[IAEP] SPL Sugar Project Leader + Sugar Project Secretary + Auditor team?

[Laura Vargas]

Hi!

2016-05-20 20:51 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com>:

> Hi
>
> On 20 May 2016 at 00:38, Laura Vargas <laura at somosazucar.org> wrote:
>
>> What do you think?
>>
>
> Debian has 1,000s of active contributors. From what I can see, we have a
> couple dozen, tops, so I kindly offer that this kind of structuring is
> wasted effort.
>
>
Could you please explain. I fail to see the correlation.


> Here are the concrete actions that you listed, and how SL is getting them
> done already, from my point of view :)
>
> - represent the Project to others, giving talks and presentations about
> it, attending trade shows, as well as building good relationships with
> other organizations and companies, fundraising
>
> We are all empowered to do this already :)
>

Sure, but having someone officially designed to do it might actually make
it happen.

>
>
- manages the project and defines its vision
>
> We are all empowered to do this on the wiki, github, and motions to SLOBs
> :)
>
> Managing a project is like driving a car; somebody has to do it and have
accountability for the results/advances in a period of time.


> - talk to other developers, assist their work; coordination and
> communication
>
> Every ships needs a captain ;D


> We are so small that everyone who is listening is here on this list :)
>
> We shouldn't be so small. Sugar is an important project for society.
Something is not ok with this reality and we need to face it.


> - conducting votes for the project -- notably the Project Leader
> elections, but also any other votes that are run (General Resolutions, for
> example).
>
> - determining the number and identity of the people eligible to vote, for
> the purpose of calculating quorum
>
> We don't need a position to do these 2 things, we need a person (or more)
> to do it, and we here on this list are de facto the persons who could be
> that person. So I suggest we just get on with it :)
>

Don't understand your point here.

>
> - adjudicating any disputes about interpretation of the constitution
>
> We already have an ombudsman for this
>
>
And thank God we do.


> - keep track of project financial assets, income, expenditures and any
> other financial information
>
> You are doing a great job :D
>
> I can only deduce things out of public conversations. That is a very
limited and stressful way of keeping track of financials.


> - keep track of hardware resources and any other physical assets of the
> project
>
> I guess Walter and Bernie are doing this already
>
> I guess the same.


> - keep track of domain names, trademarks, and any other intangible assets
> of the project
>
> I guess Conservancy is doing this already
>

 Not sure how this works.


> - periodically publish public reports about changes in assets and
> resources including (but not limited to): money coming in via donations,
> money being spent with SLOB approval, new hardware bought, etc.
>

> The finance manager motion Caryl drafted has requirements for this, but
> until then, its a shared responsibility of SLOBs, and I am pretty happy
> with how its been done
>
> What do you mean, how its been done?


> - keep track of organizations holding assets in trust for project and
> propose to the SLOB changes in the list of trusted organization
>
> Does any other org hold any SL assets in trust?
>
>
Having 5 seats instead of 7, with defined roles and responsibilities for
each might be a nice turning point for Sugar Labs.

Anyhow, we should open debate to all community members. Specially young
developers whom seems to be lost with the current model.


> Cheers
> Dave
>

-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20160521/a85eda36/attachment-0001.html>