[Marketing] How to best describe Sugar Labs

[Luke W. Faraone]

Hi Bradley and everyone else, 

Bradley M. Kuhn <bkuhn at sfconservancy.org> wrote:  
> Indeed, "qualifying the organization" is the key here.  The
> organization to be qualified is Conservancy, not Sugar Labs.

Sure. But the Conservancy as a whole wasn't being described; from what I
understand Bernie was specifically applying for a grant for Sugar Labs,
a project of the Conservancy. 

To draw a parallel, if Debian were applying for a grant, then there
would be discussion with the Debian Project Leader and local contacts
for the grant, and then (since Debian exists primarily as a project of
SPI) when it came time to figure out payment then SPI or one of the
local charities that act as agents of Debian (debian.ch, for example)
would accept the donation on Debian's behalf. 
 
>
> I've spoken with Walter before about how Sugar Labs is indeed somewhat
> unique among Conservancy's projects in that it qualifies for certain
> types of funding targets from giving programs (education, K-12, etc.)
> that most Conservancy projects don't.  I fully support the idea of
> Sugar
> Labs working with Conservancy applying for these sorts of grant
> programs, but it definitely needs the involvement of Conservancy to
> move
> forward.


Sure, that makes complete sense. I'm not sure whether there was harm
done to the conservancy; Bernie will keep you in the loop on these sort
of discussions in the future, but I think the end result would have been
the same. 

> That's a help to you
> in these sorts of applications, so I'm surprised you decided to throw
> that assistance away from the start.


Sugar Labs is very appreciative of the help the Conservancy has provided
and continues to provide. Could you or Tony chime in and let us know
what we might want to change to make our application better? 
 
>
> because the only harm done on this step would be
> that the Program Coordinators are confused and decide to ignore the
> application


Maybe I missed something: why would the Program Coordinators get
confused? 
 
>
> FSA requires that you coordinate all communications with prospective
> donors with Conservancy.  I expect Tony to be cc'ed on any
> correspondence
> regarding this grant application from here on out.


I think you're referring to section 2c of the Fiscal Agreement. I'm not
an attorney, but the text says that "fundraising events, processing and
acknowledgement of cash […]", which implies it is the Conservancy's
responsibility to handle fundraisers *or* handling grants after they
have been given, but doesn't talk about casual discussions with or even
grant applications by the Project. 

I wouldn't belabour this point, but accusations of violations of the
Agreement is something we should take seriously as a project, if for no
other reason than to ensure they don't happen in the future. 

Could you please clarify?

Thanks,
 __
(_  Luke Faraone, Web Infrastructure
__)ugarLabs.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/attachments/20121015/26d159a3/attachment.pgp>