On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 09:30 -0400, Emily Gonyer wrote: > In regards to paid and unpaid contributors to GNOME, I honestly feel > that unpaid contributions should be favored. I realize that is > probably unlikely to occur, but it ought to. Why? Because GNOME is, at > least in theory, a free software 'project'. As such, it is supposedly > run, and worked on largely by volunteers.
That's (fortunately) incorrect. > Unfortunately of course, we > all know this is not true. In practice most of the top contributors > are paid to work on GNOME - as a result, most of their work is > directed by corporations, I find that incredibly insulting, especially as it's the second time you say this. I'm paid to work on GNOME, and like most of my colleagues working on GNOME, I was a GNOME contributor before being paid to work on it. Suggesting that we don't have GNOME's best interests at heart is just hurtful, and incorrect. > and their wants/needs and not by the > thousands of individual users who have different wants/needs. But > because they are paid to work on it, they have more time to do so and > rise faster and receive more respect and admiration than those of us > who do so 'just for fun'. This creates a lopsided portrait of the > wants/needs of users. And, of course, the corporations who are paying > for the work don't care what individual users think - why would they? And you really think that those evil corporations would manage to make us make changes to GNOME that we think would be detrimental to GNOME as a project? Do you want me to assign those remarks to ignorance or malice? > As a result, users are ignored and the larger free software community > alienated. This is, IMHO why the GNOME ecosystem has fractured so > fully over the last couple of years. Where we once had GNOME we now > have GNOME Shell, Unity, Elementary, Cinnamon and Mate all competing > for the same handful of users. > > I'm not going to pretend that I know how to fix this problem. I don't. > But I do know it exists, and that it has been largely, if not > completely ignored by the majority of GNOME developers and certainly > by the Board of Directors thus far. Perhaps most striking is the very > composition of the Board of Directors itself. How many are not paid to > work on GNOME by an Advisory Board member? Isn't this in some way a > conflict of interest? Shouldn't the board be independent and not tied > to corporate interests? Shouldn't the needs of the project come first, > and not the needs of any individual corporation? > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova > <kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote: > > "On 20 May 2014 12:10, Emily Gonyer <emilyyr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova > >> <kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Hi Emily, > >>> > >>> On 17 May 2014 19:42, Emily Gonyer <emilyyr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Name: Emily Gonyer > >>>> Email: emilyyr...@gmail.com > >>>> Affiliation: None > >>>> > >>>> Dear Foundation, > >>>> > >>>> I'm interested in serving on GNOME's board of directors for the first > >>>> time, in order to help steer GNOME in a more open and community led > >>>> direction. It is my opinion that GNOME has strode too far towards a > >>>> corporate-driven project and away from its community-led roots. As of > >>>> now, GNOME is, in my opinion too beholden to a small handful of large > >>>> corporations which forces the project to ignore large swaths of our > >>>> users in preference to them. The end result being that GNOME has lost > >>>> a tremendous portion of its respect and goodwill in the wider free > >>>> software community. As a member of the GNOME board of directors I will > >>>> actively work against this tide and towards the more open, > >>>> community-driven project that GNOME once was and I hope will be again. > >>> > >>> I understand your concerns with regards to corporate involvement in > >>> the project direction. > >>> > >>> Based on the available financial information, the corporate > >>> sponsorship enables the Foundation to employ an executive director and > >>> an administrative assistant. Without this sponsorship, much of the > >>> administrative work would need to be taken over by the Foundation > >>> membership and the current board is already facing the challenges > >>> resulting from having only one employee at this time. > >>> > >>> How do you aim to achieve your goals without alienating the companies > >>> that enable the Foundation to have employees to do the administrative > >>> work and offer financial support to our membership? > >>> > >>> GNOME is Free software, with a broad base of unpaid and paid > >>> contributors. It seems that you wish to change the proportions of > >>> GNOME contributors from the two backgrounds, how do you aim to achieve > >>> this? > >> > >> I think we need to take a good, hard look at what we're spending money > >> on and evaluate what is truly needed vs wanted. Once we figure out how > >> much money we need to be spending, we can evaluate our current funds, > >> where they are coming from and how to raise more. > > > > This information is publicly available for up to the end of 2013 at > > https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/FinancialSummary . What conclusions > > have you drawn from it? > > > >> Donating to GNOME as an individual is not as easy as it could, indeed > >> should, be. We don't currently have a specific 'campaign' going on, > >> and as a result, a cursory glance at the website reveals no obvious > >> way to donate to GNOME's general fund (as far as I can tell the only > >> way to do so is to find the tiny 'Support GNOME' link at the very > >> bottom of the page). Additionally, I still don't understand why the > >> only way to donate to GNOME is through PayPal. Why don't we allow > >> people to donate via google or amazon? Why not accept bitcoins? Why > >> not encourage people to support GNOME via AmazonSmile and similar > >> programs? > > > > There is a big link in the middle of www.gnome.org which says "Make a > > donation and become a Friend of GNOME!". That offers PayPal as a > > primary option, with check (USD), wire (to a USD account) and Bitcoin > > via a third party on a secondary page. The board is working on being > > able to receive donations by bank transfer to a EUR account as well. > > > > The board has been advised by our accounting contacts and lawyers that > > we should not take Bitcoin directly because it will greatly increase > > the likelyhood of GNOME being audited by the IRS, which is likely to > > lead to the Foundation losing the not-for-profit status temporarily, > > to incur accounting costs of over USD 10000 in that year (which is > > considerably more than current costs) and eat into the board's and > > employees' time. Based on current personal donation trends, it is > > extremely unlikely that the Foundation will receive anywhere close to > > USD 10000 in Bitcoin donations. > > > > Every additional donation method does incur an additional accounting cost. > > > > Regardless, any individual is more than welcome to send in a proposal > > to the board with details of a new payment method which the board > > would be more than happy to review. In fact, it would be great if such > > initiatives were taken up by members who are not on the board as this > > will help ease the board's workload. The pages with information on > > donating are editable by a number of Foundation members, so the > > additional payment methods can also be added by whoever proposed them, > > once they have been approved. > > > >> These are just the first handful of ideas for alternative, and largely > >> untapped funding options that occur to me at first glance. I'm sure > >> there are myriad other funding options which we have not investigated > >> fully, and which do not include asking for corporate sponsorship. > > > > Personal donations make up a relatively small portion of the > > Foundation's income compared to corporate sponsorship. What other > > funding options do you think can be tapped which will bring in an > > income on a par with what the corporate sponsorship currently brings > > in? > > > >> Finally, I believe the board needs to be far more transparent than it > >> has been of late as to its activities & finances. The board in the > >> past has been resistant to allowing non-board members to 'sit in' on > >> meetings - even as a means for Engagement team members to take notes > >> and report minutes. As I understand it, the board represents and works > >> on behalf of the membership and their meetings ought to be public. > > > > The board discusses sensitive issues at almost every meeting, such as > > Foundation members' personal details, time-sensitive announcements and > > negotiations with potential sponsors. These are all recorded in > > private board minutes, in an abridged state (same as with public board > > minutes), which are available to all future board members so that they > > are not "lost". > > > > The secretary, whose duty it is to record and publish minutes, does > > not have to be a board member but it is expected that they are to be > > discreet in doing their duty. > > > > The board does work on behalf of the membership, which is why the > > membership is always more than welcome to request agenda items and > > concerns to be discussed at meetings. > > > > I think that your concern about transparency is valid, which is why I > > put in a fair bit of effort into trying to make sure that minutes are > > published at more appropriate times and I am proposing that the > > financial status of the Foundation should be made public on a regular > > basis. Are there any other steps, short of making the board meetings > > public, which you think should be investigated? > > > > I would still be interested to know your thoughts on paid and unpaid > > contributors to GNOME. > > > >> Emily Gonyer > >> > >>> > >>>> I have been a long time user of GNOME since the 1.x days, and an > >>>> active contributor for the last 2+ years, primarily in > >>>> Marketing/Engagement with limited development and design > >>>> contributions. I actively promote free > >>>> software whenever and wherever I can, and feel strongly that it is > >>>> only through free software that we will be able to keep the freedoms > >>>> that we all cherish both online and off. Those freedoms are being > >>>> actively obstructed and eroded by corporations and governments around > >>>> the world. As a member of the board of directors I will actively work > >>>> against these forces, in order to ensure a free and open internet for > >>>> everyone. > >>>> > >>>> Good luck to all! > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, > >>>> power and magic in it. - Goethe > >>>> > >>>> Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't > >>>> matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr.Seuss > >>>> > >>>> Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that > >>>> counts can be counted. - Albert Einstein > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> foundation-announce mailing list > >>>> foundation-annou...@gnome.org > >>>> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-announce > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> foundation-list mailing list > >>> foundation-list@gnome.org > >>> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, > >> power and magic in it. - Goethe > >> > >> Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't > >> matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr.Seuss > >> > >> Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that > >> counts can be counted. - Albert Einstein > > > _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
