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

[Laura Vargas]

2016-05-22 1:09 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com>:

>
> 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
>

I think we are slightly over the definition of an "intimate community".
According to
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_dd38dc6aa11d1a98 and
http://www.cs.cornell.edu/w8/~andru/cgi-perl/civs/results.pl?id=E_7fe0e83eba6b35ff
 :

55 members (out of 239 authorized for voting) voted in the 2012 elections
54 members (out of 242 authorized for voting) voted in the 2016 elections


> 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,
>

Will all my respect, opinions are welcome but their are opinions ;D

Scientific method exists and it is based on experiences.


> 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! ;)
>

> Please think of me as a 10 year old when you communicate. English is not
my native language so I really appreciate simplicity when making a point.

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,
>

There is always accountability.

Not just for the fact that there is a legal definition of what an
unincorporated association is, but because we are delivering a set of
products for children to use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_association

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.
>

I'm not stating SL should hire anybody. I'm suggesting to appoint a single
Project Leader, under whose technical vision we can all continue exploring
the satisfaction of a work well done.


> 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 ;)
>
>
I can only speculate from this, that you do recognize that SL already has a
Project Leader, so making it official shouldn't be a dramatic decision but
a logic course of action.

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?
>

I'm proposing the Project Secretary role to take care of this as they do it
in the Debian community. IMHO you would be a much better Secretary than I :D


> - adjudicating any disputes about interpretation of the constitution
>>>
>>> We already have an ombudsman for this
>>>
>>
>> And thank God we do.
>>
>
> It does sound logical to keep current ombudsman figure and assignation as
is.


> 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!! :)
>
> Thanks for you comment, but without an annual Budget nor Income
Projections we are all diving in the darkness. Keeping track of finances
goes beyond checking the numbers, you need to have a plan and compare and
adjust with actual transactions.


> 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?
>

This are not "jobs" they are roles. Project Leader, Project Secretary and 3
Auditors, should do the best they can and/or all actions necessary to
perform well and obtain results.

>
> (Also, why drop 2 seats?)
>

Unless we add another role with specific responsibilities to the
proposed *Board
Structure* it sounded like the most logical course of action.

Herbert Thelen proposed a principle that for members of groups to have
maximum motivation to perform, the number of members in each should be the
smallest "in which it is possible to have represented at a functional level
all the social and achievement skills required for the particular required
activity."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Size_of_groups,_organizations,_and_communities

-- 

> Cheers
> Dave
>



-- 
Laura V.
I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

Happy Learning!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20160522/06fa7b49/attachment-0001.html>