[IAEP] [SLOBS] meeting reminder and discussion log

Walter Bender walter.bender at gmail.com
Wed May 9 18:18:38 EDT 2012

Just a reminder that we are meeting tomorrow (Thursday, 10 May 2012)
at 21UTC/17EST in #sugar-meeting on irc.freenode.net

By way of background, I wanted to share the discussion on
#sugar-meeting re Local Labs:

	walterbender	icarito: did you see my recap?
	icarito	walterbender, yes up to where you mentioned "mifos"
	walterbender	that is as far as I got
	walterbender	mifos is the other project that is looking into setting
up a parallel org
	icarito	then I glanced at mifos and asked how would the local labs
concept fit into this new org model
	walterbender	icarito: when we create new co, we could do it with
local labs in mind from the start...
	walterbender	icarito: part of the problem is that SFC has no such
structure or the ability to create it
	walterbender	icarito: and new co can subsume the liability without
having it leak to the other SFC projects
	walterbender	icarito: the collective nature of the SFC naturally
makes it more difficult to take risks as mistakes can impact every
	walterbender	of course we would be in a similar position in new co re
one local lab creating havoc for all the others, but at least it stays
in the family
	kaametza_	hi walter, when you refer to a new co you mean to
incorporate like a NGO? US based?
	[INFO]	2 matches for “kaametza”: [kaametza, kaametza_]
	walterbender	kaametza_: not sure... looking into the possibilities...
but that is the obvious path
	icarito	i thought the idea of joining the SFC was to avoid having to
create an org ourselves
	kaametza_	the goal would be to associate all local labs?
	kaametza_	I mean there are incorporated local labs already like colombia
	icarito	but if our need for decentralization does not fit into the
SFC model then maybe a mixed model is acceptable for the SFC?
	walterbender	icarito that was part of my initial motivation, and it
has served the project well in general
	walterbender	icarito: but we have needs beyond what the SFC can do
	keynote2k	walterbender: I didn't see your recap
	keynote2k	I just received about twenty lines of backlogged chat all at once
	walterbender	keynote2k: sorry... and I lost the back log...
	walterbender	keynote2k: my machine crashed
	icarito	walterbender, keynote2k I have the backlog one sec
	icarito	keynote2k: <walterbender> to summarize where we are... it
looks like a distributed organizational model is difficult if not
impossible for the SFC to manage from within.
	icarito	so in brief, in a discussion we tony, we talked about the
possibility of setting up a new org to handle that aspect of things
	icarito	SFC would still be the home for the project
	icarito	new org would be the home for the things that need to augment
the project in the field
	icarito	new org could be set up to be distributed and global
	icarito	this is a path another project is also pursuing
	keynote2k	yes, that's correct
	|<--	Ariel_Calzada has left freenode (Quit: Leaving.)
	walterbender	what I didn't go on to say is that from the SFC POV,
we'd have Sugar communities, but not Sugar Local Labs
	walterbender	and whatever New Co did vis-a-vis Local Labs would be
independent of the SFC
	keynote2k	ok, I'm up to speed.
	keynote2k	icarito: what do you think?
	icarito	keynote2k, one area that concerns us is we have some projects
we'd like to get some help to fund
	icarito	specifically at this point we are working on some development
which will require for us to pilot
	icarito	we have a local community
	icarito	that has other projects as well
	keynote2k	what is your current fund raising plan?
	kaametza_	we have a miexed strategy
	icarito	we are looking at various options, one of which is the
possibility of doing crowdfunding
	kaametza_	we are appling to grants and also looking for local
resources from gov
	keynote2k	so, if we went with the structure walterbender is
suggesting, you could continue to pursue those avenues, right?
	kaametza_	still as icarito says fundraising seems to be the real
option for the nature of the project
	icarito	resources from the government will involve going into a
bidding process and for that we are looking at options from local
partners (as you know, we are not incorporated)
	kaametza_	this is not easy to put together as increases project
overhead and doesnt necesarly make it sustainable
	icarito	currently some members of the community have directly funded
the development but for actually deploying things seem more
	kaametza_	we would appriciate some help putting together a fund raising plan
	icarito	we think the fundraising, at least for the development part
would possibly fit within the current SFC model
	keynote2k	I understand the issue, but having a "local lab" program
affiliated with Sugar/Conservancy wouldn't solve this.
	keynote2k	If Sugar as a project wants to fund specific software
development, they can put together a grant proposal and seek funding.
But that's separate from the question of whether the project
incorporates various Local Labs
	icarito	keynote2k, back when we asked this in December it was because
the local authorities wanted to have some assurance we were a
recognized group by an international institution
	keynote2k	were those local authorities looking to fund software
development, or services, training and deployment?
	icarito	in fact, as members of Sugar Labs, it is my understanding we
could ask for help with the funding, wether we are in Peru or
anywhere, the problem becomes when we seek to bring these solutions to
the field, correct?
	keynote2k	icarito: Typically, project leadership committees gather
development proposals from within the community and prioritize them.
Conservancy works with the leadership committee to put together grant
	icarito	keynote2k, we have found it is difficult to offer only the
development part, they will always want help with deployment
	keynote2k	understood
	walterbender	icarito: I don't understand what you are asking...
	icarito	walterbender, currently we have very specific development
plans and also a pilot
	keynote2k	Conservancy has a difficult time managing the exposure
associated with deployment and training - especially when the
deployment is happening outside of the US. Conservancy isn't going to
enter into a contract with a foreign municipality on behalf a set of
volunteers to provide services in that country.
	icarito	the pilot is to test a solution that could scale, even globally
	kaametza_	questions is how to present the relationship between local
communitues with the global community to third parties as gov
	walterbender	icarito: I understand that, but I don't understand "we
could ask for help with funding"
	walterbender	kaametza_: I think it is clear that we cannot as SL/SFC
make such representations
	walterbender	kaametza_: but maybe in a new co, we can
	icarito	walterbender, as tony said, "develpment proposals" - for, for
instance, a fundraising effort - we have thoought of, e.g. something
like Kickstarter, but that particular example requires a US based org
or person
	kaametza_	walterbender: any local comunity would still be part of the
global community doesn't necesarly requires represntation
	keynote2k	icarito: those development proposals wouldn't necessarily
be by a local lab for a local lab, but by a project's leadership
	icarito	keynote2k, understood, so that is the path we will follow for
the specific project I'm mentioning, thanks for clarifying this
	walterbender	kaametza_: but icarito just got through saying that you
needed the letter to demonstrate such representation
	kaametza_	back in december we needed it, we understood it wasn't
going to be possible after all
	kaametza_	the question these days is how local community is related to SL/SFC?
	keynote2k	kaametza_: it isn't.
	icarito	keynote2k, except every member of local community is a member of SL?
	icarito	so the question becomes, how are members of SL related to SFC?
	kaametza_	would it be possible to have specific agreements for
specific purposes?
	keynote2k	a local community is a vibrant group of users and
volunteers who use code. Now, SL's charter may allow those members to
vote for the leadership committee: the SLOBs. But, as local
communities, they are unaffiliated with Conservancy
	keynote2k	Conservancy's fiscal sponsorship agreement is with the
SLOBs, not with individual contributors, or with various groups of
local users/volunteers. We can't govern that kind of scope
	kaametza_	ok, still would it be possible to have specific agreements
for specific purposes?
	keynote2k	I think it would be very difficult to do so. To have a
separate agreement would be tantamount to creating a separate fiscal
sponsorship agreement
	keynote2k	and any software development work with Sugar can and should
be routed through the existing fiscal sponsorship agreement with SL
	kaametza_	then the way to go would be thru teams and projects not
local labs, correct?
	keynote2k	What do you mean by "teams and projects"?
	icarito	keynote2k, what about the Sugar Labs Deployment Team? no
point in having one if we can only do development, correct?
	icarito	walterbender, understanding this, it seems if SL wants to do
anything which is not development per se, a new org might be
	kaametza_	teams (group of SL members) developing Sugar sub-projects
	walterbender	icarito: the goal of the SL deployment team is to share
ideas and know how... not do deployments
	keynote2k	the SL Deployment Team can exist to share information, etc.
	walterbender	icarito: that was indented to be the activity of local groups
	keynote2k	I agree ^
	kaametza_	what happens to associations already incorporated like colombia's ?
	keynote2k	how are they incorporated?
	kaametza_	the are a NGO
	keynote2k	If they're incorporated as a stand-alone org in Colombia,
then they're still not under the province of Conservancy
	keynote2k	at that point, it's just a trademark licensing issue:
should SL allow a separate entity to call themselves SL? (Note: I
don't remember the name of the Colombian local lab)
	kaametza_	Sugar Labs Colombia
	kaametza_	it was incoporated on 2009
	walterbender	their website is down
	kaametza_	they are still incorporated
	icarito	walterbender, yes bernie updated mediawiki but didn't run
maintenance on the local labs, he gave me access a few days ago but I
haven't managed to fix it yet
	keynote2k	well, so my personal position would be that it's dangerous
to have a separate org named "Sugar Labs" - if they do something
horribly bad, then it would reflect poorly on SL's brand. That being
said, Conservancy typically leaves it up to the projects to decide how
stringent they want to be with their TM policy
	keynote2k	but, they can presumably raise their own $ and keep their
own bank account, since they're an independent NGO
	keynote2k	neither SL nor Conservancy would be exposed to liability
based on anything Sugar Labs Colombia does. The only risk is the
potential misuse or dilution of the SL brand
	icarito	walterbender, keynote2k, so how complicated is it to found
this new-org, who will do the work necessary and how can we help?
	walterbender	I've already started looking into it
	walterbender	I need to write a draft of the charter and then I will
run it past SLOB and SFC for feedback
	walterbender	but it will be wholly independent of SFC/SL in its incorporation
	walterbender	(sort of like the way OLPC is both OLPCA and OLPCF)
	walterbender	two charters, two sets of books, two boards
	walterbender	just lots of the same people
	icarito	two boards?
	walterbender	yes.
	walterbender	it may be that new co decides to appoint SLOB members as
its board members, but that is a decision to make not a requirement
	kaametza_	walterbender: would this new co afiliate the current "local
labs" as franchises?
	walterbender	kaametza_: we need to decide how to do that, but that
would be one of the intentions of setting up a new co
	walterbender	kaametza_: I was thinking along the lines of moodle
	walterbender	(as I mentioned in the SLOB meeting)
	kaametza_	would it be focused on providing services then?
	walterbender	yes... that is the whole point
	kaametza_	well it sound like a very smart way to go
	icarito	would this new org also be in condition to accept donations
for pilots/other deployment, field oriented projects?
	walterbender	icarito: we should compile a wish list for new co and
then see how close we can come to developing a structure that can
	walterbender	needs to disappear soon... to be continued at tomorrow's
SLOB meeting?
	kaametza_	i like wish lists!
	icarito	fine I think the picture is much more clear for us now
	icarito	we appreciate the help SFC provides in development and for
Freedom, keynote2k, by the way
	keynote2k	glad to help.
	kaametza_	would it be a good idea to keep current "local labs" in the loop?
	walterbender	kaametza_: of course
	kaametza_	I guess everybody is in edujam these days
	walterbender	I'll send the backlog to SLOBs and we can keep talking
	walterbender	everybody but me

Walter Bender
Sugar Labs

More information about the IAEP mailing list