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 these in check, so that we can be move forward.
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 received negative comments, due to the fact that it was attached with $$ which is normal for a community like Sugar Labs to kick against. The reason why i tend to let that motion slide down is that currently we are vision less. Previous years it was alot easier because of OLPC activities. So my question for the community are. What are these money for? How do we get funds outside Google programs? What will happen to Sugar Labs if Google terminates GSOC or GCI one day? These are questions that i will love to have answers on. Concerning possible loosing support for python version. I think of we have good strategy of how sugar can impact learning in schools, i don't think any version of sugar matters. Last year after my project, i started doing research on SEED/OLPC schools. I got a call from a teacher in Southern Part of Nigeria. He was telling me about xo machines in his schools. He told me that for the past years, after SEED terminated the project. They stop using the sugar because no body could support them. He also mention that his school is willing to Re:sugar with over 1,000 xo machines working. I told him i was going to contact the community for support. Which i did but didn't get any response aside from Tony and Walter. Concerning what Caryl was saying about paying teachers to test sugar in schools. I think that is a great plan. But is shouldn't just focus on the Sugarizer only yet. Of course i know JS is the feature but before that if we can support python let us do it. "Let us use what we have to get want we want". Example, i am planning a mega workshop in Nigeria, concerning targeting school with E-learning capabilities. There are lot of schools in Nigeria using tablet in class to play games. Why won't SL sit down and think how we can get this schools to use Sugarizer in their tablet, deploy schools servers for collaborations. Install python version in computer labs as my school did back in the olpc days. I have the ability to do this, because what they care about is success stories, how does this benefit our students. GCI can be a pinpoint, my story about how i became what i am now was because of Sugar. P.S i have been invited to a Scratch conference in Bordeaux, France. Which is scheduled to happen in July i can't remember the date. Also a mini scratch events in Nairobi, Kenya for prep talk which i am going to talk about Sugar. All because i posted my passion about computer science in Medium. So this is what we should be doing as a community not doing otherwise. Samson On 26 Feb 2017 2:33 a.m., "Tymon Radzik" <dwg...@gmail.com> 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. > > I can't agree with the idea of monthly stipends (salaries) being paid to > some members. > > Not only breaking something I considered to be a fundamental principle, it > is also dividing the community. Our funds deserve to be spent in more > orgnization-beneficial way. > > Additionally, I don't want to accuse anyone personally, but current > situation in our discussion could meet the definition of *conflict of > interest* for some members involved... > > Best, > Tymon > > > sob., 25 lut 2017 o 23:46 użytkownik Chris Leonard < > cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com> napisał: > >> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Laura Vargas <la...@somosazucar.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > 2017-02-24 13:51 GMT-05:00 Caryl Bigenho <cbige...@hotmail.com>: >> >> >> >> Hello Again.... >> >> >> >> >> > >> > Hola Caryl, >> >> >> >> The "Badge" proposal is a totally inappropriate use of SL funds and >> could >> >> result in litigation and the possible end of SugarLabs. >> >> >> >> >> > Please do elaborate on this. We have already allocated stipends for >> active >> > members in the past. As I recall Chris Leonard had an 8 month stipend >> of US$ >> > 1,000. >> > >> > What would be difference? >> > >> >> 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 allowed the contract to lapse. I have not received a dime from >> Sugar Labs funds in in the 10 years I have been volunteering and I >> have come to regret that I opened the door to the current effort to >> drain those funds into members pockets. >> >> I believe the funds (the majority of which come from the TripAdvisor >> grant obtained by Walter) should go to their intended purpose, >> supporting TurtleArt promotion and internationalization and >> localization efforts. I understand that for legal reasons the funds >> are officially considered fungible and in a general pool, but I >> believe we should honor the original intent of the donor. >> >> cjl >> >> I now regret having opened the door to paid efforts >> _______________________________________________ >> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) >> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > >
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
