Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Hi Caryl, I confess I love sharing my planning expertise with Sugar Labs :D Open Badges is a proposal made in the call for strategies for the official Sugar Labs Marketing Plan. I suggest you transform a lot of your interesting comments into specific proposals so that the community and the

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

ony Anderson Cc: sugar-...@lists.sugarlabs.org; iaep; SLOBs Subject: Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget 2017-03-02 3:32 GMT-05:00 Tony Anderson <tony_ander...@usa.net<mailto:tony_ander...@usa.net>>: On 03/02/2017 02:51 PM, Laura Vargas wrote: As for the 2017 Budget, Sugar Labs needs d

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

2017-03-02 3:32 GMT-05:00 Tony Anderson : > On 03/02/2017 02:51 PM, Laura Vargas wrote: > >> As for the 2017 Budget, Sugar Labs needs doable specific proposals for >> funding and investing as a healthy financial planning should consider a >> minimum of 5 years ahead. >> > >

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On 03/02/2017 02:51 PM, Laura Vargas wrote: As for the 2017 Budget, Sugar Labs needs doable specific proposals for funding and investing as a healthy financial planning should consider a minimum of 5 years ahead. The real need is not for financial planning, but for planning. A real five-year

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

2017-03-01 22:38 GMT-05:00 Tony Anderson : > Sorry Laura > > The money is better kept in the bank until Sugar Labs has an objective and > understands what kind of resources it needs. > > Thanks for writing Tony! First and for the sake of democracy, let's make it clear to

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

+1 Tony you deserved an Oscar. Am i the only thinking we just got a mission and vision plan based on Tony explanation? Samson On 2 Mar 2017 3:44 am, "Tony Anderson" wrote: I hope I have made myself clear. The future of Sugar Labs, if it has any, is to provide Sugar on

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Sorry Laura The money is better kept in the bank until Sugar Labs has an objective and understands what kind of resources it needs. It is good that Sugar Labs is considering a budget for this year (a gross dereliction last year). However, an organization makes a budget to fund its planned

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

I hope I have made myself clear. The future of Sugar Labs, if it has any, is to provide Sugar on all widely distributed platforms so that it becomes a viable option for potential adopters. Sugar Labs needs to understand that a parent or educator who is looking for an educational platform is

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

2017-02-25 20:33 GMT-05:00 Tymon Radzik : > > Our funds deserve to be spent in more orgnization-beneficial way. > > Hello Tymon, Sorry it took me a while to reply. This Budget discussion is an open door for proposals, please do share yours as this policy making is also an

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Thanks for clarifying :) The question remains then: Is Sugar Labs to direct attention entirely to a few hundreds of very-to-somewhat old XO laptops maintained by experts like Tony and those in Caacupe, or to the millions of children who have computers/tablets capable of accessing/installing

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

All models are obviously xo-1, xo-1.5, xo-1.75 and xo-4. Sugarizer is not relevant since the XOs deploy Sugar. The Sugarizer activities are mostly also available as Sugar web activities. We are using the Python Turtle blocks. Tony On 02/28/2017 02:29 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: On Feb 27,

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On Feb 27, 2017 11:34 PM, "Tony Anderson" wrote: For what it's worth, Sugar 0.110 (OLPC OS 13.2.8) has been installed on hundreds of XO laptops, all models in Rwanda. The codebase is reaching these classrooms. That is great to know!!! :) What xo models are those? Does

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

For what it's worth, Sugar 0.110 (OLPC OS 13.2.8) has been installed on hundreds of XO laptops, all models in Rwanda. The codebase is reaching these classrooms. I am not sure what you mean by the js codebase, but if you mean the sugar web activities. Yes they are available for optional

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Hi On 26 February 2017 at 09:32, Samson Goddy wrote: > > At the last meeting, walter gave (Ignacio, Laura and me) tasks on how we can > attract funding to the Community, i came up with the idea of creating > awareness to the general public through SMM role. Which

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Dave Crossland wrote: > Hi > > On 26 February 2017 at 11:44, Sebastian Silva > wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > On 25/02/17 20:33, Tymon Radzik wrote: > > > >> Sugar Labs is by its statement volunteer-driven project. We are

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On 26/02/17 05:50, Dave Crossland wrote: >> I now regret having opened the door to paid efforts > I think with this message the door is now closed! Also from the same book, chapter /"The hidden costs of ignoring infrastructure"/: /One reason why open source contributors are strikingly more

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Hi On 26 February 2017 at 11:44, Sebastian Silva wrote: > Hello all, > > On 25/02/17 20:33, Tymon Radzik wrote: > >> Sugar Labs is by its statement volunteer-driven project. We are volunteers. >> We work for the idea of the free and open software and not for own

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On 26 February 2017 at 04:15, Chris Leonard wrote: > > To clarify, I had negotiated a contract with Sugar Labs / SFC for a > monthly stipend to support the Translation Manager position. I did > NOT submit a single invoice for that work (which I have been doing) > and

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Hello all, On 25/02/17 20:33, Tymon Radzik wrote: > Sugar Labs is by its statement *volunteer*-driven project. We are > volunteers. We work for the idea of the free and open software and not > for own financial profit. It is worth to reflect upon this point. Certainly the design and engineering

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

As Dave and Caryl mentioned earlier, i think the best thing is to redefine our missions, visions and goals. As Sameer said in the last video, "Sugar and Sugar Labs are both different". He also gave an example using how Drupal came up with theirs. So i think what should be our top priority to keep

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Sugar Labs is by its statement *volunteer*-driven project. We are volunteers. We work for the idea of the free and open software and not for own financial profit. I can't agree with the idea of monthly stipends (salaries) being paid to some members. Not only breaking something I considered to be

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Laura Vargas wrote: > > > 2017-02-24 13:51 GMT-05:00 Caryl Bigenho : >> >> Hello Again >> >> > > Hola Caryl, >> >> The "Badge" proposal is a totally inappropriate use of SL funds and could >> result in litigation

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On Sat, 2017-02-25 at 08:36 +0530, Dave Crossland wrote: > Actually I am not convinced of this; I do not believe that the latest > releases of the Python codebase reach classrooms, and the js codebase > only reaches one.  > > One of the projects listed is social help. It's a fine idea, but a >

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

sending reps to places >>>> where they can show the merits of Sugarizer (Primero) to educators and >>>> other stakeholders around the world. I would oversee the whole thing for >>>> free (except possibly some occasional travel expenses and entrance or >

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

he world. I would oversee the whole thing for >>> free (except possibly some occasional travel expenses and entrance or >>> visa fees). >>> >>> >>> P.P.S. I know Samson could have a good proposal ... or perhaps he could >>> ov

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

e translation teams for mine. Walter probably has some in mind as >> well. Let's get the vision, goals and objectives in hand before progressing >> any further. >> >> >> -- >> *From:* IAEP <iaep-boun...@lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

jectives in hand before progressing > any further. > > > -- > *From:* IAEP <iaep-boun...@lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of Laura Vargas > <la...@somosazucar.org> > *Sent:* Friday, February 24, 2017 3:50 AM > *To:* Dave Crossland > *C

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

objectives before marketing. Samson > > > -- > *From:* IAEP <iaep-boun...@lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of Laura Vargas > <la...@somosazucar.org> > *Sent:* Friday, February 24, 2017 3:50 AM > *To:* Dave Crossland > *Cc:* Adam Holt; su

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

g> on behalf of Laura Vargas <la...@somosazucar.org> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 3:50 AM To: Dave Crossland Cc: Adam Holt; sugar-...@lists.sugarlabs.org; iaep; Samson Goddy; SLOBs Subject: Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget 2017-02-24 5:33 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com<mailto:d...@

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

2017-02-24 5:33 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland : > On 24 February 2017 at 12:44, Samson Goddy > wrote: > > Also, if you have a strong opposition to the model or to any of the > listed > > badges or badge holders, please share the reasons openly. > > Where is

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On 24 February 2017 at 12:44, Samson Goddy wrote: > Also, if you have a strong opposition to the model or to any of the listed > badges or badge holders, please share the reasons openly. Where is the $42k coming from? ___

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On Feb 24, 2017 4:14 AM, "Samson Goddy" wrote: On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Dave Crossland wrote: > Hi > > Where can I read more about the sugar open badges? :) > Some time ago Aleksey suggested to the list, that we should sponsor with

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

t a try to put it all into > a single motion :D" > > >> Caryl (aka GrannieB) >> -- >> *From:* IAEP <iaep-boun...@lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of Dave >> Crossland <d...@lab6.com> >> *Sent:* Thursday, February 23, 20

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

annieB) > -- > *From:* IAEP <iaep-boun...@lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of Dave > Crossland <d...@lab6.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, February 23, 2017 6:28:16 PM > *To:* Laura Vargas > *Cc:* Adam Holt; sugar-...@lists.sugarlabs.org; iaep; SLOBs

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Dave Crossland wrote: > Hi > > Where can I read more about the sugar open badges? :) > Some time ago Aleksey suggested to the list, that we should sponsor with US$500/month to active Sugar Labs contributors in need on a monthly basis. Today we

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Thursday, February 23, 2017 6:28:16 PM To: Laura Vargas Cc: Adam Holt; sugar-...@lists.sugarlabs.org; iaep; SLOBs Subject: Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget Hi Where can I read more about the sugar open badges? :) On Feb 23, 2017 9:57 PM, "Laura Vargas" <la...@somosazucar.org&l

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Hi Where can I read more about the sugar open badges? :) On Feb 23, 2017 9:57 PM, "Laura Vargas" wrote: Hello all! Hola a todos! 2016 Fiscal year is soon coming to its end (March 1st 2016 until February 28th 2017). Subject to final reports from Adam, we must consider

[IAEP] Sugar Labs 2017 Budget

Hello all! Hola a todos! 2016 Fiscal year is soon coming to its end (March 1st 2016 until February 28th 2017). Subject to final reports from Adam, we must consider and project our expenses of the 2017 fiscal year. I would like to help in a first draft. >From the systems, marketing and funding