On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 15:47 +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote:
> Setting up this, however, requires lots of time and money,
Not really, a foundation was set up by the OpenDocument fellowship in
the US and we did a not for profit company limited by guarantee as a not
for profit here in the UK - cost less than 50 Euros IIRC. Setting up a
charity is a bit more involved but has the advantage that donations can
attract tax relief.
The Charity Commission web site in the UK has a specimen Memorandum and
Articles of Association ('Mems and Arts') which is quite easy to use.
This has different paragraphs to insert depending on the kind of
organisation you want to be. The benefit of using the standard Mems and
Arts is that the Charity Commission will register you more quickly. Even
so, it can take 3 months or so.
At least 2 trustees are required and you have to submit accounts and an
Annual Report, so there is some record keeping to do. Not sure about
Germany but probably it's not too different?
Such an organisation can apply for EU grants in partnership with other
organisations. Or be a partner in a project submitted by others. As an
example, I'm currently running a project for Transfer of Innovation for
the INGOTs. That application resulted in a grant of 275,000 Euros (I
think you know Manfred Reiter who is our external pedagogical adviser
for the project) I have applied for a similar grant for OOo
certification, but we can't have OOo as a partner because there is no
official entity. If there had been I could have given OOo a work package
and a budget. If there was an OOo Foundation that was a legal entity it
could apply for grants (I will help anyone with the application process
- 100 pages of forms to fill in is quite a task in itself, but its not
an impossible one even for an individual especially now I know the
method.) Here are some possible projects:
Develop on-line assessment tools for OOo training
Develop OOo Draw as a multimedia notepad for use with Interactive
Whiteboards and similar technologies in schools
Develop training materials for teachers so they can make best use of
OOo4Kids
Develop vocational training courses on the importance of odf and
transfer them to countries across Europe.
Any of these could be developed into projects with a good chance of
success. In fact small businesses that were OOo friendly across Europe
could collectively make several applications and nominate each other as
partners. OOo foundation would be just one of them.
> and one of
> the problems surely is that we need people to do that.
We need one or two people to set up the foundation, do a bit of research
on EU projects and make contacts with other like-minded people. All the
National Agencies run contact seminars for this purpose and they will
pay about 1.000 Euros per delegate for people to attend these and
preparatory visits. So if say 5 Marcons got together to work on the
project they would get all their travel expenses and subsistence paid by
their National Agencies. If it costs them less than 1.000 Euro to attend
they probably will make a profit ;-)
> When one already
> spends several hours per day on OpenOffice.org, finding more time for
> setting up a foundation is not an easy task.
Work smarter not harder :-). This is why I'm saying putting effort into
things that can generate resources is better than keeping working with
no resources. I'm self-employed since 1993 so everything I do has to be
paid for by finding a source of income, whether it's a grant or income
from sales. It's not a bad discipline to get into ;-)
> In addition, for
> OpenOffice.org the specialty is that most developers are employed by one
> major stakeholder, who also owns the brand and trademark.
>
> This means we need to get the major stakeholder in the boat, otherwise
> things will get real hard. I don't know about the discussions that took
> place on that in the past, but as you see, there are various reasons why
> a foundation isn't an easy task.
I know, it's why I decided in the end to just set up the INGOT project
as a separate issue. It seemed to me that the "officials" were more
likely to be a hindrance than a help. (They didn't understand the
business model apart form anything else, and e-mail is not the best
medium to try and explain such things.) That might not have changed. If
it has, I'm willing to help within the time constraints I have - eg I
have copies of successful applications. I know what to target. But I
don't have a lot of time to do all the detail as I need to also
concentrate on my core strategy as I have people to pay and partners to
look after.
> > Yes but the point is that some people get expenses approved for some
> > things while others will get them turned down. (Rightly so) So in
>
> Is there any request for expense funding that has been denied
> erroneously? I don't recall. If so, please let me know.
No, that is not the point I'm making, I'm just saying that there is
never enough money so sometimes some people will get something when
others don't. I'm not making a criticism. I think the system is much
improved since I last looked at it.
> > principle some people get expenses and some people don't and that could
> > be for very similar events. Some people commit their own money -
> > personally I have spent thousands of Euro promoting OOo and I know
> > others that have done so too. It isn't a problem for me, I'm just saying
>
> I can join. I'm a student, my monthly income is way lower than to most
> of the OOo project, and in 2007, I've spent nearly 1.700 € from my
> private pocket for OpenOffice.org. It's much better these days with the
> funding options, but basically, joining for a CeBIT trade show for one
> week means not going out the month to me, because even with funding,
> being at a trade show for one week costs a lot of money. Especially
> those who are unemployed or students really have to calculate.
Exactly, so if you had say 200 Euros a day from an EU project it would
make a lot of difference. Actually the daily subsistence rate is about
200 Euros before any daily rates.
> But, after all, that's part of our volunteer "job" and our hobby, and
> it's similar for other volunteer jobs, so there's nothing wrong about it.
Well, the only thing wrong about it is if you could be getting paid
without it costing the project anything.
> Of course, looking at other communities can make one jealous when you
> see their trade show attendance is paid worktime, while you pay yourself
> -- but again, our communities are different. I'm all for a foundation
> and more options, but the current situation doesn't have it, so we have
> to make the best out of our current resources, and be fair to everyone.
I don't believe in jealousy :-) Each person has the power to change
things. They just have to believe they can and then do what is necessary
to make it happen. Ok, I decided about 5 years ago that normal OOo
channels were not going to support what I wanted to do so I did
something different but the point is I did something. I have had to
learn about EU grants, set up a UK accredited Awarding organisation -
that took 2 years to get through the bureaucracy - and get private
investment. Things that are easy are not worth doing because if they had
value someone would have don it already ;-).
> > that in principle decisions are already made about who gets paid
> > expenses and who does not. It's bound to be the case with a finite
> > budget.
>
> I think we are doing a fair and transparent process. There need to be
> certain rules, and I think the reason behind them is obvious to anyone.
> Again, if there has been any funding request we denied so far, and
> anyone considers that a mistake, please let me know.
>
> > I don't think so either, I just wonder why paying expenses selectively
> > is seen as different from paying for time selectively.
>
> Because it makes a difference. Paying expenses means covering costs that
> actually occured, refund people's payments. Paying for time is paying
> costs that did not occur, but rather merit people's time. And that makes
> a big difference.
Not necessarily, you can pay for a job at the end. EU grants are
typically paid 20% up front, 20% end of year 1, 20% beginning of Y2, 20%
towards the end of Y2 and final 20% on the final report being approved.
> As an example: Assume the Japanese website took 20 hours to be created.
> 1.000 € / 20 hours = 50 € per hour. I can name you dozens of people who
> spend probably 30-60 hours per month on OpenOffice.org volunteer work.
> Shall we now give each of them 3.000 € per month? We simply can't.
I wasn't particularly arguing in favour of the Japanese case. Rather I
was talking about principles.
> It makes a big difference if you cover costs that actually occured, or
> pay people for their volunteer worktime. We can pay expenses for travel
> and lodging for one week of CeBIT. But we can't pay 6 days of CeBIT
> attendance per hour. We just don't have that money.
No, but you could pay a bounty for someone to eg do .svg import/export
for OOo Draw. To me an early strategic investment in that say 7 years
ago would have made a significant difference and it might not have been
too expensive to afford. But 7 years ago the only one in a position to
make that decision was Sun.
> > The CC does pay some people to go to some shows, but not everyone for
> > any show requested (and rightly so). Decisions are made about priorities
>
> No, it does not. It pays their expenses, not their worktime.
That's what I meant it pays some peoples expenses to some shows, it does
not pay all people's expenses for any show - and of course it would not
be sensible to do so.
> > So we could do the same with other uses of resources.
> >
> > X is a high priority and a very small resource will make a big
> > difference
> >
> > Y can do it but can't afford to do it without some funding.
> >
> > Z would cost the same in travel expenses for P but will have marginal
> > effect.
> >
> > Therefore better to spend the resource on X.
>
> Sure, spending wisely makes sense. But again, the difference for me is
> if we fund expenses, or if we pay worktime. If we start to pay people
> per working hours, we actually employ them, and then we are not a
> volunteer project anymore.
Probably paying people per working hour is not a good idea anyway.
Better to pay for outcomes rather than process.
> We of course can discuss some more attractive options, and maybe some
> small fee per day (let's say 20 €) in addition to the actual travel
> expenses, but we cannot really pay people the money they would get in a
> contracted job.
>
> > I'd agree that donations are not likely, but consider whether it might
> > be better to invest 1.000 Euros in generating a further 1.000 Euros or
> > just spending the first 1.000 and hoping someone will donate more.
>
> How will you measure that?
I apply for a Key Activities ICT transversal grant from Brussels for
500,000 Euros. Part of the requirement is to provide sustainability and
impact. I use 50.000 Euros to set up an OOo training provider for two or
three large cities that are migrating and the business plan shows this
will make 50.000 Euros a year. I have just made 50.000 Euros produce not
just 50.000 Euros but that much every year. Of course we probably need
50.000 into marketing and publicity development so that pays for a lot
of presence at Cebit etc. And that includes daily rates.
> > To be honest, I just raise these issues occasionally to see if anything
> > has changed. I don't think that there has ever been the right enterprise
> > culture in OOo to really capitalise on the potential of the product. For
> > a global project of this size there really should be scope to generate
> > millions of Euros per year.
>
> I share your thoughts, and believe me, I was much happier if we had more
> options. My thoughts do not mean we should stop investigating those
> options, but my thoughts mean we should be careful on how to spend our
> current ressources.
The most valuable resource is people's time. To me investing that in
making substantial amounts more money than any individual could get paid
is a very good option ;-)
--
Ian
Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
A new approach to assessment for learning
www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940
You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
