On 9 Jun 2011, at 00:12, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:53 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > >> >> On 8 Jun 2011, at 23:49, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote: >>> >>>> Op 6-6-2011 11:37, toki schreef: >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>>> >>>>> On 05/06/2011 15:00, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> A formal, legal foundation. The ASF is a recognized 501(c)3, non- >>>>> TDF might not have 501(c)(3) status, but then consider that it is >>>>> incorporated in Germany, not the United States. >>>> That 501(c)(3) status aside, is TDF actually a legally established >>>> foundation (yet)? >>> >>> I also think that 'independent' is also an adjective that belongs >>> there... being independent is quite important to a number >>> of FOSS ecosystem people... >> >> While that is clearly a true statement, you seem to be implying that you >> don't think TDF is "independent". Please can you explain what you mean? > > People may just be curious about TDF being "backed" by“Freies Office > Deutschland > e.V.” as well as an associated project in Software in the Public Interest > (SPI). > What does being "backed" by them mean? How independent is it from these > 2 entitied? Just questions like that.
As I understand it FrODeV is hosting the incorporation launch of TDF, and SPI is providing stewardship of funds outside Germany. SPI is a very well-known, respected and trusted non-profit originally set up to host Debian's assets and who never interfere in the affairs of the organisations to which they provide this stewardship service. Right now TDF appears to be essentially a project of FrODeV, itself an independent non-profit, and thus there's no hint of any dependency on a for-profit entity. > > Certainly being an independent, legally established foundation is > critical, isn't it, as compare to one which is "just" a legally > established one? Not saying that TDF isn't at all, but the > 'independent' part is important. Not really hugely important, as long as everything is open to scrutiny and beyond the control of any interested party - transparency is the key, just like it is at Apache. Any organisation can be gamed - it's a function of having rules, since "every system of rules contains within it the game that plays it and ultimately subverts it"[1]. But it will indeed be good when TDF is able to complete the bootstrap process so the innuendo can stop. S. [1] http://webmink.com/essays/sentinels/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
