Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
> I've seen that Daniel Ruoso applied for a grant for his smop project, > basically a virtual machine and fast backend for kp6, and perhaps other > implementations. > > TPF decided not to invest into yet another implementation. I appreciate that it is a subtle distinction to make, too subtle to reasonably be guessed at from someone in the Perl community at large, but the Grants Committee does _NOT_ define TPF policy. The GC is autonomous. It is populated by respected members of the community. I think what was demonstrated is that there is a certain amount of lag-time between where the larger Perl community is (which has both p5 and p6 aspects) and the constituents of the GC, who were chosen when p6 wasn't strongly on the radar. The result of this is that there is an impedance mismatch. It will get better with time as membership turns over. In fact, things are changing currently. Cheers, - Richard
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's what made me come to the conclusion that it's really "The Parrot Foundation". As brian mentioned, the NLNet grant is what's driving the Parrot work. AFAIK, there haven't been any Parrot-related grants for a long time besides that one and the MoFo/TPF grant to Patrick. To see other grants given go here - http://www.perlfoundation.org/grants Most of them are Perl 5 related. There are also the micogrants (http://www.perlfoundation.org/microgrants) which are all Perl 6 focused, but only one is Parrot-specific. So where is the problem? Why doesn't the money flow one way or another? Does TPF want to sponsor more Perl 5 related development? Or was that offer, $5k for 1 month full time hacking, not known before? TPF definitely does want to sponsor more on Perl 5. I think this is mostly TPF's communications problem. People don't know about the grants, or don't know what is likely to be accepted, don't know when to apply, etc. -dave /*=== VegGuide.Orgwww.BookIRead.com Your guide to all that's veg. My book blog ===*/
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's what made me come to the conclusion that it's really "The Parrot > Foundation". It's not The Parrot Foundation. It's that NLNet gave a very large targeted grant for Parrot. It's a single big donation that's driving that. I'm working on a detailed history of all TPF grants, but I want to get everything just right before I published it. You'll see that your comment is not really true.
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Joshua Gatcomb wrote: I am mostly ignoring the rest of what others have said in this thread because I think it is detracting from your intention of getting money to people to work more. Here is one thing that has frustrated me about TPF. They are a non-profit organization. Yeah, kind of suprising that would be the frustrating thing. The issue is that they can't take money from Bob to give to Sue to work on Bob's widget. This is an extreme oversimplification but in general, they have to abide by the rules that allow them to keep their non-profit status. Where am I going with this? This doesn't make any sense to me. There's nothing about being a nonprofit that prevents TPF from accepting donations targeted to a specific program. There's a bit of accounting overhead to make it happen, but it's perfectly legal and in keeping with TPF's 501c3 status and its mission. Regardless if we use TPF or not, I think what will get more people to contribute is having some say as to where there money goes. To that end, I suggest having a list of projects currently being funded. A donator can choose which fund their money goes to or can choose a general fund if they don't care. I don't suggest these projects be generic and nebulous either (though they could be for the same reason a general fund is). In other words, there might be a Rakudo fund - generic. There might also be a fund to fix RT # 31415 which is a Rakudo bug. I don't object to the idea of targeted donations, nor of having the community be more involved in that targeting. Sounds groovy. However, I'm not too interested in handing my personal cash over to TPF. I've thought about this for a while, and I'm convinced that for a variety of reasons, TPF should be working on getting most of its funding from corporations. One of the main reasons is simply that there's more bang for the fundraising effort. I can't afford to give TPF $5k, but there's many, many companies using Perl that could easily give $5k or maybe $50k. over where it went. Actually, it has been years since I have contributed to TPF. Now, I just write a check to the individual(s) I want to help. I don't get the tax write off but I know where my money is going. I would never do this, because it's not tax-deductible. Also, if you pay them enough (>= $2k, I believe) you'll have to file a 1099 form because they're now a subcontractor for you ;) Personally, I really think it's important that any money funding Perl work go through TPF. It keeps things tax-deductible _and_ it imposes a higher degree of accountability on the process. -dave /*=== VegGuide.Orgwww.BookIRead.com Your guide to all that's veg. My book blog ===*/
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Geoffrey Broadwell wrote: Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that this can't be done directly because of rules surrounding TPF's non-profit status. Someone else pointed out the problems with TPF officers benefitting directly from the donations, even though some of the current and former TPF officers would be great candidates for support. Which made me think ... wasn't this why Mozilla created a corporation? I doubt that's why. If TPF owned The Perl Corporation (TPC), there'd still be serious conflict of interest issues were TPC to be employing TPF board members or other officers. If anything, this would look even _worse_ than giving them grant money from TPF! The main reason a nonprofit would create a for-profit subsidiary is in order to engage in business activities outside of that nonprofits tax-exempt purpose. That purpose is generally defined by the nonprofit's mission. TPF's missions is: The Perl Foundation is dedicated to the advancement of the Perl programming language through open discussion, collaboration, design, and code. I would guess that MoFo founded MoCo primarily because it wanted to pursue income sources that weren't compatible with MoFo's nonprofit status. I'm guessing that this was primarily the Google deal, and it was determined that the income from Google would be business income, and that it would be so much that if it came directly to MoFo it would compromise MoFo's status as a 501c3 nonprofit. I'd guess that the reasoning behind this is that in the Google deal, Google gets a benefit from the money it pays. It's not a donation. That means it's business income. TPF is not in a similar position at this time. There is no massive source of income available that would not be a donation, to the best of my knowledge. If there were such a source, forming a subsidiary for-profit corporation would be worthwhile. -dave /*=== VegGuide.Orgwww.BookIRead.com Your guide to all that's veg. My book blog ===*/
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
Hi everyone, Guess it's time for me to finally join the discussion. :-) I've been paying attention to this thread since it started. > > Which made me think ... wasn't this why Mozilla created a corporation? > I believe one can find online write-ups from the people involved with the decision to create MoCo as to why they felt this was a good idea. I read them once years ago. I would need to re-read to remind myself what those reasons were. Or could we even just go to that Mozilla corporation? > > Given that Mozilla is a Perl 6 supporter, would they be willing to handle > earmarked Perl 6 donations in lieu of TPF (for a limited time, say 2 > years)? > One of the stated goals and desired outcomes of the MoFo joint sponsorship with TPF of Patrick Michaud's work was to assist TPF to do more (and more effective) fundraising for p6. MoFo's goals in p6 are served by supporting TPF. I strongly doubt that they would accept donations for p6 and distribute them themselves directly. (I'm in touch with the MoFo executive director on a weekly basis. I've got a pretty good idea of where he's at in his thinking.) > Their major name recognition as a solid entity could be very helpful in > attracting major donations prior to Perl 6's first production release. > Yes, they appreciate that, which is why they donated to TPF. They wanted to endorse TPF and p6 to make it easier for others to do so. Cheers, - Richard Dice (President of TPF)
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
> In article > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Conrad Schneiker > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> So over the next few months, I'm planning to learn about >> fundraising, and see what I can accomplish on behalf of Perl >> 6 development. To that end, I'm soliciting: > > It's not really a money problem. It's finding someone to give the money > to. I've been trying to force money on some people to work on Perl 6, > but they don't wants it, for whatever reason. Part of that is that TPF > officers aren't supposed to get grant money. > > And, before you think about raising money, check how much money TPF > actually has. There is still half of the NLNet's $70k to be > distributed. for instance. It's not a fundraising problem. Find a > person who would take money before you spend too much time finding the > money. Targeted fundraising is more effective anyway :) That's why I raised the debate on whom to aid. I've seen that Daniel Ruoso applied for a grant for his smop project, basically a virtual machine and fast backend for kp6, and perhaps other implementations. TPF decided not to invest into yet another implementation. So I learn that they do have money, and don't seem to finde worthy targets to spend it. On the other hand there are applications that I do consider worthwhile. That's what made me come to the conclusion that it's really "The Parrot Foundation". But from chromatic's response I learned that there is good way to support parrot - but financing him for month. So where is the problem? Why doesn't the money flow one way or another? Does TPF want to sponsor more Perl 5 related development? Or was that offer, $5k for 1 month full time hacking, not known before? Moritz
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
> Whilst debating issues like parrot vs pugs, or single-track vs parellel > track development, can be quite interesting, especially if it induces > Larry to compare straight lines to mountains and railroads, it is likely > to be more useful to have suggestions like chromatic's - 1month of > dedicated work for $5000. > > How about adding a page to one of the web sites where offers of help, > time and expense, can be made? Very good idea. Any takers? I would, but my internet connectivity is severely constrained atm. That will change from April 15th on, if noone made it until then, I'll do. But it would be shame to wait that long ;-) Cheers, Moritz
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
OOOWWW my tail is burnt!!! But I wasnt on the committee... promise. Sorry about the cat... So lets get some money into this Foundation, so that, perhaps, Larry might possibly, if he deserves, get a little more money. Richard Larry Wall wrote: On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:03:03AM +0300, Richard Hainsworth wrote: No one likes bureacracy. But I feel much happier about handing over money, or persuading someone else to hand over money, to a group of people with established procedures and collective responsibility, than to some enthusiatic individual who promises the earth and whose the world-number-one genius at code writing, but might also go and blow the whole lot on girls and booze cos his cat died. Let me make a clear statement here. I have no trouble with the committee making its decisions--that's what the committee is obliged to do. The committee is *not* obliged to feel secure about that; (nor do I feel obliged to allow them to feel secure about that ;) nevertheless, the committee is also not obliged to demonstrate its insecurity by heaping scorn upon such persons of indeterminate feline attachment while turning them down. A simple "no" would suffice without the we-had-to-say-this-because-you-suck bits. By the way, it's possible that I might deserve a little more money, because *my* cat died last year, and as near as I can tell, I didn't spend any money on girls and booze because of it... :) Larry
RE: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
> From: Geoffrey Broadwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 6:20 PM > > On Thu, 2008-02-21 at 18:45 -0500, Joshua Gatcomb wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:23 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2. Allow people to choose where their money will go (if that's what > they > > want to do) > > > Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that this can't be done > directly because of rules surrounding TPF's non-profit status. Someone > else pointed out the problems with TPF officers benefitting directly > from the donations, even though some of the current and former TPF > officers would be great candidates for support. > > Which made me think ... wasn't this why Mozilla created a corporation? > Personally, I think it's ridiculous that a non-profit can't be an > umbrella facilitator for directed donations (if that is in fact the > case). But if that is really the way of things, can TPF go the Mozilla > route to break the logjam? Or could we even just go to that Mozilla corporation? Given that Mozilla is a Perl 6 supporter, would they be willing to handle earmarked Perl 6 donations in lieu of TPF (for a limited time, say 2 years)? Their major name recognition as a solid entity could be very helpful in attracting major donations prior to Perl 6's first production release. Best regards, Conrad Schneiker www.AthenaLab.com http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6 Official Perl 6 Wiki http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot Official Parrot Wiki
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:03:03AM +0300, Richard Hainsworth wrote: > No one likes bureacracy. But I feel much happier about handing over money, > or persuading someone else to hand over money, to a group of people with > established procedures and collective responsibility, than to some > enthusiatic individual who promises the earth and whose the > world-number-one genius at code writing, but might also go and blow the > whole lot on girls and booze cos his cat died. Let me make a clear statement here. I have no trouble with the committee making its decisions--that's what the committee is obliged to do. The committee is *not* obliged to feel secure about that; (nor do I feel obliged to allow them to feel secure about that ;) nevertheless, the committee is also not obliged to demonstrate its insecurity by heaping scorn upon such persons of indeterminate feline attachment while turning them down. A simple "no" would suffice without the we-had-to-say-this-because-you-suck bits. By the way, it's possible that I might deserve a little more money, because *my* cat died last year, and as near as I can tell, I didn't spend any money on girls and booze because of it... :) Larry
RE: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 1:24 AM > > > Whilst debating issues like parrot vs pugs, or single-track vs > parellel > > track development, can be quite interesting, especially if it induces > > Larry to compare straight lines to mountains and railroads, it is > likely > > to be more useful to have suggestions like chromatic's - 1month of > > dedicated work for $5000. > > > > How about adding a page to one of the web sites where offers of help, > > time and expense, can be made? > > Very good idea. ++ > Any takers? > > I would, but my internet connectivity is severely constrained atm. > That will change from April 15th on, if noone made it until then, I'll > do. > But it would be shame to wait that long ;-) We have the Perl 6 wiki. That might be a good way to set up a preliminary version. I could help out this weekend, but right now I've got to catch up on sleep and $work. Best regards, Conrad Schneiker www.AthenaLab.com http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6 Official Perl 6 Wiki http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot Official Parrot Wiki
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
Me too. $500. That's 3*500, so far. Can I do this through the Perl Foundation as an earmark? Conrad Schneiker wrote: On Thursday 21 February 2008 06:25:42 Joshua Gatcomb wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:23 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I could take a month's sabbatical from my day job for $5000 without losing insurance coverage or other benefits. That's slightly more than Audrey's $100/day, I know, but it's substantially less than my consulting rate and somewhat less than my salary too. I could probably make 100 - 150 high-quality commits to Parrot in that 30 day period. Perhaps more. I'm probably not the only Parrot/Perl 6 hacker in this situation. I was beginning to wonder if my post to the thread had gotten eaten. Thanks for replying. I probably didn't do a good job of tying the two portions of my reply together, but if I were to go to the donation page and I saw Project: Allow chromatic for 1 month to work exclusively on parrot Deliverables (if applicable): 100 - 150 high quality commits Required: $5000 Current: $0 I would be very inclined to make a donation. In fact, if you can find 9 other people willing to do so - I will cut a check for $500 any time you are ready. That's besides the point. Not to me it isn't. :-) Count me in as person #1 of the 9 others. I don't believe "just getting more money" is the solution. I think we need to do a number of things: 1. Identify people, like you, who are in a position to trade time for money and the projects they will work on 2. Allow people to choose where their money will go (if that's what they want to do) 3. Do it in a way that causes the least amount of fighting Good ideas. Best regards, Conrad Schneiker www.AthenaLab.com http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6 — Official Perl 6 Wiki http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot — Official Parrot Wiki
RE: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
On Thursday 21 February 2008 06:25:42 Joshua Gatcomb wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:23 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I could take a month's sabbatical from my day job for $5000 without losing > insurance coverage or other benefits. That's slightly more than Audrey's > $100/day, I know, but it's substantially less than my consulting rate and > somewhat less than my salary too. I could probably make 100 - 150 > high-quality commits to Parrot in that 30 day period. Perhaps more. > > I'm probably not the only Parrot/Perl 6 hacker in this situation. > > > I was beginning to wonder if my post to the thread had gotten > > eaten. Thanks for replying. I probably didn't do a good job of > > tying the two portions of my reply together, but if I were to go > > to the donation page and I saw > > > > Project: Allow chromatic for 1 month to work exclusively on parrot > > Deliverables (if applicable): 100 - 150 high quality commits > > Required: $5000 > > Current: $0 > > > > I would be very inclined to make a donation. In fact, if you can > > find 9 other people willing to do so - I will cut a check for > > $500 any time you are ready. That's besides the point. Not to me it isn't. :-) Count me in as person #1 of the 9 others. > > I don't believe "just getting more money" is the solution. I > > think we need to do a number of things: > > > > 1. Identify people, like you, who are in a position to trade > > time for money and the projects they will work on > > 2. Allow people to choose where their money will go (if that's what they > > want to do) > > 3. Do it in a way that causes the least amount of fighting Good ideas. Best regards, Conrad Schneiker www.AthenaLab.com http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6 Official Perl 6 Wiki http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot Official Parrot Wiki
Re: Perl 6 fundraising and related topics.
In my $life, I raise money from sponsors. It is not difficult to spend money, once you have it. It is not difficult to raise money, once you know how to spend it wisely. What's difficult is putting the two together. Some donors know what to contribute to - they choose specific projects and people. Some donors want to help achieve a general aim - they give to a foundation that will wisely spend the money for them (eg. Warren Buffet giving gazillions to Bill Gate's foundation). Any sponsorship program should enable both ear-marked and general contributions (and I am certain if the paper-work's done right, this can be achieved within TPF). To be frank, the ONLY reasonable systematic way of managing a sponsorship process is to have a Foundation, and the foundation should have people who are trusted, who already have contributed to the process, and who are prepared to report back on how the money has been spent. The Perl Foundation meets these criteria. If you spend time on administration, you are using resources, in just the same way as programmers hacking on the code. So if the officers of the Foundation are paid for their efforts, that is acceptible so long as the payments are commensurate with resources spent in other directions. It is not a mathematical formula, its a question of balance and fairness and transparency. No one likes bureacracy. But I feel much happier about handing over money, or persuading someone else to hand over money, to a group of people with established procedures and collective responsibility, than to some enthusiatic individual who promises the earth and whose the world-number-one genius at code writing, but might also go and blow the whole lot on girls and booze cos his cat died. Whilst debating issues like parrot vs pugs, or single-track vs parellel track development, can be quite interesting, especially if it induces Larry to compare straight lines to mountains and railroads, it is likely to be more useful to have suggestions like chromatic's - 1month of dedicated work for $5000. How about adding a page to one of the web sites where offers of help, time and expense, can be made? The micro-grants idea is great. What I have seen of the results and reporting is fine. More grants, more people, and more results are needed. How about everyone reading this thread thinking about a micro-project they can do. Finally, there needs to be recognition for the sponsors, both those that donate their talent resources such as volunteer designer, implementors, & hackers, and those that donate just cash. How about a mandatory section of text at the top of each core and sponsored module that lists the sponsors? Just like license text. That way all contributors are recognised when/if perl6 becomes the predominant programming environment, those names become distributed around the world.
