1. Powers
Together, the Developers may:
-6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about
- property held in t
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> How about simplifying the strictures in the constitution to
> something like this:
That seems a substantial power transfer to the DPL, with the related loss
of scrutiny. It may not cause problems now, but it's quite a bet on
the financial prudence o
* Manoj Srivastava:
> On 11 Jun 2006, Martin Wuertele stated:
>
> ]Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> ]donations for the Debian Project must be made to any
> ]one of a set of organizations designated by the Project leader
> } or a delegate to be aut
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Why not just trust the DPL to be reasonable? The language is them
> much simpler, too.
Just to even avoid having to have a reasonable DPL,[1] we could also
require that changes to the list of organisations that are authorized
to hold Debian's assets
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> The point of the exercise is to avoid having so many organizations and
> so many bank accounts that we would need three professional accountants
> just to keep track. Perhaps I should have worded it as 'no more than one
> such organization shall be active per country'; [...
On 11 Jun 2006, Martin Wuertele stated:
] Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
] donations for the Debian Project must be made to any
] one of a set of organizations designated by the Project leader
} or a delegate to be authorized to handle such thi
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 12:40:39PM +0100, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:31:28AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> [...]
> > After all, you don't need such an organization in _every_
> > country; there are a number of countries that have treaties which make
> > monetary transac
Hi Manoj!
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-11 15:37]:
> Hi,
>
> How about simplifying the strictures in the constitution to
> something like this:
>
> ] Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> ] monetary donations for the Debian Project mus
Hi,
How about simplifying the strictures in the constitution to
something like this:
] Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
] monetary donations for the Debian Project must be made to any
] one of a set of organizations designated by the DPL to b
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 02:18:43PM +0200, Sylvain Sauvage wrote:
> Dimanche 11 juin 2006, 13:47:18 CEST, Sven Luther a écrit :
> >[...]
> > There was also talk of an EU regulation, which said that if an
> > association had tax-exemption in one of the EU countries, then this tax
> > exemption would
Dimanche 11 juin 2006, 13:47:18 CEST, Sven Luther a écrit :
>[...]
> There was also talk of an EU regulation, which said that if an
> association had tax-exemption in one of the EU countries, then this tax
> exemption would be valid in other countries of the EU too. If this is
> verified, it would
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 12:40:39PM +0100, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:31:28AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> [...]
> > After all, you don't need such an organization in _every_
> > country; there are a number of countries that have treaties which make
> > monetary transac
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:31:28AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
[...]
> After all, you don't need such an organization in _every_
> country; there are a number of countries that have treaties which make
> monetary transactions between them cheap (e.g., the EU).
s/EU/countries using the euro/ but
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:31:43AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 09:59:19AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Just for clarity, I'm not going to support maintaining a list as part of
> > the constitution; such a list should be outside of it.
>
> Notice that there was a preced
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 09:59:19AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Just for clarity, I'm not going to support maintaining a list as part of
> the constitution; such a list should be outside of it.
Notice that there was a precedent, in the list of fundation documents, which
is separate from the con
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 07:27:04AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Perhaps a formulation like
> >
> > Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> > monetary donations for the Debian Project must be made to an
> > organization that has
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 03:35:26PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Hello Wouter,
> On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 12:45 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Perhaps a formulation like
> >
> > Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> > monetary donations for the Debian Project mu
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 02:39:45PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> This should refer to another text listing the vetted organizations.
> One outside the constitution so it can be changed as needed.
That's usually bad practice in a constitution. You want to change the
constitution if the Debia
Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> donations for the Debian Project must be made to SPI, which
> manages such affairs.
>
> I think this is rather outdated; when it was written, the only
> organization
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Perhaps a formulation like
>
> Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> monetary donations for the Debian Project must be made to an
> organization that has been vetted by the DPL to be allowed to
> handle such th
On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 18:51 +0100, David Pashley wrote:
> Presumably because transfering money between countries involves
> non-neglegable cost, where as transfer of ownership of hardware
> doesn't[0].
I understand that - my point is that I don't see a clear reason to
*disallow* other of such "vet
On Jun 10, 2006 at 14:35, Thijs Kinkhorst praised the llamas by saying:
> Hello Wouter,
>
> I wonder why you open up the possibility for other organisations to keep
> money for Debian, but do not allow these organisations to have any
> non-monetary property for Debian.
>
Presumably because transf
On 10 Jun 2006, Goswin von Brederlow told this:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Perhaps a formulation like
>>
>> Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property,
>> any monetary donations for the Debian Project must be made
>> to an organization that has be
Hello Wouter,
On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 12:45 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Perhaps a formulation like
>
> Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> monetary donations for the Debian Project must be made to an
> organization that has been vetted by the DPL to
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 11:54:31PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> pe, 2006-06-09 kello 22:43 +0200, Florian Weimer kirjoitti:
>> > * MJ Ray:
>> > > any donations to debian must be given to SPI; or
>> >
>> > Why do you think this is so?
>>
>> Our Con
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 11:54:31PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> pe, 2006-06-09 kello 22:43 +0200, Florian Weimer kirjoitti:
> > * MJ Ray:
> > > any donations to debian must be given to SPI; or
> >
> > Why do you think this is so?
>
> Our Constitution, section 9.2:
>
> Since Debian has
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 11:54:08PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> Our Constitution, section 9.2:
>
> Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
> donations for the Debian Project must be made to SPI, which
> manages such affairs.
>
> I think this
pe, 2006-06-09 kello 22:43 +0200, Florian Weimer kirjoitti:
> * MJ Ray:
>
> > any donations to debian must be given to SPI; or
>
> Why do you think this is so?
Our Constitution, section 9.2:
Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
donations for the Debian Pr
* MJ Ray:
> any donations to debian must be given to SPI; or
Why do you think this is so?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...]
> > > Wow, in what sense are donations *not received by SPI* "earnings"?
>
> MJR> It's money given to an SPI member project for whom any donations
> MJR> must be made to SPI. How can they be earnings of anyone else?
>
> Because they've never been *given*
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/07/2006 04:20 AM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 07:27:03AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
>
>>I don't know the status of holdings in Australia and Brazil.
>>Are they retained profits from events? DebConf6 seemed to
>>be privately run fo
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 07:27:03AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> I don't know the status of holdings in Australia and Brazil.
> Are they retained profits from events? DebConf6 seemed to
> be privately run for debian, supported by SPI. I assumed
> that any surplus will be donated to debian, but I don't k
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> This is an interesting point. The Debian constitution appears to assume
> that SPI will be the only organization holding property in trust for Debian;
> but this hasn't been the case for some time -- ffis, e.V. in Germany has
> received Debian donations for yea
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 02:56:51PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> For that matter, how is this a decision about property held in trust for
> Debian? Before being received from the donor, the money is not held in
> trust for Debian; so giving someone your blessing to receive that money
> doesn't se
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 07:27:09AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > In particular, the Constitution says that `[a person] must not
> > actively work against these rules and decisions properly made under
> > them'.
> > If you want you can hold a GR to reverse the DPL's dec
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In particular, the Constitution says that `[a person] must not
> actively work against these rules and decisions properly made under
> them'.
>
> If you want you can hold a GR to reverse the DPL's decision but you
> must not interfere with people who are carrying
McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Any of these are fine, and will see your donation used to improve Debian.
So you can see that the DPL has explicitly endorsed Debian UK as a
mechanism for donating for Debian.
Therefore, I trust there will be no more statements like this one:
Hi Donna,
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 04:38:11PM +0100, Donna Orlowski wrote:
> We are a UK based company and we use Debian for all our existing
> servers. We'd like to make a direct donation into Debian account and I
> was wondering if we could get you international wire transfer details?
> We'd l
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 07:27:05AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> [...]
> > There have been fixes, but it is a second party and no charity.
>
> Why not?
I don't know. Ask the leaders of the Debian UK Society.
As I understand it, they are unwilling to register
On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 07:27:05AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
[...]
> The above is true, isn't it? The Debian-UK Society also arguably
> ignores the long-standing "Debian does not sell any products"
> assurance to Debian vendors, but maybe it's not part of Debian,
> so maybe not. There have been fixes,
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060526 15:21]:
> > Steve is an officer of a trader called the Debian-UK Society.
> > It is not a charity. Please make donations to SPI directly.
>
> What's that? Can you *please* stop throwing shit on Debian UK? Debian
> UK was et
On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 07:27:06AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Donna, please ignore MJ Ray on that. He is a know troll regarding Debian
> > UK.
> If you want to suggest people donate to a debian commercial
> enterprise, tell them to send me the money. If you want
On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 07:27:06AM +0100, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Donna, please ignore MJ Ray on that. He is a know troll regarding Debian
> > UK.
>
> If you want to suggest people donate to a debian commercial
> enterprise, tell them to send me th
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Donna, please ignore MJ Ray on that. He is a know troll regarding Debian
> UK.
If you want to suggest people donate to a debian commercial
enterprise, tell them to send me the money. If you want them
to donate to the project, ask them to donate to a charity tha
As our company greatly uses Debian for all our servers I don't wish to
have this dispute effect our intentions. That's why I'd like to inform
you that we still will be happy to donate the money however we will do
it directly to Software in the Public Interest, Inc
Regards,
Donna Orlowski
Co
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060526 15:21]:
> Steve is an officer of a trader called the Debian-UK Society.
> It is not a charity. Please make donations to SPI directly.
What's that? Can you *please* stop throwing shit on Debian UK? Debian
UK was etablished following the Debian procedures. If y
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060526 15:21]:
> Martin Zobel-Helas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > IIRC Debian UK guys have also some bank accounts. CCed Steve for that.
>
> Steve is an officer of a trader called the Debian-UK Society.
> It is not a charity. Please make donations to SPI directly.
Donna,
Martin Zobel-Helas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> IIRC Debian UK guys have also some bank accounts. CCed Steve for that.
Steve is an officer of a trader called the Debian-UK Society.
It is not a charity. Please make donations to SPI directly.
--
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lynn, Norfolk, England
My Opinio
Hi Kari,
On Thursday, 25 May 2006, you wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 04:38:11PM +0100, Donna Orlowski wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > We are a UK based company and we use Debian for all our existing
> > servers. We'd like to make a direct donation into Debian account and I
> > was wondering if
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 04:38:11PM +0100, Donna Orlowski wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> We are a UK based company and we use Debian for all our existing
> servers. We'd like to make a direct donation into Debian account and I
> was wondering if we could get you international wire transfer details?
Sof
98 matches
Mail list logo