Stephen Frost wrote:
* Simon Huggins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I realise that money can be very devisive but these are relatively small
amounts of money used well for the good of Debian.
Even small amounts of money can change people's priorities.
It seems that you are under the impression
Steve McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] Precisely what personal details do
you think D-UK holds about you, either correct or incorrect?
How is DUS recording its membership? I can't think of a way
for it to do so without either dumping data from db.d.o (are
businesses allowed to do that?)
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Things have gotten muddled though and that's the problem. There's a
number of issues here:
Thanks for the fresh eyeballs. Here's my take:
1) Holding money in the UK on behalf of Debian
2) Selling t-shirts and whatnot
3) The name issue with 'Debian-UK'
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The way we price this stuff has always been based on selling it as cheaply
as possible, while making the numbers round for convenient change at Expos,
and aiming to do just better than break-even [...]
How can anyone define a not-for-profit business if
* Philip Hands ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Stephen Frost wrote:
* Simon Huggins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I realise that money can be very devisive but these are relatively small
amounts of money used well for the good of Debian.
Even small amounts of money can change people's
Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has
anything at all to do with business. Despite being asked for
clarification several times, you have spectacularly failed to
document, or even argue for,
Scripsit Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems that you are under the impression that the activities such as the
selling of T-shirts are done for the purpose of raising money. (Not
surprising given the spin that MJ Ray's been putting on it)
It doesn't actually make any difference at all
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 12:12:44PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
We would be most glad then if you would stop trying to harm it by
involving all the members in a stupid flamewar on -project then. Trust
me you are visibly doing harm.
Attempting to work out the concerns of DDs and how the
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Yes, I've a personal axe, but it's based on this real event:
I was told I had been made a member of a new UK unincorporated
association based on db.d.o data. Even if
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scripsit Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems that you are under the impression that the activities such as the
selling of T-shirts are done for the purpose of raising money. (Not
surprising given the spin that MJ Ray's been putting on it)
It
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 12:12:44PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
We would be most glad then if you would stop trying to harm it by
involving all the members in a stupid flamewar on -project then. Trust
me you are visibly doing harm.
Attempting
* Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Scripsit Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems that you are under the impression that the activities such as the
selling of T-shirts are done for the purpose of raising money. (Not
surprising given the spin that MJ Ray's been putting on it)
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 06:30:46PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 12:12:44PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
We would be most glad then if you would stop trying to harm it by
involving all the members in a stupid flamewar on
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) Holding money in the UK on behalf of Debian
2) Selling t-shirts and whatnot
3) The name issue with 'Debian-UK'
4) The 'opt-out' membership
5) The beer-bashes
6) The bank account
For my part, I think #1, #3 and #6 go just fine together.
Sure.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This doesn't strike me as much different than loads of other inon-profit
associations
(maybe thisis a frenchisism though ?) do in all legallity, and i see nothing
there which really involves trademark or our attitude with regard commercial
distributions.
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's somewhat worth pointing out that Mark has something of a reputation
for inter-personal friction.
I assume you're referring to me. That myth exists mostly among
some DD cliques (IRCers? unsure), some LUGgers (but not all, as
I still get speaking
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...]
As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from
commercial sale of goods - a business.
More assertions.
Assertions?
That DUS is an enterprise?
That DUS generates income from commercial sale
Scripsit Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually, depending on what parts of UK law the organisation ended up
falling under (and without a clear constitution c this will probably
*not* be what you expect it to be) the membership might be jointly and
severally liable for the actions of the
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 07:15:19PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The way we price this stuff has always been based on selling it as cheaply
as possible, while making the numbers round for convenient change at Expos,
and aiming to do just better than break-even
Em Sex, 2005-09-02 às 18:38 +0100, MJ Ray escreveu:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why should *charities* get special consideration, anyway? Being a
charity doesn't automatically make them aligned with Debian's goals.
Indeed, which is why debian should reach consensus before they
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis:
Em Sex, 2005-09-02 =E0s 18:38 +0100, MJ Ray escreveu:
[...] I think charities should get some special consideration
because law enforces some level of openness and honour not
required of other organisations.
I must remember that you're restrictive
Daniel writes:
A not-for-profit organization (at least in Brasil) don't share the
profits among the share-holders, I mean, don't pay dividends.
That's true of a not-for-profit (sometimes called nonprofit) corporation in
the US. Note, however, that not-for-profit is not the same as charitable.
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis:
Em Seg, 2005-09-05 =E0s 12:55 +0100, MJ Ray escreveu:
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis:
In Brasil, for
instance, there is no such thing as charity organization.
Then no groups would get special consideration from that
clause of my
MJ Ray wrote:
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis:
Em Seg, 2005-09-05 =E0s 12:55 +0100, MJ Ray escreveu:
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis:
In Brasil, for
instance, there is no such thing as charity organization.
Then no groups would get special consideration from that
clause of my
Em Seg, 2005-09-05 às 21:31 +0100, MJ Ray escreveu:
Charity is not country-specific. At the very least, Japan (according
to JACO) and Canada (CharityVillage) also have charities with similar
conditions of openness to the UK.
Well... That's not true for Brasil, and may be the case for other
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis:
So, are we going to stablish the criterias for organizations to have the
right of using the Debian name? Like a type of fair-use?
Not me in the forseeable. spi-trademark would be the next step,
but it was just my opinion on a question you asked.
[...]
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 01:57:08PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Daniel writes:
A not-for-profit organization (at least in Brasil) don't share the
profits among the share-holders, I mean, don't pay dividends.
That's true of a not-for-profit (sometimes called nonprofit) corporation in
the US.
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see nothing on this that can be considered a Debian (as The Debian
Project) problem, it's an internal problem of the Uk Debian Fellows [...]
Yes, mostly, you're right and they're not enough to act on. One
possible debian problem is the use of db.d.o when
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 10:49:25AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
I don't know debian-br and I didn't find enough explanation.
Trading with debian in the name is an advantage against other
local businesses who can sell debian CDs, isn't it? What does
the project get in return for that advantage?
I
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I confess to being puzzled by this persistent use of the term business
here.
DUS is an enterprise generating income from commercial sale of goods.
Whatever else you want to call it, business seems accurate.
AFAICT, the Debian UK Society does not have
Em Qui, 2005-09-01 às 13:53 +0100, MJ Ray escreveu:
I think there are reasons to dislike it, not enough to act on:
* DUS was developed at a meeting for another purpose and just
announced to those (is Cambridge the new Vancouver?).
* It has a very weak link to the debian project.
* Its
101 - 131 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
