[IAEP] [SLOBS] [Sur] "New Co" / Nueva Empresa
cbigenho at hotmail.com
Wed May 23 01:07:55 EDT 2012
It has been 7 months since the "Bumblebee" brainstorming group had its discussion in San Francisco. I'm not sure what we thought would work for us, would fit what you are proposing. It just sounded like it might. Perhaps not.
I wish I had a record of our ideas so I could speak more clearly about our thoughts. Perhaps someone else who was there could shed light on the subject. But, I do definitely recall that the need for independence and autonomy was one thing we had consensus on.
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 02:41:18 +0000
> From: alsroot at sugarlabs.org
> To: cbigenho at hotmail.com
> CC: olpc-sur at lists.laptop.org; bkuhn at sfconservancy.org; tony at sfconservancy.org; iaep at lists.sugarlabs.org; slobs at lists.sugarlabs.org
> Subject: Re: [SLOBS] [Sur] "New Co" / Nueva Empresa
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 02:52:15PM -0700, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
> > > Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 19:51:48 +0000
> > > From: alsroot at sugarlabs.org
> > > To: cbigenho at hotmail.com
> > > CC: olpc-sur at lists.laptop.org; bkuhn at sfconservancy.org; tony at sfconservancy.org; iaep at lists.sugarlabs.org; slobs at lists.sugarlabs.org
> > > Subject: Re: [SLOBS] [Sur] "New Co" / Nueva Empresa
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:54:34AM -0700, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi...
> > > >
> > > > At the olpcSF meeting last October some of us met informally and discussed
> > > > the need for exactly what you are suggesting: an organization that would
> > > > act as an "umbrella" for groups that wanted to fund small deployments and
> > > > make other contributions to the OLPC, Sugar, and open source software in
> > > > education (OSSIE).
> > > >
> > > > As far as I know, nothing has been done to implement this idea yet. Some
> > > > of the suggestions we had were:
> > > >
> > > > * It should be a completely separate entity from OLPC and Sugar Labs to
> > > > insure independence.
> > >
> > > In fact, Sugar Labs was for me exactly such "umbrella" (pure community
> > > based organization to coordinate not only Sugar development but also any
> > > Sugar learning platform related work "in the field") from the beginning.
> > > So, being independent from Sugar Labs sounds for me like being
> > > independent from the community :).
> > Exactly... independent of all of the politics! It would also allow
> > for the inclusion of other OSSIE projects folks might want to undertake.
> (Lets keep politics aside. Though I not fully understand your concerns
> regarding SL. Generally speaking, people who will get benefits from new
> organization will be related to SL as well, since they are a part of
> global Sugar relation community. But, I think that new organization is more
> important than the fact of relation to some of existing orgs. And, I
> personally think that it is absolutely not important will funded
> projects be related to Sugar-desktop-environment/XO-laptops or not,
> it is much more important if they are related to principals that SL's
> mission is talking about.)
> btw, are you thinking about organization that only provides/accumulates funds
> (like administration of crowdfunding site)? Or, it should do something
> Because my current thinking is that such organization should provide
> funds, from one side, and technical possibility to process projects in
> most useful way from another side. I don't mean that new organization should
> develop Sucrose, nope, just "package" it (see 4.1/4.2 in my original post).
> The problems with existing implementations, how I see it, are:
> * Sugar Labs takes care, "officially", only about Sucrose (thats just
> several software projects, not a full featured software stack that is
> ready to use);
> * OLPC provides such stack but only for XO laptops (and ignore,
> understandably, desktops).
> My point is that it not only speeds up funded projects implementation,
> but also make them replaceable. If current project implementors can't do
> they work any more, it will be easy (because they work was based on
> already created procedures and software) to "replace" them.
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Did you consider joining existing crowdfunding efforts (I assume there
> > > should be kickstarter like sites that are related to edu) instead of
> > > creating new GNO? If it is not trivial to handle donations worldwide, it
> > > might be useful to reuse already done work.
> > All of the crowd funding sites I have checked out take quite
> > a cut for their services (I guess they do have to eat).
> > I was hoping that could be reduced or avoided all together
> > or at least minimized.
> My point was about joining existing crowdfunding effort in edu field,
> i.e., the goals are the same and, most likely, we will just duplicate
> existing implementation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IAEP