On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 10:50:35AM +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > On Sun Jun 21, 2020 at 19:02:06 -0400, Michael Schultheiss wrote: > > Luca Filipozzi wrote: > > > @all: Having slept on things, I'm changing my position from (2a) to (2c) > > > since it is more appropriate to correct the lack of charging Debian 5% > > > on sponsorships than it is to correct the actual/perceived > > > miscommunication between Debian and SPI. > > > > > > So, for clarity: > > > - do not refund Debian for 2016-2019; do not charge fees on Debian > > > sponsorships prior to 2016; do not refund other projects (2c) > > > - charge all projects' donations and sponsorships the same 5% fee, which > > > is the current practice (3b) > > > > > > @president: kindly consider revising the draft resolution per above > > > since there are now several of us in holding this view. > > Resolution 2020-06-22.mcs.1: > > Conferences and SPI 5% fee > > > > WHEREAS > > > > 1. Software in the Public Interest, Inc. (SPI) is a Debian Trusted > > Organization. > > > > 2. The annual Debian Conference (Debian) utilizes SPI to collect > > some of the conference sponsorship funds. > > > > 3. SPI has inconsistently charged its 5% administrative fee for > > conference sponsorships. > > > > 4. SPI has not yet determined the effect of waiving the 5% > > administrative fee for conference sponsorships in perpetuity. > > > > THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES THAT > > > > 1. Going forward, SPI will consistently charge all projects donations > > and conference sponsorships a 5% administrative fee, as is SPI's > > current practice. > > > > 2. SPI will not retroactively charge Debian its 5% adminsitrative fee for > > Debian conferences held prior to 2016. > > > > 3. SPI will not refund associated projects the 5% adminsitrative fee for > > conferences held 2016-2019. > > This resolution still has not addressed my concern, that this resolution > speaks about Debian / DebConf only here, while we also have other > associated projects, that might also be affected.
@Martin Zobel-Helas: Doesn't resolution clause #1, which says "all projects" (plural possessive apostrophe missing) address your concern on a go-forward basis? The other two clauses are specifically about answering specific Debian/DebConf questions because they are the only associate project who was treated differently (to the best of my knowledge). @Michael Schultheiss: I have a vet appointment at 20:30 UTC, so if you'd be so kind as to put this resolution at the beginning of the agenda, I'd appreciate it. -- Luca Filipozzi _______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
