On 5/7/05, Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Before going into elaborate schemes here, I suggest that everyone > consider the following points: > 1. Sure, commercial companies have something to gain from being listed > on the WineHQ page, but so does Wine.
So this is a mute point. > 2. If I, as a business owner, am going to be charged more than a token > amount, I had better get a receipt. You should save all your small receipt's they will add up come tax time. Otherwise the actual cost to me is > about double the amount I pay Wine. I don't mind if it's 50$ or 100$, > but more then that, and I'd want it as a deductible expense. As Wine is > not a legally existing body, however, there is no one to issue said receipt. The "Wine Party Fund" is listed as a non-profit charity in the state of Minnesota so the listing fee could be a minimum donation to this fund. and as its a non-profit you should have the ability to write this off. > 3. On the flip side, if Wine is going to be receiving such amounts, it > will have to report them to some tax authority. Who will do the > reporting, and how? WPF is a non-profit... > 4. If we are going to go into 8 steps programs, a contract had better be > involved. Creating one costs money. Keeping it enforced costs money. > This money, a.k.a. "overhead", had better come from somewhere. The kind donations to be listed.. > 5. More importantly than money, keeping the contract and money matters > enforced requires human supervision. This means that someone who could > really spend their time hacking wine will need to make sure that the > commercial companies adhere to our standards. Okay, now we get to my concerns..... Who is going to do this even if the listing fee is a poultry $100.00 ? There sure as heck wont be any money to in force anything. > > I really suggest we adhere to KISS - Keep It Simple. And have nothing in place if a rouge company fails to adhear to the LGPL!!!!!!! I actually liked > the "hackers rating" idea. If a company is well known among the wine > hackers, they'll vote for it. If not, list it alphabetically at the end > of the former list. As I said before, the token cost was meant mostly to > make sure that the company is still alive, but as Andrew said, sending > an email once a year to make sure someone responds also works, and does > not get anyone in trouble with any tax authority. > > Having said all of that, I think I'll actually go with Brian's idea. Let > him phrase the criteria. Unlike me, he does not have a commercial > interest in Wine. I say we have a *OPEN* vote on this..... Democracy at its best... Tom Wickline > > Shachar