https://www.qgis.ch/en/association/membership-application
Cheers - Phil, On the road with his iPad > On 30 Nov 2020, at 5:30 pm, Emma Hain <emmah...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey All > I’m with the essence of what Martin put forward as well as Nathan. If those > that can do pool together funds under the SIG then we can get the tools that > Oceania needs. > Is there a link to the Swiss Qgis funding model? > > Cheers > > Emma Hain > >>> On 30 Nov 2020, at 13:51, Martin Tomko <tom...@unimelb.edu.au> wrote: >>> >> >> Dear all, >> I just chip in, to elaborate on what I was thinking about when drafting the >> SIG guidelines. >> >> The overall model, for me, was that of the ACM SIGs, which work well ( >> some), or less well ( others), but do not impact on each other. An OO member >> can be member of multiple SIGs, or none. Some may organise hackatons, >> mapping parties, microconferences, some may not. Some may even propose ( and >> successfully populate and run) a stream at a FOSS4G SOTM conference (that >> would be awesome). They may help set the program for the conference, etc, >> etc. >> >> The level of activity, and the financial resources they may have available >> will differ, and it is not up to the OO (board) to dictate, as long as they >> do not encroach on the freedom of others to have their own activities, do >> not place undue burden on the OO itself (run by volunteers, you do not want >> to process hundreds of micro payments, etc, I would say), or have multiple >> SIGs overlapping in scope. >> >> Re fees. I would have assumed that most will be free, BUT the ability to >> levy a membership[ fee was left there exactly to satisfy the need for >> supporting a more intensive activity that is not “event” based. So, if the >> QGIS SIG decides to print a monthly SIG magazine and provide it as a >> membership service to the SIG, sure, why not, levy a membership fee. Or a >> website, online course, or similar. >> >> Broader membership by organisations is starting to go borderline, to what >> Adam noted. Is this something where the overall interests of the >> organisation clash with the SIG? I would suggest let’s try this, and decide, >> as we go. If the burden by SIGS or the internal competition is too much ( we >> lose FOS4G SOTM sponsors to the SIG), then this will need to be addressed. >> This is I believe the main concern, but we are not there. >> >> Martin >> >> From: Oceania <oceania-boun...@lists.osgeo.org> >> Date: Monday, 30 November 2020 at 1:51 pm >> To: Cameron Shorter <cameron.shor...@gmail.com> >> Cc: QGIS Australia User Group <australian-qgis-user-gr...@googlegroups.com>, >> OSgeo - Oceania <oceania@lists.osgeo.org> >> Subject: Re: [OSGeo Oceania] [Aus-NZ-QGIS-group] Community consultation: OO >> Org QGIS Special Interest Group Charter >> >> Hey Cameron >> >> The issue of membership fees is only for the QGIS special interest group. >> The OSGeo Oceania membership will always be zero, or near zero cost. >> >> I'll let the QGIS folks speak for themselves, but they're talking about >> being able to pool money to fund specific activities, and if people are >> willing to pay for a subscription to regularly contribute, and they call it >> a membership of that QGIS SIG, that's all good, I say! >> >> Cheers, >> >> Alex >> >> On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 13:33, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shor...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> The question of membership fees pops up every few years with arguments for >> and against. >> I summarized a bunch of threads in the OSGeo community back when I was on >> the OSGeo board in: >> http://cameronshorter.blogspot.com/2013/03/osgeo-board-priorities.html >> .There may be some points in there which you can reuse. >> >> OSGeo as a low capital, volunteer focused organisation >> Should OSGeo act as a high capital or low capital organisation? I.e., should >> OSGeo dedicate energy to collecting sponsorship and then passing out these >> funds to worthy OSGeo causes. >> While initially it seems attractive to have OSGeo woo sponsors, because we >> would all love to have more money to throw at worthy OSGeo goals, the >> reality is that chasing money is hard work. And someone who can chase OSGeo >> sponsorship is likely conflicted with chasing sponsorship for their >> particular workplace. So in practice, to be effective in chasing >> sponsorship, OSGeo will probably need to hire someone specifically for the >> role. OSGeo would then need to raise at least enough to cover wages, and >> then quite a bit more if the sponsorship path is to create extra value. >> This high capital path is how the Eclipse foundation is set up, and how >> LocationTech propose to organise themselves. It is the path that OSGeo >> started following when founded under the umbrella of Autodesk. >> However, over the last seven years, OSGeo has slowly evolved toward a low >> capital volunteer focused organisation. Our overheads are very low, which >> means we waste very little of our volunteer labour and capital on the time >> consuming task of chasing and managing money. Consequently, any money we do >> receive (from conference windfalls or sponsorship) goes a long way - as it >> doesn't get eaten up by high overheads. As discussed and agreed by the >> board, this low capital path is something that is working very well for us, >> and is the path we should continue to follow. >> >> >> On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 05:21, Adam Steer <adam.d.st...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi all >> >> Thanks Andrew for addressing all the questions people have. Responding >> to your reply to my questions: >> >> - OK about sponsorships and so on, I can see that the QGIS SIG could >> choose to align events with FOSS4G SotM Oceania editions, thereby >> really streamlining logistics and effort and working with the whole >> community >> >> - conflict of interest: really hard in a community where everyone >> knows each other - my science community is the same, anonymous reviews >> are almost impossible! I think yes, recusing people from decision >> making is a great step. I also think it's unrealistic to make a >> blanket statement that fits all cases. I think the best approach might >> be to handle each case as it comes, and do it transparently. To make a >> concrete suggestion - and feel free to disagree - the charter could >> contain a statement like 'Conflicts of interest, real or perceived, >> will be handled in accordance with our code of conduct. This means >> recusing relevant parties from decision making as early as possible in >> the process, and discussing the matter openly with our community. In >> some cases, we may have to proceed by funding people who make >> decisions about where to apply funds. This is a function of a small >> and close knit community, and will always be discussed openly with the >> community first.' >> >> There are probably heaps of loopholes in that, and impossible to close >> them all - so the short version is to write exactly what you wrote in >> reply: 'we will be ethical, and will resist being a funding pipeline >> to particular people or companies'. The community has to step up to >> make that always true. >> >> I have no thoughts to add to John's about SIG membership, except I >> really like that you're thinking about how to manage it in an >> inclusive fashion. >> >> I do have an opinion about creating sub-SIGS though - in my science >> career I've seen multiple disciplines discover the same tooling a few >> times. So my hot take is 'avoid having discipline-specific subgroups', >> way better to let disciplinary cross-fertilisation happen ;) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Adam >> >> On Sun, 29 Nov 2020 at 09:39, Andrew Jeffrey <aljeffre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > No problems, with everything going on post conference, elections, and the >> > upcoming holiday period we may need to leave this open for comment for a >> > little longer than normal. Happy to go with what people feel is needed >> > here. >> > >> > John, regarding your thoughts on the membership I agree 100%, the charter >> > at the moment has a sentence stating the SIG should be "providing >> > membership avenues for people that may not be in a financial position to >> > pay a fee" perhaps we need more clarity around membership and what it >> > involves in the charter? To be clear, my thoughts are that keeping in the >> > spirit of OO the SIG should be available to everyone and no one should be >> > excluded from participating, on reflection the term "membership" might >> > come across as prohibitive. I'm sure we'll come up with something >> > acceptable through conversation here. >> > >> > For context though it may be helpful to explain the intent behind the idea >> > of a "membership". The issues it aims to address are below: >> > >> > There is some difficulty associated with organisations giving a >> > "donation", but purchasing something like a "membership" to a professional >> > user group seems to be acceptable and is easier justified in some >> > procurement processes. >> > For individuals donating to QGIS helps the project but has little >> > influence on their QGIS experience, also individuals on the QGIS list have >> > indicated trouble participating in crowdfunding campaigns due to high >> > minimum pledges. >> > >> > A QGIS SIG would allow us to receive money from interested parties wanting >> > to support QGIS in our region, pool the funds and then spend as the SIG >> > sees fit. The best part is the money will be spent on the items scoped in >> > our charter which is again relevant to users in our region. For lack of a >> > better term think of it as a "co-op" for the donations alot of us already >> > make on an ad-hoc basis. Ideally we would be looking to get a majority of >> > the membership from organisations that we know use QGIS to support a bulk >> > of this activity, and then people willing to make a personal contribution >> > would then add to that. Then if people can't make a personal contribution >> > that is also fine because they can assist in other ways. >> > >> > That was the idea in justifying a membership fee. We will need to offer >> > something in return, for individuals that will be the professional network >> > and for organisations that will be recognition at this early stage but as >> > we progress this may evolve. >> > >> > Thanks >> > Andrew >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 3:57 PM John Bryant <johnwbry...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Andrew, thanks a lot for continuing to push this forward. It has been a >> >> couple of months since I last looked at this, and I haven't really had a >> >> detailed look at the SIG concept yet. >> >> >> >> I'm 'out of the office' for the next few days, but would be happy to join >> >> in this discussion when I get back, and have a proper chance to refresh >> >> my memory and get up to speed on SIGs. >> >> >> >> One brief thought, it feels like it would be good to consider a free (or >> >> very inexpensive) tier of membership. I suspect many of us can't justify >> >> (or can't afford) to spend much, but could contribute in other ways. >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> John >> >> >> >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2020, 9:46 am Andrew Jeffrey, <aljeffre...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Adam, >> >>> >> >>> Thanks for the feedback. >> >>> >> >>> I agree the SIG shouldn't bring about any duplication of the processes >> >>> that the OO currently does. A SIG as defined in the guidelines should be >> >>> "enabling OSGeo Oceania members to interact, share knowledge, organise >> >>> events, and collaborate on a selected, targeted topic within the scope >> >>> of OSGeo Oceania". So a SIG should be complementary to the OO function >> >>> and allow the interested community members to drive engagement in that >> >>> area without the OO board having to do it all. Like you say though, open >> >>> communication between the SIG and the OO board is key in making sure >> >>> there is no overlap being introduced. Also to be clear the SIG isn’t >> >>> seeking “sponsorship” as such but we do want to be able to collect a >> >>> membership fee for people/orgs wanting to be involved, allowing them to >> >>> fund items that maybe other OO members don’t see as important. I don’t >> >>> see this taking away from conference sponsorship and this idea will >> >>> ultimately sink or swim depending on whether the SIG members have an >> >>> appetite to fund the items in our scope. >> >>> >> >>> As for the conflict of interest, to be honest I don't know the answer in >> >>> regards to how that should be dealt with. I think we need to add >> >>> something in the charter, would removing those people from the proposal >> >>> and voting process be enough? How does OO deal with this? I don’t want >> >>> to rule local devs out of working on this because they belong to the >> >>> group, but we also don’t want to become the entry point to company XYZ. >> >>> >> >>> Thanks for the feedback. >> >>> >> >>> Andrew >> >>> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:35 AM Adam Steer <adam.d.st...@gmail.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Hey Andrew and all the QGIS SIG proposers >> >>>> >> >>>> Thanks, I think this is a perfect use of OSGeo Oceania as a backing >> >>>> organisation :) >> >>>> >> >>>> My only reservation with any SIG proposal is that effort isn't >> >>>> duplicated about events and marketing, and also that a funding from a >> >>>> small pool of interested parties (relative to other parts of the >> >>>> world) is able to be effectively spread among the whole community. For >> >>>> an example it would be a bit awry to see a SIG gather a heap of >> >>>> funding at the expense of conference sponsorships. I guess in that >> >>>> case the SIG could also sponsor conferences? This goes the other way >> >>>> too - the existence of a well connected SIG makes it easier for OO to >> >>>> fund a QGIS feature (for example) if it decides to do so. >> >>>> >> >>>> I think clear, constant and open communication between OO and the SIG >> >>>> will make those concerns go away. >> >>>> >> >>>> In writing this I did work my thoughts through to a serious question: >> >>>> How will the SIG deal with conflicts of interest? A stated aim of the >> >>>> SIG is to fund development, what will the SIG do if all the key QGIS >> >>>> developers in the region are also in the group of people making >> >>>> decisions about buying developer time? >> >>>> >> >>>> My only comment on the charter itself is that if you want, you can >> >>>> link to the existing Berlin Code of Conduct: >> >>>> https://berlincodeofconduct.org/ - with which the upcoming OO CoC >> >>>> should be 100% compatible. >> >>>> >> >>>> Cheers, >> >>>> >> >>>> Adam >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 04:37, Andrew Jeffrey <aljeffre...@gmail.com> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Hi All, >> >>>> > >> >>>> > The OSGeo Oceania board has approved an initiative for members to >> >>>> > form Special Interest Groups (SIGs) within the OO community. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > A SIG is a way for community members to collaborate around common >> >>>> > interests which in this case is QGIS. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > In establishing a SIG, the OO board requires that the group proposing >> >>>> > the SIG put forward a charter which outlines the Aim and Scope under >> >>>> > which the SIG will operate. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Myself, Emma Hain, John Bryant, Nathan Woodrow and Nyall Dawson would >> >>>> > like to start a QGIS SIG which can be used to benefit QGIS users in >> >>>> > our community. To get things started we have come up with a charter >> >>>> > that we would like to make available for community consultation. As >> >>>> > this charter currently reflects our input we would like to put this >> >>>> > out for discussion to see if what we are proposing is on the right >> >>>> > path for the community. At the moment everyone with the link below >> >>>> > has "comment" permissions, but "edit" permissions can be granted on >> >>>> > request if you would like to get more involved and you're welcome to >> >>>> > do so. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lrewntrC0N1r6mfZdo1AdPhe2qTEaN5hDA2pcL0mrvI/edit?usp=sharing >> >>>> > >> >>>> > I also just want to be upfront that this SIG is proposing that there >> >>>> > be a membership fee associated with the group. The funds raised by >> >>>> > the membership will be stored with the OO org and then used by the >> >>>> > SIG on items as scoped out in the charter. The idea with the >> >>>> > membership is not to "make money" but to pool our small contributions >> >>>> > to give us better "buying power" for lack of a better term. As a SIG >> >>>> > within the OO org we can participate in crowdfunding campaigns, >> >>>> > engage a dev to develop a feature important to us but might not be >> >>>> > recognised as important to the larger QGIS project, or engage a >> >>>> > trainer to provide professional development via Zoom, the types of >> >>>> > things that are hard to do as individuals or as a user group with no >> >>>> > funds etc. The membership arrangement also allows us to offer >> >>>> > membership to organisations which will become a way for them to >> >>>> > support QGIS and their local QGIS community. Ideally, this is where a >> >>>> > majority of the funds would come from as we don't want an individual >> >>>> > to be excluded due to a "fee", which is also covered in the charter. >> >>>> > I'm available as I'm sure the other proposers are to discuss the >> >>>> > intention of this further and in the open on this list. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Any questions feel free to ask or if you prefer to comment on the >> >>>> > charter that is fine too. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > I look forward to discussing this with you. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Thanks >> >>>> > Andrew >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > -- >> >>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >>>> > Groups "QGIS Australia User Group" group. >> >>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >> >>>> > send an email to >> >>>> > australian-qgis-user-group+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> >>>> > To view this discussion on the web, visit >> >>>> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/australian-qgis-user-group/CADTxF6bV6OicKcLveZsexfQ_gLULoFTpATV3iyjxWBswRyM_iA%40mail.gmail.com. >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >>>> Groups "QGIS Australia User Group" group. >> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> >>>> an email to australian-qgis-user-group+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> >>>> To view this discussion on the web, visit >> >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/australian-qgis-user-group/CAFORoyh3xiAcvRrAWbNK%3DrH%2B0-DUhq1GZnVp08t8HX90R9tdKA%40mail.gmail.com. >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >>> Groups "QGIS Australia User Group" group. >> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> >>> an email to australian-qgis-user-group+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> >>> To view this discussion on the web, visit >> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/australian-qgis-user-group/CADTxF6ZUvSgCSuzn-ikrGNAKBmaQ5Mc84uCTbOeLSLqRtjfzew%40mail.gmail.com. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> >> "QGIS Australia User Group" group. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> >> email to australian-qgis-user-group+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> >> To view this discussion on the web, visit >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/australian-qgis-user-group/CAHY5hn8OAzyneschpsBa2XwifpKo47mFrWfwGafoDAOJjFir1Q%40mail.gmail.com. >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> > "QGIS Australia User Group" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> > email to australian-qgis-user-group+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web, visit >> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/australian-qgis-user-group/CADTxF6b8jpUOK8EeMyUnd3rYG9N_EAKtU%3D%2Bwao1ZZUHBHUw9aQ%40mail.gmail.com. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "QGIS Australia User Group" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to australian-qgis-user-group+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/australian-qgis-user-group/CAFORoyiDubVGZybpYo_uQs_8m%2BF9-LKcKTWHtrNG41vT8Mf%2BmA%40mail.gmail.com. >> >> >> -- >> Cameron Shorter >> Technical Writer, Google >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oceania mailing list >> Oceania@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania >> >> >> -- >> Alex Leith >> m: 0419189050 >> _______________________________________________ >> Oceania mailing list >> Oceania@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "QGIS Australia User Group" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to australian-qgis-user-group+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/australian-qgis-user-group/5BAC325B-3737-48E0-8BB3-DEA443E3AD37%40gmail.com.
_______________________________________________ Oceania mailing list Oceania@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
