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

[Dave Crossland]

Hi!

*Adam, please see my request below :)*

On 21 May 2016 at 02:38, Laura Vargas <laura at somosazucar.org> wrote:

> 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.
>

I am asserting that less people means less structure is required.

https://www.army.mil/info/organization/unitsandcommands/oud/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number


> 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.
>

I kindly offer you my opinion that this is empirically false, and confess
that I have been actively working in the last week to remove such empty
designations: https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Vacancies sat for over 2 years
with "open positions" that were unfilled and per
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_proof I think it is very unhelpful to
leave stale positions open, actually detering people from joining the
project because it seems moribund, so I struck them off:
https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/index.php?title=Vacancies&type=revision&diff=98758&oldid=92298



> - 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.
>

I kindly disagree; managing an open, collaborative project like Sugar is
not like driving a car with Walter as benevolent dictator in the driving
seat. The horror! ;)

We all can do it together! :) And in such a project, if we don't do
something, there is no bad result except lost opportunity... so there's no
accountability, deadlines or fate except that we make for ourselves ;)
https://youtu.be/NyGEy-2Hq64?t=51s

Of course if we raise funds to hire someone to do something, then they have
a contract and accountability and deadlines. But Sugar Labs is not hiring
anyone to define the vision, nor does it need to.

It needs a collaborative text editor, and people willing to write down
their ideas, and we have this:
https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Vision_proposal_2016

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

Aye aye, Captain Bender ;)


> 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.
>

Sure! :)


>  - 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.
>

It seems to me that Seb and Caryl did this last year and would prefer not
to do it again, and that you and I care about this, so I suggest that you
and I do it this year. Would you like to?


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

I'm happy with this, and I don't have any changes to suggest or
request. Would you like to anything changed about how the adjudication of
disputes is done?


> - 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.
>

I'm sorry to hear that its stressful for you - you're doing an awesome
job!! :)

However, when thinking abut what is ideal for tracking finances, I
understand that Conservancy uses www.ledger-cli.org to do accounting and
while SL is a Conservancy project, it must use a ledger-cli compatible
system.

It is a text file based system (eg
http://ledger-cli.org/3.0/doc/ledger3.html#Example-Journal-File) and Adam
has access to the Sugar Labs text file. This formed the basis of what he
posted to https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Finance in summary.

Ideally I would like the file to be published, and to put up a web UI for
it using the http://hledger.org tools.

*Adam, can the full file be published?*


>  - 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.
>

I'm happy with this, and I don't have any changes to suggest or request.
Would you like to anything changed about how physical assets are tracked?


>  - 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.
>

http://sfconservancy.org/members/services/ explains a bit.

I'm happy with this, and I don't have any changes to suggest or
request. Would you like to anything changed about how intangible assets are
tracked?

- 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?
>

https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Finance looks great!


>  - 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.
>

What are the _actions_ you want those roles to carry out?

(Also, why drop 2 seats?)

-- 
Cheers
Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20160521/de77bcdf/attachment-0001.html>