Hi Sean! On 23 May 2016 at 04:42, Sean DALY <sdaly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Handing over marketing to anyone with a deep pocket is incomprehensible to > me, I'd much rather just see "gold sponsor status" or something similar. Do > people really need the recognition? > Offering to suggest a codename is hardly "handing over marketing." Let's experiment! :) > I'm also confused about the public statement bit - don't we already have > member pages? > I can't see anything on www.sugarlabs.org ;) > Important contributions are made by members who already donate their time > and would perhaps prefer not to donate funds too, do they get to do a > public statement? > Sure! Anyone can make a pull request to the website :) > Social media offers a very effective means for microdonation fundraising > drives, and we haven't done that yet. As I understand it, this is more like > voluntary membership dues - a fundraising drive (which would be associated > with a tangible goal, e.g. an alternate hardware platform) would be > separate. > Yep :) > In my view, requesting conditions or offering perks shouldn't be > associated with voluntary membership dues. I'd prefer the following: > > Motion: To request donations from Sugar Labs Members, to be allocated to > the General Fund through the SFC. The annual donation requested will be $12 > USD from members who self-identify as low-income (such as students); $36, > $120, or $600 USD from general members. > Since you sent this to SLOBs, I guess they will have to vote on both motions and we'll see which is passed :D Cheers Dave
_______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list Marketing@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing