Ruth, Yeah, that's the point, I wrote: "ApacheCon is a for profit effort with some of the proceeds going to the foundation".
You wrote: "David has made a statement that the ApacheCon organization is a for profit organization". I guess my problem is I don't know how to defend a statement I didn't make. You're the one who confronted me to challenge a statement that you said I made. Sorry, I guess I just don't know how to respond. Any hints? -David On Apr 2, 2010, at 1:44 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote: > Hello David: > > I simply would like clarification on your statement: "ApacheCon is a for > profit effort." No need to get confrontational. > > Regards, > Ruth > > David E Jones wrote: >> Ruth, >> >> I challenge you to quote where I said that. >> >> -David >> >> >> On Apr 2, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote: >> >> >>> Hi Scott: >>> Thanks that has been my understanding. >>> >>> However, David has made a statement that the ApacheCon organization is a >>> for profit organization. I want to make sure that I'm operating under the >>> correct assumptions when I make my decisions relative to this conference. >>> There is a HUGE difference between an organization taking in more money >>> than expenses and an organization operating as a "for profit" endeavor. >>> >>> I'd like to know what David really means by his statement. >>> Regards, >>> Ruth >>> >>> Scott Gray wrote: >>> >>>> Apache is non-profit, but the foundation does "profit" from ApacheCons in >>>> the sense that their takings exceed expenses. This "profit" goes back >>>> into the foundation account to be used for other expenses involved in >>>> running the foundation. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> HotWax Media >>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>>> >>>> On 2/04/2010, at 12:32 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi David: >>>>> Where have you seen it documented that ApacheCon is an organization with >>>>> a "for profit" tax status? >>>>> >>>>> Everything I see says that ApacheCon is the "Official User Conference of >>>>> the Apache Software Foundation". This implies that it is sanctioned by >>>>> ASF and that it is a non-profit organization. Please, if you know for >>>>> sure where it is documented that ApacheCon is a separate, for profit, >>>>> organization, I'd like to know. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Ruth >>>>> >>>>> David E Jones wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It would be nice if it were that way, but that's just not the case. >>>>>> >>>>>> ApacheCon is a for profit effort with some of the proceeds going to the >>>>>> foundation (in theory). In other words, the ASF gets money from >>>>>> ApacheCon and does not generally invest any money in ApacheCon. In 2009 >>>>>> I think the foundation did invest some money in marketing (for the >>>>>> anniversary) that also benefitted ApacheCon (since they had a party >>>>>> there for it), but that's the closest thing I'm aware of to what you are >>>>>> describing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also consider that the majority of the participants in the OFBiz events >>>>>> have been people who already know about and are already using OFBiz. >>>>>> Even in 2008 with the enormous investments in the conference by OFBiz >>>>>> contributors, much of which was supposed to go into promoting the >>>>>> conference but the PR consulting company messed up that year (which >>>>>> caused them to be replaced), and so even then most of the people >>>>>> attending sessions were presenters at other sessions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Even in the pre-ApacheCon OFBiz Users Conferences there were far more >>>>>> developers and contributors attending than users, and typically the >>>>>> users were people who happened to live close to the conference and who >>>>>> attended to check out what was going on. >>>>>> >>>>>> We need something else to attract end-users and better meet their needs. >>>>>> >>>>>> -David >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Apr 2, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Ean: >>>>>>> Nice, but I think you might be missing my point. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ApacheCon is all about telling the world about OFBiz and using the >>>>>>> immense resources available to the Foundation to do that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMHO it isn't really about socializing with the small and (getting >>>>>>> smaller by the hour) OFBiz community. ApacheCon is for our end-users. >>>>>>> Or rather, our potential end-users. This should be the place where we >>>>>>> showcase our wares and not "vacation with a purpose". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just my 2 cents. >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Ruth >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ean Schuessler wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think DebConf is a good example that this can be done and done >>>>>>>> right. I know HP helps out with the expenses of DebConf but part of >>>>>>>> that is helping fly in developers from countries where the currency >>>>>>>> exchange rates make attendance impractically high. We may simply not >>>>>>>> be able to do that or we may come to some agreement about how we would >>>>>>>> share those expenses for speakers with something especially important >>>>>>>> to contribute. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Given the relatively small size of our community, we have a lot of >>>>>>>> flexibility about where we choose to meet. In my mind, the >>>>>>>> accommodations should be purposefully modest yet interesting and fun. >>>>>>>> There are lots of options like that in all kinds of places. We can >>>>>>>> think of it as a collaboratively planned vacation with a purpose. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm not sure if you meant this or not Ruth, but as it was addressed >>>>>>>>> to me I should clarify: I did speak up here, but I am not taking a >>>>>>>>> role in organizing anything as I did in previous years. In other >>>>>>>>> words, I'm not committing to anything on behalf of the project and >>>>>>>>> I'm not trying to recruit speakers and I'm not volunteering to speak >>>>>>>>> or do training either. >>>>>>>>> Quite frankly in the past it has required a lot of time and money and >>>>>>>>> liability with no real benefit. I hope someone profited from those >>>>>>>>> past efforts, perhaps the for-profit organizers and maybe some >>>>>>>>> attendees as well. About that, I don't know. ApacheCon was a mess in >>>>>>>>> '08 because people were paying a lot to attend (both the training and >>>>>>>>> the conference) and yet none of the money (not a penny) went to any >>>>>>>>> of the presenters or trainers. In other words, the presenters and >>>>>>>>> trainers were paying to be there and so were the attendees. This >>>>>>>>> culminated in some fascinating personal attacks from people who >>>>>>>>> attended and who were not satisfied that what they got was worth what >>>>>>>>> they paid for it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just in case anyone is wondering ApacheCon is not the only one that >>>>>>>>> ended up this way. In another conference I did some pre-conference >>>>>>>>> training and made almost nothing doing it because the conference >>>>>>>>> organizers mixed the funds for the training with the funds for the >>>>>>>>> conference, and so basically I offered training and most of the >>>>>>>>> proceeds went to subsidize the conference. My guess is that this >>>>>>>>> happens a lot with conferences. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, taking that on just so other people can make money? Well, I'd >>>>>>>>> like to say that I learned my lesson and that's why I'm not >>>>>>>>> interested (that would incorrectly make me look experienced and >>>>>>>>> intelligent and somehow remotely good at business dealings), but the >>>>>>>>> fact of the matter is that even if I wanted to I don't have the weeks >>>>>>>>> of time and thousands of dollars to even participate in a bare >>>>>>>>> minimum way. If someone else does, I'm sure many people will benefit >>>>>>>>> from their contributions and they should certainly step up and go for >>>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyway, sorry if any bitterness bled through in this text. I think >>>>>>>>> it's really just human nature that expectations of EVERYONE involved >>>>>>>>> with such things have expectations dramatically inconsistent with >>>>>>>>> reality. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> >> >>
