Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOB meeting reminder

[Jui Pradhan]

Hi Everyone,

Sorry could not attend the meeting today. I'll look at the minutes :)

Regards,
Jui

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 04:03 Walter Bender  wrote:

> The next meeting of the Sugar Labs oversight board is on Wednesday, 17
> March at 19:30 UTC (3:30 PM on the US East Coast). NOTE the time
> change for those attending from the US.
>
> We will be meeting in the #sugar room of matrix.org.
>
> Among other topics, we will discuss LibrePlanet -- should we have a
> virtual booth -- and Google Season of Docs.
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOB meeting reminder

[Chihurumnaya Ibiam]

I apologize for not attending today's meeting - had some connection issues
-, can someone
share the minutes. Thanks.

-- 

Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com



On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 10:54 PM Walter Bender 
wrote:

> The next meeting of the Sugar Labs oversight board is on Wednesday, 17
> February at 19:30 UTC (2:30 PM on the US East Coast).
>
> We agreed to meet in the #sugar room of matrix.org so please be sure
> to have a matrix client available. (I use element, which is available
> at element.io.)
>
> Please contact me if you have any questions.
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and time change

[Claudia Urrea]

Hi Walter,

I am in Colombia and I will try my best to get home, so I can connect.

Claudia

On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Lionel Laské  wrote:

> Hi Walter,
>
> Not sure to be around.
> Is there something specific on the agenda ?
>
>  Lionel.
>
>
> 2018-07-05 19:06 GMT+02:00 Samson Goddy :
>
>> Good for me
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, 5:50 PM Walter Bender 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have our regular Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting scheduled for
>>> Friday, 6 July. Unfortunately I have a conflict at 20:00 UTC. Can we meet
>>> at 21:00 UTC?
>>>
>>> regards.
>>>
>>> -walter
>>> --
>>> Walter Bender
>>> Sugar Labs
>>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> SLOBs mailing list
>>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> SLOBs mailing list
>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>
>>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and time change

[Lionel Laské]

Hi Walter,

Not sure to be around.
Is there something specific on the agenda ?

 Lionel.


2018-07-05 19:06 GMT+02:00 Samson Goddy :

> Good for me
>
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, 5:50 PM Walter Bender 
> wrote:
>
>> We have our regular Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting scheduled for
>> Friday, 6 July. Unfortunately I have a conflict at 20:00 UTC. Can we meet
>> at 21:00 UTC?
>>
>> regards.
>>
>> -walter
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> 
>> ___
>> SLOBs mailing list
>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and time change

[Samson Goddy]

Good for me

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, 5:50 PM Walter Bender  wrote:

> We have our regular Sugar Labs Oversight Board meeting scheduled for
> Friday, 6 July. Unfortunately I have a conflict at 20:00 UTC. Can we meet
> at 21:00 UTC?
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

Today's meeting log:

http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2017-10-06


Next Meeting Agenda:

https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Next_meeting


Regards and thank you all who participated,

Laura Victoria

2017-10-04 10:14 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :

> We have a meeting on Friday, 6 October at 1900 UTC. Please join us in
> irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting (chat.sugarlabs.org) to discuss these
> topics:
>
>
>- Code of Conduct
>- i18n contract for Aymara
>- Creation of a SLOB shadow mailing list
>- Discussion of "process" (and "guidelines") for requesting travel
>advances
>- Discussion of "guidelines" for external programs such as GCI, GSoC,
>Outreachy, etc.
>- GCI participation (further clarification is needed regarding
>Oversight_Board/Decisions#2017-09-14
>)
>- Discussion of proposal to have motions translated into Spanish (and
>other languages?)
>- SLOB election update
>- Financial report first and second quarters 2017
>- Discussion of process for finding/appointing a finance manager
>- Update/discussion regarding computer-xo icon
>
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>


-- 
Laura V.
* I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*

“Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
~ L. Victoria

Happy Learning!
#LearningByDoing
#Projects4good
#IDesignATSugarLabs
#WeCanDoBetter
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Walter Bender]

http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2017-09-01T19:10:08

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Sameer Verma  wrote:

> Couldn't make it. Meeting conflict at work.
>
> Sameer
>
> On Aug 31, 2017 5:22 PM, "Walter Bender"  wrote:
>
>> We have a meeting on Friday, 1 September at 19UTC. Please join us in
>> irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting. Note that one option to connect is via
>> chat.sugarlabs.org in your web browser.
>>
>> Among other topics of discussion:
>> * Summary of GSoC/Outreachy
>> * SLOB election
>> * Google Code-in
>>
>> regards.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> SLOBs mailing list
>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>
>>


-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org

___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Sameer Verma]

Couldn't make it. Meeting conflict at work.

Sameer

On Aug 31, 2017 5:22 PM, "Walter Bender"  wrote:

> We have a meeting on Friday, 1 September at 19UTC. Please join us in
> irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting. Note that one option to connect is via
> chat.sugarlabs.org in your web browser.
>
> Among other topics of discussion:
> * Summary of GSoC/Outreachy
> * SLOB election
> * Google Code-in
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

2016-12-06 0:57 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :

>
> Hi
>
> On 3 December 2016 at 19:54, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>
>> I pray to the Gods for your forgiveness!!! :D
>>
>
> lol
>
>
>> 2016-12-02 23:21 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :
>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I checked the http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-12-02 log
>>> - sorry I couldn't make it, was in transit at that time. Sameer, sorry to
>>> hear about your colleague. No pressure, just looking forward to your next
>>> installment - when you can :)
>>>
>>> On 2 December 2016 at 12:36, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>>>
 I would assume they *do* wish to stand for re-election.

>>> Tony, Jose Miguel, and Claudia, please could you reply to this email
>>> confirming or denying your wish to stand for reelection in 2017.
>>>
>>
>> If you don't set clear deadlines don't expect execution. // Please set a
>> deadline :D
>>
>
> Whoever runs the election should set deadlines (and make application pages
> :)
>
>> The publicity on this has been terrible.

>>> Actually non-existent, because there is nothing to publicize.
>>>
 I don't know who is in charge,

>>> No one is in charge.
>>>
>>
>> You are in charge Dave! we know you can do it :D
>>
>
> Sadly I will not have any real spare time to work on this kind of thing
> until December 18/19/20, and then no time until Jan 7, and then Jan 28/29.
> My calendar is completely full with work/family/friends obligations until
> then.
>

Dave,

You are SL official Secretary! remember?

Since there was a lack of interest of 2016 SLOBs to set an election within
the year, I guess we would have to wait until you have time :D


Regards and blessings to free software!



> SLOBs, do you have a 'semi-legal' duty to perform the election before a
> certain date?
>
> --
> Cheers
> Dave
>



-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

On 3 December 2016 at 19:54, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> I pray to the Gods for your forgiveness!!! :D
>

lol


> 2016-12-02 23:21 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :
>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I checked the http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-12-02 log
>> - sorry I couldn't make it, was in transit at that time. Sameer, sorry to
>> hear about your colleague. No pressure, just looking forward to your next
>> installment - when you can :)
>>
>> On 2 December 2016 at 12:36, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>>
>>> I would assume they *do* wish to stand for re-election.
>>>
>> Tony, Jose Miguel, and Claudia, please could you reply to this email
>> confirming or denying your wish to stand for reelection in 2017.
>>
>
> If you don't set clear deadlines don't expect execution. // Please set a
> deadline :D
>

Whoever runs the election should set deadlines (and make application pages
:)

> The publicity on this has been terrible.
>>>
>> Actually non-existent, because there is nothing to publicize.
>>
>>> I don't know who is in charge,
>>>
>> No one is in charge.
>>
>
> You are in charge Dave! we know you can do it :D
>

Sadly I will not have any real spare time to work on this kind of thing
until December 18/19/20, and then no time until Jan 7, and then Jan 28/29.
My calendar is completely full with work/family/friends obligations until
then.

SLOBs, do you have a 'semi-legal' duty to perform the election before a
certain date?

-- 
Cheers
Dave
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Dave Crossland]

On 5 December 2016 at 07:15, José Miguel García  wrote:

> Hola!
>
> 2016-12-04 2:34 GMT-03:00 Sameer Verma :
>
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > I checked the http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-12-02
>> log -
>> > sorry I couldn't make it, was in transit at that time. Sameer, sorry to
>> hear
>> > about your colleague. No pressure, just looking forward to your next
>> > installment - when you can :)
>> >
>>
>
> No pude encontrar la página de postulaciones para el año 2017. No sería
> ese el lugar natural para que se realizaran, en lugar de una cadena de
> correo?
>

Yes, whoever runs the election should make an applications page. ;)

[ Sí, quien ejecuta la elección debe hacer una página de solicitudes. ;) ]


> Me alegro que haya jóvenes que quieran sumarse!
>

Yes, I agree!! :)

[ ¡¡Sí estoy de acuerdo!! ]



> >Thank you. Apart from the personal loss, we've had to pick up his
>> >classes, which has been difficult to manage along with everything
>> >else. I do have some stuff lined up for us. My semester ends in two
>> >weeks.
>> >
>> > On 2 December 2016 at 12:36, Caryl Bigenho 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I would assume they do wish to stand for re-election.
>> >
>> > Tony, Jose Miguel, and Claudia, please could you reply to this email
>> > confirming or denying your wish to stand for reelection in 2017.
>> >
>>
>
> Si bien entiendo que el lugar de definir las postulaciones no es este, y
> habiendo interesantes candidatos nuevo, no me presentaré este año.
>

Cool :D So, what I am wondering is if there are only 3 people seeking
(re)election and 3 slots open, then there is no need for the election. XD

[ Enfriar :D Por lo tanto, lo que me pregunto es si hay sólo 3 personas que
buscan (re) elección y 3 espacios abiertos, entonces no hay necesidad de la
elección. XD ]

-- 
Cheers
Dave
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Sameer Verma]

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I checked the http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-12-02 log -
> sorry I couldn't make it, was in transit at that time. Sameer, sorry to hear
> about your colleague. No pressure, just looking forward to your next
> installment - when you can :)
>

Thank you. Apart from the personal loss, we've had to pick up his
classes, which has been difficult to manage along with everything
else. I do have some stuff lined up for us. My semester ends in two
weeks.

> On 2 December 2016 at 12:36, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>>
>> I would assume they do wish to stand for re-election.
>
> Tony, Jose Miguel, and Claudia, please could you reply to this email
> confirming or denying your wish to stand for reelection in 2017.
>
>>
>> The publicity on this has been terrible.
>
> Actually non-existent, because there is nothing to publicize.
>
>>
>> I don't know who is in charge,
>
> No one is in charge.

I am the SLOB rep, but would prefer a non-SLOB to chair the elections.

Sameer
-- 
Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
Professor, Information Systems
San Francisco State University
http://verma.sfsu.edu/

>>
>> but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of deadlines to
>> file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an announcement sent out to all
>> of the membership asking if they wish to run and giving deadlines and a
>> timeline? I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It
>> looks like someone is trying to rig the election! (Sorry... but that is how
>> some of us from the US feel about elections right now!
>
> There is no election to be rigged ;)
>
> On 2 December 2016 at 18:45, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>>
>> What I don't understand is why it wasn't made (or delegated) on time? this
>> should have been done in September-October and November, don't you agree?
>
>
> Well, sure - shoulda woulda coulda :)
>
> I said I would do some things, and I did not do them, and no one else has
> said anything about any of this I apologise.
>
> - I ought to have been more proactive, and said in September when all my
> time got taken with my employment that I wouldn't be able to do anything, as
> I had said I would
>
> - Each SLOB ought to have been more proactive, realised the obligation to
> run the election, and solicited a new volunteer
>
> - Anyone else active in the community could have been more proactive on this
>
> But no one was. Alas!
>
> Now, rather than focusing on who in this very small community ought to have
> done, I suggest we all focus on moving forwards and suggest what we may do
> as next steps.
>
> I am unlikely to have any real spare time from now until mid-January. I'm
> happy for anyone to ask me to do something and I'll do what I can, but
> basically I'm checked out until then.
>
> # https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRh_vgS2dFE #
>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

2016-12-03 19:54 GMT-05:00 Laura Vargas :

> I pray to the Gods for your forgiveness!!! :D
>
>
> 2016-12-02 23:21 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :
>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I checked the http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-12-02 log
>> - sorry I couldn't make it, was in transit at that time. Sameer, sorry to
>> hear about your colleague. No pressure, just looking forward to your next
>> installment - when you can :)
>>
>> On 2 December 2016 at 12:36, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>>
>>> I would assume they *do* wish to stand for re-election.
>>>
>> Tony, Jose Miguel, and Claudia, please could you reply to this email
>> confirming or denying your wish to stand for reelection in 2017.
>>
>>
>
> If you don't set clear deadlines don't expect execution.
>

Please set a deadline :D

> The publicity on this has been terrible.
>>>
>> Actually non-existent, because there is nothing to publicize.
>>
>>
>>> I don't know who is in charge,
>>>
>> No one is in charge.
>>
>
> You are in charge Dave! we know you can do it :D
>
>> but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of deadlines
>>> to file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an announcement sent out to
>>> all of the membership asking if they wish to run and giving deadlines and a
>>> timeline? I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It
>>> looks like someone is trying to rig the election! (Sorry... but that is how
>>> some of us from the US feel about elections right now!
>>>
>> There is no election to be rigged ;)
>>
>> On 2 December 2016 at 18:45, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>>
>>> What I don't understand is why it wasn't made (or delegated) on time?
>>> this should have been done in September-October and November, don't you
>>> agree?
>>
>>
>> Well, sure - shoulda woulda coulda :)
>>
>> I said I would do some things, and I did not do them, and no one else has
>> said anything about any of this I apologise.
>>
>> - I ought to have been more proactive, and said in September when all my
>> time got taken with my employment that I wouldn't be able to do anything,
>> as I had said I would
>>
>> - Each SLOB ought to have been more proactive, realised the obligation to
>> run the election, and solicited a new volunteer
>>
>> - Anyone else active in the community could have been more proactive on
>> this
>>
>> But no one was. Alas!
>>
>> Now, rather than focusing on who in this very small community ought to
>> have done, I suggest we all focus on moving forwards and suggest what we
>> may do as next steps.
>>
>
> We should relax and have very happy lives!!!
>
> Blessings to your feminine side :D
>
> (we are celebrating #feminidadTIC this weekend)
>
>
>> I am unlikely to have any real spare time from now until mid-January. I'm
>> happy for anyone to ask me to do something and I'll do what I can, but
>> basically I'm checked out until then.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org
>
> Identi.ca/Skype acaire
> IRC kaametza
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>


-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

I pray to the Gods for your forgiveness!!! :D


2016-12-02 23:21 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :

>
> Hi
>
> I checked the http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-12-02 log -
> sorry I couldn't make it, was in transit at that time. Sameer, sorry to
> hear about your colleague. No pressure, just looking forward to your next
> installment - when you can :)
>
> On 2 December 2016 at 12:36, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>
>> I would assume they *do* wish to stand for re-election.
>>
> Tony, Jose Miguel, and Claudia, please could you reply to this email
> confirming or denying your wish to stand for reelection in 2017.
>
>

If you don't set clear deadlines don't expect execution.

> The publicity on this has been terrible.
>>
> Actually non-existent, because there is nothing to publicize.
>
>
>> I don't know who is in charge,
>>
> No one is in charge.
>

You are in charge Dave! we know you can do it :D

> but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of deadlines to
>> file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an announcement sent out to all
>> of the membership asking if they wish to run and giving deadlines and a
>> timeline? I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It
>> looks like someone is trying to rig the election! (Sorry... but that is how
>> some of us from the US feel about elections right now!
>>
> There is no election to be rigged ;)
>
> On 2 December 2016 at 18:45, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>
>> What I don't understand is why it wasn't made (or delegated) on time?
>> this should have been done in September-October and November, don't you
>> agree?
>
>
> Well, sure - shoulda woulda coulda :)
>
> I said I would do some things, and I did not do them, and no one else has
> said anything about any of this I apologise.
>
> - I ought to have been more proactive, and said in September when all my
> time got taken with my employment that I wouldn't be able to do anything,
> as I had said I would
>
> - Each SLOB ought to have been more proactive, realised the obligation to
> run the election, and solicited a new volunteer
>
> - Anyone else active in the community could have been more proactive on
> this
>
> But no one was. Alas!
>
> Now, rather than focusing on who in this very small community ought to
> have done, I suggest we all focus on moving forwards and suggest what we
> may do as next steps.
>

We should relax and have very happy lives!!!

Blessings to your feminine side :D

(we are celebrating #feminidadTIC this weekend)


> I am unlikely to have any real spare time from now until mid-January. I'm
> happy for anyone to ask me to do something and I'll do what I can, but
> basically I'm checked out until then.
>
>
> ___
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>



-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

I checked the http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-12-02 log -
sorry I couldn't make it, was in transit at that time. Sameer, sorry to
hear about your colleague. No pressure, just looking forward to your next
installment - when you can :)

On 2 December 2016 at 12:36, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:

> I would assume they *do* wish to stand for re-election.
>
Tony, Jose Miguel, and Claudia, please could you reply to this email
confirming or denying your wish to stand for reelection in 2017.


> The publicity on this has been terrible.
>
Actually non-existent, because there is nothing to publicize.


> I don't know who is in charge,
>
No one is in charge.

> but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of deadlines to
> file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an announcement sent out to all
> of the membership asking if they wish to run and giving deadlines and a
> timeline? I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It
> looks like someone is trying to rig the election! (Sorry... but that is how
> some of us from the US feel about elections right now!
>
There is no election to be rigged ;)

On 2 December 2016 at 18:45, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> What I don't understand is why it wasn't made (or delegated) on time? this
> should have been done in September-October and November, don't you agree?


Well, sure - shoulda woulda coulda :)

I said I would do some things, and I did not do them, and no one else has
said anything about any of this I apologise.

- I ought to have been more proactive, and said in September when all my
time got taken with my employment that I wouldn't be able to do anything,
as I had said I would

- Each SLOB ought to have been more proactive, realised the obligation to
run the election, and solicited a new volunteer

- Anyone else active in the community could have been more proactive on this

But no one was. Alas!

Now, rather than focusing on who in this very small community ought to have
done, I suggest we all focus on moving forwards and suggest what we may do
as next steps.

I am unlikely to have any real spare time from now until mid-January. I'm
happy for anyone to ask me to do something and I'll do what I can, but
basically I'm checked out until then.

# https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRh_vgS2dFE #
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

Caryl,

I'm really sad you are not directing the committee's time table and
activities, like last year. We should all thank you for your hard work.

I'm also sorry you had no time to move forward with the funding activities,
you promoted early this year.


I agree and I hope everyone (every year) has the opportunity to run for the
board and this requires promotion from the committee. *What I don't
understand is why it wasn't made (or delegated) on time? this should have
been done in September-October and November, don't you agree?*


Regards and blessings,

Laura Victoria



2016-12-02 17:38 GMT-05:00 Caryl Bigenho :

> Sebastian wrote, "That is a statement that shouldn't be done lightly. It
> casts doubt on
> the process you yourself led last year."
>
> As you well know we (you, Samson, and I) sent out multiple emails to make
> very sure everyone had an opportunity not only to vote but also to run for
> office, if they so chose. It was a lot of work and we had many hours
> involved in making it happen. I Have seen nothing like that happening this
> year.
>
> Caryl
> --
> *From:* Sebastian Silva 
> *Sent:* Friday, December 2, 2016 10:56:43 AM
> *To:* Caryl Bigenho; Laura Vargas; Dave Crossland; Tony Anderson; José
> Miguel García; Claudia Ur
> *Cc:* SLOBs; iaep; Sugar-dev Devel; OLPC para usuarios, docentes,
> voluntarios y administradores
> *Subject:* Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder
>
>
>
> On 02/12/16 12:36, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
> > I don't know who is in charge,
> Last time, you were in charge of the election.
> > but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of
> > deadlines to file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an
> > announcement sent out to all of the membership asking if they wish to
> > run and giving deadlines and a timeline?
> Are you being ironic? There obviously wasn't any.
> > I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It looks
> > like someone is trying to rig the election!
> That is a statement that shouldn't be done lightly. It casts doubt on
> the process you yourself led last year.
>
> I don't plan to volunteer this year. This has been made clear in prior
> conversation but I thought it would be worth to state it publicly again.
>
> Dave already gave an update on the current status.
>
> Regards,
> Sebastian
>



-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Caryl Bigenho]

Sebastian wrote, "That is a statement that shouldn't be done lightly. It casts 
doubt on

the process you yourself led last year."

As you well know we (you, Samson, and I) sent out multiple emails to make very 
sure everyone had an opportunity not only to vote but also to run for office, 
if they so chose. It was a lot of work and we had many hours involved in making 
it happen. I Have seen nothing like that happening this year.

Caryl

From: Sebastian Silva 
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 10:56:43 AM
To: Caryl Bigenho; Laura Vargas; Dave Crossland; Tony Anderson; José Miguel 
García; Claudia Ur
Cc: SLOBs; iaep; Sugar-dev Devel; OLPC para usuarios, docentes, voluntarios y 
administradores
Subject: Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder



On 02/12/16 12:36, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
> I don't know who is in charge,
Last time, you were in charge of the election.
> but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of
> deadlines to file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an
> announcement sent out to all of the membership asking if they wish to
> run and giving deadlines and a timeline?
Are you being ironic? There obviously wasn't any.
> I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It looks
> like someone is trying to rig the election!
That is a statement that shouldn't be done lightly. It casts doubt on
the process you yourself led last year.

I don't plan to volunteer this year. This has been made clear in prior
conversation but I thought it would be worth to state it publicly again.

Dave already gave an update on the current status.

Regards,
Sebastian
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

Dave,

So far it looks like this year's election is still in your plate :D

If you need to pass it on, please call openly in IAEP for help and/or
leadership.

However it goes, it would be very nice to keep community timely informed.

Regards and blessings!

Laura Victoria


2016-12-02 13:56 GMT-05:00 Sebastian Silva :

>
>
> On 02/12/16 12:36, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
> > I don't know who is in charge,
> Last time, you were in charge of the election.
> > but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of
> > deadlines to file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an
> > announcement sent out to all of the membership asking if they wish to
> > run and giving deadlines and a timeline?
> Are you being ironic? There obviously wasn't any.
> > I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It looks
> > like someone is trying to rig the election!
> That is a statement that shouldn't be done lightly. It casts doubt on
> the process you yourself led last year.
>
> I don't plan to volunteer this year. This has been made clear in prior
> conversation but I thought it would be worth to state it publicly again.
>
> Dave already gave an update on the current status.
>
> Regards,
> Sebastian
>



-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Sebastian Silva]

On 02/12/16 12:36, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
> I don't know who is in charge, 
Last time, you were in charge of the election.
> but they should have made sure they sent several reminders of
> deadlines to file for candidacy. In fact, was there ever an
> announcement sent out to all of the membership asking if they wish to
> run and giving deadlines and a timeline?
Are you being ironic? There obviously wasn't any.
> I didn't see even one. This has always been done in the past. It looks
> like someone is trying to rig the election!
That is a statement that shouldn't be done lightly. It casts doubt on
the process you yourself led last year.

I don't plan to volunteer this year. This has been made clear in prior
conversation but I thought it would be worth to state it publicly again.

Dave already gave an update on the current status.

Regards,
Sebastian
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

Not sure what you are trying to say. Even after living, studying and
working in the US (thank you Fulbright Schoolarships!) I still fail to
understand how US citizens understand and act upon democracy :D

I guess having a standar and logical caledar for every year's election will
make this easier for following years.

Ej:

Identify voting members: October
Call for Candidates: November
Election:December


2016-12-02 12:36 GMT-05:00 Caryl Bigenho :

> I would assume they *do* wish to stand for re-election. The publicity on
> this has been terrible. I don't know who is in charge, but they should have
> made sure they sent several reminders of deadlines to file for candidacy.
> In fact, was there ever an announcement sent out to all of the membership
> asking if they wish to run and giving deadlines and a timeline? I didn't
> see even one. This has always been done in the past. It looks like someone
> is trying to rig the election! (Sorry... but that is how some of us from
> the US feel about elections right now!)
>
>
> Caryl
>
>
> --
> *From:* IAEP  on behalf of Laura Vargas
> 
> *Sent:* Friday, December 2, 2016 8:44:55 AM
> *To:* Dave Crossland
> *Cc:* iaep; Sugar-dev Devel; OLPC para usuarios, docentes, voluntarios y
> administradores; SLOBs
> *Subject:* Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder
>
>
>
> 2016-12-02 11:38 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :
>
>>
>>
>> On 2 December 2016 at 11:28, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2016-12-02 11:27 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2 December 2016 at 11:24, Laura Vargas 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Looks like we have 3 seats for 3 candidates :D
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 6 candidates, assuming the 3 people in those 3 seats want to stand for
>>>> reeleection?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why would you assume this?
>>>
>>
>> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>>
>> Why would you not? :D
>>
>> lol :)
>>
>
>
> Because you announced elections will take place first week of December. If
> they were interested I'm sure they would already expressed interest as
> Ignacio, Samson and I.
>
> At least some interest in setting up the elections, don't you think?
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>


-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Caryl Bigenho]

I would assume they do wish to stand for re-election. The publicity on this has 
been terrible. I don't know who is in charge, but they should have made sure 
they sent several reminders of deadlines to file for candidacy. In fact, was 
there ever an announcement sent out to all of the membership asking if they 
wish to run and giving deadlines and a timeline? I didn't see even one. This 
has always been done in the past. It looks like someone is trying to rig the 
election! (Sorry... but that is how some of us from the US feel about elections 
right now!)


Caryl



From: IAEP  on behalf of Laura Vargas 

Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 8:44:55 AM
To: Dave Crossland
Cc: iaep; Sugar-dev Devel; OLPC para usuarios, docentes, voluntarios y 
administradores; SLOBs
Subject: Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder



2016-12-02 11:38 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland mailto:d...@lab6.com>>:


On 2 December 2016 at 11:28, Laura Vargas 
mailto:la...@somosazucar.org>> wrote:


2016-12-02 11:27 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland mailto:d...@lab6.com>>:

On 2 December 2016 at 11:24, Laura Vargas 
mailto:la...@somosazucar.org>> wrote:
Looks like we have 3 seats for 3 candidates :D

6 candidates, assuming the 3 people in those 3 seats want to stand for 
reeleection?

Why would you assume this?

¯\_(?)_/¯

Why would you not? :D

lol :)


Because you announced elections will take place first week of December. If they 
were interested I'm sure they would already expressed interest as Ignacio, 
Samson and I.

At least some interest in setting up the elections, don't you think?


--
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Happy Learning!

___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

2016-12-02 11:38 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :

>
>
> On 2 December 2016 at 11:28, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> 2016-12-02 11:27 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :
>>
>>>
>>> On 2 December 2016 at 11:24, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>>>
 Looks like we have 3 seats for 3 candidates :D

>>>
>>> 6 candidates, assuming the 3 people in those 3 seats want to stand for
>>> reeleection?
>>>
>>
>> Why would you assume this?
>>
>
> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
> Why would you not? :D
>
> lol :)
>


Because you announced elections will take place first week of December. If
they were interested I'm sure they would already expressed interest as
Ignacio, Samson and I.

At least some interest in setting up the elections, don't you think?


-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Dave Crossland]

On 2 December 2016 at 11:28, Laura Vargas  wrote:

>
>
> 2016-12-02 11:27 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :
>
>>
>> On 2 December 2016 at 11:24, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like we have 3 seats for 3 candidates :D
>>>
>>
>> 6 candidates, assuming the 3 people in those 3 seats want to stand for
>> reeleection?
>>
>
> Why would you assume this?
>

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Why would you not? :D

lol :)
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

2016-12-02 11:27 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :

>
> On 2 December 2016 at 11:24, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>
>> Looks like we have 3 seats for 3 candidates :D
>>
>
> 6 candidates, assuming the 3 people in those 3 seats want to stand for
> reeleection?
>

Why would you assume this?


-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Dave Crossland]

On 2 December 2016 at 11:24, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> Looks like we have 3 seats for 3 candidates :D
>

6 candidates, assuming the 3 people in those 3 seats want to stand for
reeleection?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

2016-12-02 11:03 GMT-05:00 Dave Crossland :

>
> On 2 December 2016 at 09:19, Walter Bender 
> wrote:
>
>> I have heard nothing from the Election/Membership committee about any
>> update.
>
>
> I hope my email last night could serve as such an update :)
>



Dave,

I hope you read Ignacio and Samson would also like to be part of the Board
for the 2017-2019!

This are fantastic news!!!

Looks like we have 3 seats for 3 candidates :D



-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Dave Crossland]

On 2 December 2016 at 09:19, Walter Bender  wrote:

> I have heard nothing from the Election/Membership committee about any
> update.


I hope my email last night could serve as such an update :)
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Chris Leonard]

 I'm not going to be able to join, but Walter will cover the L10n topic.

cjl

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Walter Bender  wrote:
> There is not much of an agenda. I will give an update on GCI and one i18n
> project. The discussion proposed by Tony has been seemingly postponed until
> we hear back from Sameer. I have heard nothing from the Election/Membership
> committee about any update.
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> (NOTE: 19UTC == 2PM Boston/New York/Miami time.)
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Walter,
>>
>> Is there a call and agenda for December meeting?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> 2016-11-04 16:26 GMT-05:00 Sameer Verma :
>>>
>>> Sorry, I couldn't make it. Too many meetings, plus OLPC SF Community
>>> Summit begins this evening.
>>>
>>> Sameer
>>> --
>>> Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
>>> Professor, Information Systems
>>> San Francisco State University
>>> http://verma.sfsu.edu/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:09 AM, Walter Bender 
>>> wrote:
>>> > My apologies for not sending this out earlier. We have a Sugar Labs
>>> > oversight board meeting today at 19UTC (15 EST) (See [1]). Please join
>>> > us on
>>> > irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting
>>> >
>>> > Among the discussion topics will be:
>>> > Google Code In (See [2]).
>>> >
>>> > regards.
>>> >
>>> > -walter
>>> >
>>> > [1]
>>> >
>>> > http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20161104T15&p0=43&msg=Sugar+Labs+oversight+board+meeting1&font=cursive
>>> > [2] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Google_Code_In_2016
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Walter Bender
>>> > Sugar Labs
>>> > http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > SLOBs mailing list
>>> > sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>> >
>>> ___
>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org
>>
>> Identi.ca/Skype acaire
>> IRC kaametza
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

Adam,

Since it is the last meeting of the year I thought maybe you need a space
for wrapping financials.

Regards,

Laura

2016-12-02 9:19 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender :

> There is not much of an agenda. I will give an update on GCI and one i18n
> project. The discussion proposed by Tony has been seemingly postponed until
> we hear back from Sameer. I have heard nothing from the Election/Membership
> committee about any update.
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> (NOTE: 19UTC == 2PM Boston/New York/Miami time.)
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Laura Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Walter,
>>
>> Is there a call and agenda for December meeting?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> 2016-11-04 16:26 GMT-05:00 Sameer Verma :
>>
>>> Sorry, I couldn't make it. Too many meetings, plus OLPC SF Community
>>> Summit begins this evening.
>>>
>>> Sameer
>>> --
>>> Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
>>> Professor, Information Systems
>>> San Francisco State University
>>> http://verma.sfsu.edu/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:09 AM, Walter Bender 
>>> wrote:
>>> > My apologies for not sending this out earlier. We have a Sugar Labs
>>> > oversight board meeting today at 19UTC (15 EST) (See [1]). Please join
>>> us on
>>> > irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting
>>> >
>>> > Among the discussion topics will be:
>>> > Google Code In (See [2]).
>>> >
>>> > regards.
>>> >
>>> > -walter
>>> >
>>> > [1]
>>> > http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20161104T15
>>> &p0=43&msg=Sugar+Labs+oversight+board+meeting1&font=cursive
>>> > [2] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Google_Code_In_2016
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Walter Bender
>>> > Sugar Labs
>>> > http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > SLOBs mailing list
>>> > sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>> >
>>> ___
>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org
>>
>> Identi.ca/Skype acaire
>> IRC kaametza
>>
>> Happy Learning!
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>



-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Walter Bender]

There is not much of an agenda. I will give an update on GCI and one i18n
project. The discussion proposed by Tony has been seemingly postponed until
we hear back from Sameer. I have heard nothing from the Election/Membership
committee about any update.

regards.

-walter

(NOTE: 19UTC == 2PM Boston/New York/Miami time.)

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> Hi Walter,
>
> Is there a call and agenda for December meeting?
>
> Regards
>
> 2016-11-04 16:26 GMT-05:00 Sameer Verma :
>
>> Sorry, I couldn't make it. Too many meetings, plus OLPC SF Community
>> Summit begins this evening.
>>
>> Sameer
>> --
>> Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
>> Professor, Information Systems
>> San Francisco State University
>> http://verma.sfsu.edu/
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:09 AM, Walter Bender 
>> wrote:
>> > My apologies for not sending this out earlier. We have a Sugar Labs
>> > oversight board meeting today at 19UTC (15 EST) (See [1]). Please join
>> us on
>> > irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting
>> >
>> > Among the discussion topics will be:
>> > Google Code In (See [2]).
>> >
>> > regards.
>> >
>> > -walter
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20161104T15
>> &p0=43&msg=Sugar+Labs+oversight+board+meeting1&font=cursive
>> > [2] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Google_Code_In_2016
>> >
>> > --
>> > Walter Bender
>> > Sugar Labs
>> > http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> >
>> >
>> > ___
>> > SLOBs mailing list
>> > sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>> >
>> ___
>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>
>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org
>
> Identi.ca/Skype acaire
> IRC kaametza
>
> Happy Learning!
>
>


-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org

___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Laura Vargas]

Hi Walter,

Is there a call and agenda for December meeting?

Regards

2016-11-04 16:26 GMT-05:00 Sameer Verma :

> Sorry, I couldn't make it. Too many meetings, plus OLPC SF Community
> Summit begins this evening.
>
> Sameer
> --
> Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
> Professor, Information Systems
> San Francisco State University
> http://verma.sfsu.edu/
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:09 AM, Walter Bender 
> wrote:
> > My apologies for not sending this out earlier. We have a Sugar Labs
> > oversight board meeting today at 19UTC (15 EST) (See [1]). Please join
> us on
> > irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting
> >
> > Among the discussion topics will be:
> > Google Code In (See [2]).
> >
> > regards.
> >
> > -walter
> >
> > [1]
> > http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=
> 20161104T15&p0=43&msg=Sugar+Labs+oversight+board+meeting1&font=cursive
> > [2] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Google_Code_In_2016
> >
> > --
> > Walter Bender
> > Sugar Labs
> > http://www.sugarlabs.org
> >
> >
> > ___
> > SLOBs mailing list
> > sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
> >
> ___
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep




-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Sameer Verma]

Sorry, I couldn't make it. Too many meetings, plus OLPC SF Community
Summit begins this evening.

Sameer
-- 
Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
Professor, Information Systems
San Francisco State University
http://verma.sfsu.edu/


On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:09 AM, Walter Bender  wrote:
> My apologies for not sending this out earlier. We have a Sugar Labs
> oversight board meeting today at 19UTC (15 EST) (See [1]). Please join us on
> irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting
>
> Among the discussion topics will be:
> Google Code In (See [2]).
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> [1]
> http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20161104T15&p0=43&msg=Sugar+Labs+oversight+board+meeting1&font=cursive
> [2] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Google_Code_In_2016
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] Meeting reminder

[Lionel Laské]

Sorry. Not sure at all that I could be there due to the limited internet
connection I've got.

Lionel.


2016-08-05 0:20 GMT+02:00 Walter Bender :

> We have a Sugar Labs oversight board meeting on Friday, 5 August at 19UTC
> *. Please join us on irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting
>
> Among the discussion topics: Turtle Art Days in Abuja, Asuncion, and
> Montevideo
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
> * http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=
> 20160805T15&p0=43&msg=Sugar+Labs+oversight+board+meeting&font=cursive
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Dave Crossland]

Do you have any more specific objections?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Adam Holt]

Progress.  Further progress will come after I speak with Bradley Kuhn in
coming weeks, to understand has real-world recommendations on
pacing/publishing financials, based on his extensive experiences with the
~40 NGO's he (as SFConservancy's de facto bookkeeper) supervises/supports.
I hope he has time in the coming week, but if not I will work around his
schedule.

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> Hi
>
> I went over Caryl's google doc again after re-reading the below, and I
> must say that I am no longer surprised by Adam's comments at the SLOB
> meeting on Friday; it seems that these clearly expressed points were
> not addressed in the text that Caryl submitted.
>
> Adam, please review the Google Doc with my comments and let me know if
> this resolves your concerns.
>
> On 6 May 2016 at 10:06, Adam Holt  wrote:
> > The financial spring cleaning CarylB, DaveC and others have worked hard
> on
> > within
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit
> > is promising, but seems premature in my opinion, until its mechanics are
> > better understood:
> >
> > - Even if we suppose that $X remains $200 (as it has been for many years,
> > not Board involvement for expenses under $200), Financial Manager
> potential
> > monthly stipend $Y still remains too vague.  Should $Y be $100 per month
> or
> > what?
> >
> > - The prior "month" is very poorly defined, making the Financial
> Manager's
> > life impossible, if for example SL Board meets on Friday March 1st, and a
> > financial report summarizing February must be submitted "72 hours in
> > advance" by February 25th realistically, then the Financial Manager must
> > have worked for the prior week to get this right Feb 18-to-25th.   If
> s/he
> > is away that week for a family/professional emergency, and does not want
> to
> > be fired then s/he must do the work Feb 10-to-17th, and as such has
> pulled
> > the numbers from SFConservancy's system on February 10th, just over a
> week
> > after the prior SL board meeting.  So perhaps the only practical thing
> she
> > can do is run a report on the prior month of January?  And even if s/he
> > tries to do that, SFConservancy has explained to me that they often take
> a
> > month-or-so to get all receipts entered into their system, so the
> Financial
> > Manager cannot in fact get hard information about January.  My
> understanding
> > from SFConservancy is that on February 10th, we could only get hard info
> on
> > December's financials, and even then there's no absolute guarantee, as
> > receipts come in very late at times.
> >
> > On the one hand it sounds ridiculous, in the age where most of us obtain
> > live bank statements online, that we cannot get confirmed up-to-date
> > financials until 2 months later!  But what other options are there?
> Should
> > we accept known-imprecise financial reporting in exchange for recency?
> And
> > if so, aren't we really asking for a rolling report of the prior ~3
> months
> > every time?  Let`s spell it out, if in fact those are the true duties of
> the
> > Financial Manager -- to provide a rolling estimates (estimates, to the
> best
> > of his/her professional ability) of the prior 3 months of expenses/income
> > and balance on the last day of each month?
> >
> > - Dismissal notice could be a lot more precise: "Failure to carry out
> these
> > 2 duties for more than one meeting will result in removal and
> appointment of
> > another Finance Manager."  Can s/he miss one or both duties once per
> 6-month
> > period due to death of a close family member?  Is s/he fired immediately
> for
> > missing one or both dutires twice, even if separated by 2 years?  If so,
> we
> > need to spell it out.  If conversely we want to fire the Financial
> Manager
> > immediately, for failing to fulfill 1 duty or the other, then we should
> say
> > that more explicitly.
>
> --
> Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

I went over Caryl's google doc again after re-reading the below, and I
must say that I am no longer surprised by Adam's comments at the SLOB
meeting on Friday; it seems that these clearly expressed points were
not addressed in the text that Caryl submitted.

Adam, please review the Google Doc with my comments and let me know if
this resolves your concerns.

On 6 May 2016 at 10:06, Adam Holt  wrote:
> The financial spring cleaning CarylB, DaveC and others have worked hard on
> within
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit
> is promising, but seems premature in my opinion, until its mechanics are
> better understood:
>
> - Even if we suppose that $X remains $200 (as it has been for many years,
> not Board involvement for expenses under $200), Financial Manager potential
> monthly stipend $Y still remains too vague.  Should $Y be $100 per month or
> what?
>
> - The prior "month" is very poorly defined, making the Financial Manager's
> life impossible, if for example SL Board meets on Friday March 1st, and a
> financial report summarizing February must be submitted "72 hours in
> advance" by February 25th realistically, then the Financial Manager must
> have worked for the prior week to get this right Feb 18-to-25th.   If s/he
> is away that week for a family/professional emergency, and does not want to
> be fired then s/he must do the work Feb 10-to-17th, and as such has pulled
> the numbers from SFConservancy's system on February 10th, just over a week
> after the prior SL board meeting.  So perhaps the only practical thing she
> can do is run a report on the prior month of January?  And even if s/he
> tries to do that, SFConservancy has explained to me that they often take a
> month-or-so to get all receipts entered into their system, so the Financial
> Manager cannot in fact get hard information about January.  My understanding
> from SFConservancy is that on February 10th, we could only get hard info on
> December's financials, and even then there's no absolute guarantee, as
> receipts come in very late at times.
>
> On the one hand it sounds ridiculous, in the age where most of us obtain
> live bank statements online, that we cannot get confirmed up-to-date
> financials until 2 months later!  But what other options are there?  Should
> we accept known-imprecise financial reporting in exchange for recency?  And
> if so, aren't we really asking for a rolling report of the prior ~3 months
> every time?  Let`s spell it out, if in fact those are the true duties of the
> Financial Manager -- to provide a rolling estimates (estimates, to the best
> of his/her professional ability) of the prior 3 months of expenses/income
> and balance on the last day of each month?
>
> - Dismissal notice could be a lot more precise: "Failure to carry out these
> 2 duties for more than one meeting will result in removal and appointment of
> another Finance Manager."  Can s/he miss one or both duties once per 6-month
> period due to death of a close family member?  Is s/he fired immediately for
> missing one or both dutires twice, even if separated by 2 years?  If so, we
> need to spell it out.  If conversely we want to fire the Financial Manager
> immediately, for failing to fulfill 1 duty or the other, then we should say
> that more explicitly.
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Adam Holt]

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Karen Sandler 
wrote:

> On 2016-05-06 12:06, Adam Holt wrote:
>
> s/he tries to do that, SFConservancy has explained to me that they
>> often take a month-or-so to get all receipts entered into their
>> system, so the Financial Manager cannot in fact get hard information
>> about January.  My understanding from SFConservancy is that on
>> February 10th, we could only get hard info on December's financials,
>> and even then there's no absolute guarantee, as receipts come in very
>> late at times.
>>
>
I meant to clarify above that SFConservancy has no possible way provide SL
fully complete/accurate financial info when receipts are sometimes
submitted ~90 days late?  What Karen says below, exactly!

In short, the current/proposed Financial Manager job description (
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc)
needs more tuning of its operational mechanics month-by-month and
quarter-by-quarter, for the reasons Karen laid out.

If in the end SL will benefit from 10+ hours-per-month of professional
financial consulting/reporting every month, we cannot make an underpaid
Financial Manager and others' lives impossible, by imposing more accounting
burdens than is in fact possible within 10
hours-per-month-or-whatever-is-recommended, such that nothing happens in
the end (back to square one worst case) if we ask for too much.

PS on a more positive note (!) can someone help me publish SFConservancy's
latest travel/expense/reimbursement guidelines and requirements directly
off of https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Finance#For_funding_travel ?  Is there
a public link somewhere already, or can we make one now, if someone has
this/these document(s) handy?

On the one hand it sounds ridiculous, in the age where most of us
>> obtain live bank statements online, that we cannot get confirmed
>> up-to-date financials until 2 months later!  But what other options
>> are there?  Should we accept known-imprecise financial reporting in
>> exchange for recency?
>>
>
> It's great you're contemplating hiring a financial manager - increased
> engagement from SL in its finances might solve some of the problems from
> third-parties that are the root cause of delays in update to the books (we
> cannot help the fact that travelers sometimes take a long time to ask for
> reimbursement, for example). As Adam indicates, any faster financial info
> would surely be less precise. As we hear in reports from others, we're the
> fastest at getting our financial data up to date in the entire industry. We
> keep books for almost 40 projects that have many transactions, and we're
> doing it with only a staff of 3 who have a lot of other work too.  A
> financial manager will be able to track the few transactions that haven't
> processed in the interim so you have the granularilty when you need it.
>
> More realistically, it's worth reiterating that building an annual budget
> is really what you should focus on. We will track spending against it on an
> ongoing basis. You currently have a balance of over $80k that has not
> changed in some time - are you contemplating undergoing expenses in a 2 or
> 3 month period that would need exact amounts on a daily basis? For example,
> our own books (which are much bigger) are updated at the same rate as SL's
> and it works great for us as we build our budget and monitor income
> throughout the year. A Financial manager could also save us time and
> heartache by vetting travel reimbursement requests against the travel
> policy.
>
> Given the holistic discussion, it's also worth saying that while I (along
> with everyone else at Conservancy) am a huge supporter of SLs and would be
> happy for you to stay with us, we take a loss on our fiscal sponsorship
> work for you. On average, you give back to us $36/week for *all* the
> services we provide to you. That's less than $2000 per year when we must
> pay our auditors $12k alone.
>
> As always you should definitely feel free to look for another nonprofit
> home. We deliberately designed our termination provisions to be very easy
> to leave. As I said, we're unaware of anyone doing it faster (and we hear
> that most are far slower in updating books) but we'd have no problem
> helping you to transition to another org.
>
> I don't always follow this list closely, but I'm happy to set up a call or
> IRC chat any time.
>
> karen
>
>
> Karen M. Sandler
> Executive Director, Software Freedom Conservancy
> __
> Become a Supporter today! http://sfconservancy.org/supporter/
>
> --
> 
> 
> Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @
> http://unleashkids.org !
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Dave Crossland]

Hi Adam

Thanks for the thoughtful comments, I've added them as comments in the
doc to help close them out

On 6 May 2016 at 12:06, Adam Holt  wrote:
> The financial spring cleaning CarylB, DaveC and others have worked hard on
> within
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit
> is promising, but seems premature in my opinion, until its mechanics are
> better understood:
>
> - Even if we suppose that $X remains $200 (as it has been for many years,
> not Board involvement for expenses under $200), Financial Manager potential
> monthly stipend $Y still remains too vague.  Should $Y be $100 per month or
> what?
>
> - The prior "month" is very poorly defined, making the Financial Manager's
> life impossible, if for example SL Board meets on Friday March 1st, and a
> financial report summarizing February must be submitted "72 hours in
> advance" by February 25th realistically, then the Financial Manager must
> have worked for the prior week to get this right Feb 18-to-25th.   If s/he
> is away that week for a family/professional emergency, and does not want to
> be fired then s/he must do the work Feb 10-to-17th, and as such has pulled
> the numbers from SFConservancy's system on February 10th, just over a week
> after the prior SL board meeting.  So perhaps the only practical thing she
> can do is run a report on the prior month of January?  And even if s/he
> tries to do that, SFConservancy has explained to me that they often take a
> month-or-so to get all receipts entered into their system, so the Financial
> Manager cannot in fact get hard information about January.  My understanding
> from SFConservancy is that on February 10th, we could only get hard info on
> December's financials, and even then there's no absolute guarantee, as
> receipts come in very late at times.
>
> On the one hand it sounds ridiculous, in the age where most of us obtain
> live bank statements online, that we cannot get confirmed up-to-date
> financials until 2 months later!  But what other options are there?  Should
> we accept known-imprecise financial reporting in exchange for recency?  And
> if so, aren't we really asking for a rolling report of the prior ~3 months
> every time?  Let`s spell it out, if in fact those are the true duties of the
> Financial Manager -- to provide a rolling estimates (estimates, to the best
> of his/her professional ability) of the prior 3 months of expenses/income
> and balance on the last day of each month?
>
> - Dismissal notice could be a lot more precise: "Failure to carry out these
> 2 duties for more than one meeting will result in removal and appointment of
> another Finance Manager."  Can s/he miss one or both duties once per 6-month
> period due to death of a close family member?  Is s/he fired immediately for
> missing one or both dutires twice, even if separated by 2 years?  If so, we
> need to spell it out.  If conversely we want to fire the Financial Manager
> immediately, for failing to fulfill 1 duty or the other, then we should say
> that more explicitly.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Walter Bender 
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> On 6 May 2016 at 10:35, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>>> > I am hoping all the differences have been ironed out and that my
>>> > motions
>>> > receive a majority vote.
>>>
>>> I just checked
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit
>>> and it still has a lot of my suggestions to be reviewed by Caryl, and
>>> as she says,
>>>
>>> > I noticed, the last time I checked, amounts for $X and $Y had not been
>>> > discussed. They are an important part of the motion.
>>>
>>> So I don't the motion for a finance manager can be passed today.
>>>
>>> However, can SLOBs pass a motion at any time? (And so the monthly
>>> meetings are just to ensure no motions go undecided for more than a
>>> month?)
>>>
>>> If so then I hope Caryl can firm up the motion and it can be passed
>>> within May :)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers
>>> Dave
>>
>>
>> I agree that there are a number of open issues in the motions. Re Motion
>> 1, I am on the fence about making it a paid position: I have seen no
>> evidence that that will make a difference, but I am willing to give it a
>> shot. Re Motion 2, I have asked for evidence that (1) we are solving a real
>> problem and (2) if it is not better to delegate low-volume/low-threshold
>> spending authority to the teams, where the knowledge resides. (For example,
>> Bernie, as head of the infrastructure team, could have unilaterally approved
>> the request for the domain name payment. He already has that authority.) I
>> am fine with the other two motions as written.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>
>>
>> ___
>> SLOBs mailing list
>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Adam Holt]

The financial spring cleaning CarylB, DaveC and others have worked hard on
within
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit
is promising, but seems premature in my opinion, until its mechanics are
better understood:

- Even if we suppose that $X remains $200 (as it has been for many years,
not Board involvement for expenses under $200), Financial Manager potential
monthly stipend $Y still remains too vague.  Should $Y be $100 per month or
what?

- The prior "month" is very poorly defined, making the Financial Manager's
life impossible, if for example SL Board meets on Friday March 1st, and a
financial report summarizing February must be submitted "72 hours in
advance" by February 25th realistically, then the Financial Manager must
have worked for the prior week to get this right Feb 18-to-25th.   If s/he
is away that week for a family/professional emergency, and does not want to
be fired then s/he must do the work Feb 10-to-17th, and as such has pulled
the numbers from SFConservancy's system on February 10th, just over a week
after the prior SL board meeting.  So perhaps the only practical thing she
can do is run a report on the prior month of January?  And even if s/he
tries to do that, SFConservancy has explained to me that they often take a
month-or-so to get all receipts entered into their system, so the Financial
Manager cannot in fact get hard information about January.  My
understanding from SFConservancy is that on February 10th, we could only
get hard info on December's financials, and even then there's no absolute
guarantee, as receipts come in very late at times.

On the one hand it sounds ridiculous, in the age where most of us obtain
live bank statements online, that we cannot get confirmed up-to-date
financials until 2 months later!  But what other options are there?  Should
we accept known-imprecise financial reporting in exchange for recency?  And
if so, aren't we really asking for a rolling report of the prior ~3 months
every time?  Let`s spell it out, if in fact those are the true duties of
the Financial Manager -- to provide a rolling estimates (estimates, to the
best of his/her professional ability) of the prior 3 months of
expenses/income and balance on the last day of each month?

- Dismissal notice could be a lot more precise: "Failure to carry out these
2 duties for more than one meeting will result in removal and appointment
of another Finance Manager."  Can s/he miss one or both duties once per
6-month period due to death of a close family member?  Is s/he fired
immediately for missing one or both dutires twice, even if separated by 2
years?  If so, we need to spell it out.  If conversely we want to fire the
Financial Manager immediately, for failing to fulfill 1 duty or the other,
then we should say that more explicitly.



On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Walter Bender 
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> On 6 May 2016 at 10:35, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>> > I am hoping all the differences have been ironed out and that my motions
>> > receive a majority vote.
>>
>> I just checked
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit
>> and it still has a lot of my suggestions to be reviewed by Caryl, and
>> as she says,
>>
>> > I noticed, the last time I checked, amounts for $X and $Y had not been
>> > discussed. They are an important part of the motion.
>>
>> So I don't the motion for a finance manager can be passed today.
>>
>> However, can SLOBs pass a motion at any time? (And so the monthly
>> meetings are just to ensure no motions go undecided for more than a
>> month?)
>>
>> If so then I hope Caryl can firm up the motion and it can be passed
>> within May :)
>>
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Dave
>>
>
> I agree that there are a number of open issues in the motions. Re Motion
> 1, I am on the fence about making it a paid position: I have seen no
> evidence that that will make a difference, but I am willing to give it a
> shot. Re Motion 2, I have asked for evidence that (1) we are solving a real
> problem and (2) if it is not better to delegate low-volume/low-threshold
> spending authority to the teams, where the knowledge resides. (For example,
> Bernie, as head of the infrastructure team, could have unilaterally
> approved the request for the domain name payment. He already has that
> authority.) I am fine with the other two motions as written.
>
> -walter
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>


-- 
Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Dave Crossland]

Hi Caryl!

Sorry to hear about that - best wishes for you and Ed that it all goes
smoothly! :)

On 5 May 2016 at 12:14, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:

> Hi all...
> I finally had a chance to check out the discussions about the motions I
> have proposed. Unfortunately I don't really have the chance to do much
> commenting as I am restricted to communicating with my I phone for a while.
>
> After a great 10 days in WA and going to LinuxFestNW (on our own dime), we
> got home and Ed started having dizzy spells. After a lot of testing, it has
> been decided that the time to get a pacemaker has come. So, if all goes
> according to plan, it will be implanted this evening and he will get to go
> home about 24 hours later.
>
> That means I will miss tomorrow's meeting. If I need to add anything to
> the motion or discussion before it comes up for vote... Send an email to
> this thread.
>
> Caryl
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 3, 2016, at 6:44 AM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
>
> On 3 May 2016 at 09:37, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>
>> Why does the vision statement say "but not phones"? I run Sugarizer on my
>> iPhone and Ed's Android phone. There are some formatting issues but they
>> are easily overcome. In the real world of developing countries, children
>> are probably more likely to have access to one of these tiny screens than
>> any tablet or computer. They deserve access to Sugar too.
>
>
> I added that because when I tested it seemed to not work well, but I don't
> object to removing it and have just done so :)
>
>
> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/index.php?title=Vision_proposal_2016&diff=98338&oldid=98337
>
>


-- 
Cheers
Dave
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Caryl Bigenho]

Hi all...
I finally had a chance to check out the discussions about the motions I have 
proposed. Unfortunately I don't really have the chance to do much commenting as 
I am restricted to communicating with my I phone for a while. 

After a great 10 days in WA and going to LinuxFestNW (on our own dime), we got 
home and Ed started having dizzy spells. After a lot of testing, it has been 
decided that the time to get a pacemaker has come. So, if all goes according to 
plan, it will be implanted this evening and he will get to go home about 24 
hours later.

That means I will miss tomorrow's meeting. If I need to add anything to the 
motion or discussion before it comes up for vote... Send an email to this 
thread.

Caryl

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 3, 2016, at 6:44 AM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 3 May 2016 at 09:37, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
>> Why does the vision statement say "but not phones"? I run Sugarizer on my 
>> iPhone and Ed's Android phone. There are some formatting issues but they are 
>> easily overcome. In the real world of developing countries, children are 
>> probably more likely to have access to one of these tiny screens than any 
>> tablet or computer. They deserve access to Sugar too.
> 
> I added that because when I tested it seemed to not work well, but I don't 
> object to removing it and have just done so :) 
> 
> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/index.php?title=Vision_proposal_2016&diff=98338&oldid=98337
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Dave Crossland]

On 3 May 2016 at 09:37, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:

> Why does the vision statement say "but not phones"? I run Sugarizer on my
> iPhone and Ed's Android phone. There are some formatting issues but they
> are easily overcome. In the real world of developing countries, children
> are probably more likely to have access to one of these tiny screens than
> any tablet or computer. They deserve access to Sugar too.


I added that because when I tested it seemed to not work well, but I don't
object to removing it and have just done so :)

https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/index.php?title=Vision_proposal_2016&diff=98338&oldid=98337
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Caryl Bigenho]

Why does the vision statement say "but not phones"? I run Sugarizer on my 
iPhone and Ed's Android phone. There are some formatting issues but they are 
easily overcome. In the real world of developing countries, children are 
probably more likely to have access to one of these tiny screens than any 
tablet or computer. They deserve access to Sugar too.

Caryl

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 2, 2016, at 2:19 PM, Lionel Laské  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Would like to add a quick motion to ensure we share the Vision Proposal 2016 
> [1].
> Not the goal part of the page, at first.
> 
> Best regards from France.
> 
>Lionel.
> 
> 
> [1] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Vision_proposal_2016
> 
> 2016-04-29 16:29 GMT+02:00 Walter Bender :
>> Our next meeting will be Friday, 6 May, at 16 UTC.
>> 
>> We have a few outstanding motions and topics of discussion:
>> 
>> * Samson Goody's i18n proposal for Yoruba (See the proposal circulated by 
>> CJL [1]);
>> * Updating to GPL3 license (See discussion thread [2]);
>> * GSoC mentor payments: it has been proposed (in a private email) to let 
>> mentors have access to the stipend paid by Google. We had decided in 2009 to 
>> pool these stipends into the general Sugar Labs funds and had not revisited 
>> this decision in the ensuing years. At least one mentor has mentioned that 
>> the money would make a big difference. It seems we could accommodate 
>> individual decisions on behalf of each mentor as to whether or not they keep 
>> the stipend or pool it in the general funds, but we should discuss it.
>> 
>> regards.
>> 
>> -walter
>> 
>> [1] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/private/slobs/2016-April/003442.html
>> [2] https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/685
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> SLOBs mailing list
>> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
> 
> ___
> 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___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Lionel Laské]

Hi all,

Would like to add a quick motion to ensure we share the Vision Proposal
2016 [1].
Not the goal part of the page, at first.

Best regards from France.

   Lionel.


[1] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Vision_proposal_2016

2016-04-29 16:29 GMT+02:00 Walter Bender :

> Our next meeting will be Friday, 6 May, at 16 UTC.
>
> We have a few outstanding motions and topics of discussion:
>
> * Samson Goody's i18n proposal for Yoruba (See the proposal circulated by
> CJL [1]);
> * Updating to GPL3 license (See discussion thread [2]);
> * GSoC mentor payments: it has been proposed (in a private email) to let
> mentors have access to the stipend paid by Google. We had decided in 2009
> to pool these stipends into the general Sugar Labs funds and had not
> revisited this decision in the ensuing years. At least one mentor has
> mentioned that the money would make a big difference. It seems we could
> accommodate individual decisions on behalf of each mentor as to whether or
> not they keep the stipend or pool it in the general funds, but we should
> discuss it.
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
>
> [1] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/private/slobs/2016-April/003442.html
> [2] https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/685
>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Lionel Laské]

Hi all,

Just to share some thought before the meeting regarding the l18n. Sure that
it could feed the debate tomorrow :-)

I'm pretty sure that it's super important for Sugar to be available in
multiple languages.
Plus I know the huge works done by all translators (including some guys
from OLPC France) on this, mostly as volunteers (i.e. unpaid).

As everyone know SugarLabs funds are limited so I think that before
launching a paid mission of translation. I think we need to ask a stupid
question: What's the need to translate Sugar into language X ?

Shortly: if we translate Sugar into X, how many new Sugar users could we
expect ? Is there guys on the field that actively waiting for this
translation to deploy Sugar ?
Because SugarLabs resources are limited, I think we can't invest in a
language if we can't expect direct benefit.
So my - very pragmatic - point of view is to have a sort of algorithm: for
example if the number of potential users is lower than N then we could stay
in a volunteer mode to handle X translation. Else we could invest money to
pay a translation mission of X.
I've got a similar experience regarding our Malagasy deployment. At first
we heavily explored ways to translate Sugar in Malagasy. We even started
Malagasy localization in volunteer mode. I guess we reached about 30% of
localization like this. But finally we understood that Sugar in Malagasy
will not help us to deploy more and that we have no money to pay for it.
Worse: most of people locally tell us that is better to use Sugar in French
on the field because French is important for the curriculum… So we
definitively stopped the Malagasy localization.

Just my two cents.

Best regards from France.

Lionel.

2016-03-30 13:31 GMT+02:00 Walter Bender :

> The next meeting of the Sugar Labs oversight board will be Friday, 1 April
> at 19:00 UTC. Please join us at irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting (you can
> access our IRC channel through the web interface provided at
> http://chat.sugarlabs.org).
>
> Agenda:
> 1. Google Summer of Code status
> 2. Wiki Cleanup Party planning
> 3. Request from Edgar Quispe to attend Traducción e interpretación en las
> lenguas originarias del Perú meeting in Lima
> 4. I18n manager discussion
> 5. Proposal from Samson Goddy re i18n in Nigeria
> 6. YOUR TOPIC HERE
>
> Looking forward to seeing everyone on Friday.
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] meeting reminder

[Lionel Laské]

Hi Walter,

As I said at last meeting, I would like to add a topic regarding "Sugar
vision".
Will share a document proposal.

Best regards from France.

   Lionel.


2016-03-30 13:31 GMT+02:00 Walter Bender :

> The next meeting of the Sugar Labs oversight board will be Friday, 1 April
> at 19:00 UTC. Please join us at irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting (you can
> access our IRC channel through the web interface provided at
> http://chat.sugarlabs.org).
>
> Agenda:
> 1. Google Summer of Code status
> 2. Wiki Cleanup Party planning
> 3. Request from Edgar Quispe to attend Traducción e interpretación en las
> lenguas originarias del Perú meeting in Lima
> 4. I18n manager discussion
> 5. Proposal from Samson Goddy re i18n in Nigeria
> 6. YOUR TOPIC HERE
>
> Looking forward to seeing everyone on Friday.
>
> regards.
>
> -walter
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> 
>
> ___
> SLOBs mailing list
> sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep