Inviting questions from SPI

Hello,

I have been nominated to run for board this year and I have accepted.
You can see my "reasons why" here:

http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote6/jdrake.txt

I am inviting anyone who has any questions to ask them.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote6/jdrake.txt
> I am inviting anyone who has any questions to ask them.

On the platform:
1. Should "associative projects" be associated projects?
2. Can you give an example of an illegitimate talk opportunity?
3. Does Command Prompt, Inc have a conflict of interest with SPI?
(I ask mainly because I didn't see much on its web site about its
mission or structure.)

General questions, other candidates may answer too:
4. Would you vote for or against giving away SPI assets?
5. Will you abstain from votes about things not mentioned in your
platform?

Thanks,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been nominated to run for board this year and I have accepted.
> You can see my "reasons why" here:
>
> http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote6/jdrake.txt
>
> I am inviting anyone who has any questions to ask them.

I see that you plan

* An agressive increase in the number and quality of associate projects

Question is: how are you planning to increase the _quality_ of associate
projects? And how do you measure quality in the first place?

--
Alvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile ICBM: S 39º 49' 18.1", W 73º 13' 56.4"
"La Primavera ha venido. Nadie sabe como ha sido" (A. Machado)

MJ Ray wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote6/jdrake.txt
>> I am inviting anyone who has any questions to ask them.
>

I also copied spi-private on this because I know there are people on
private that are not on -general.

> On the platform:
> 1. Should "associative projects" be associated projects?

Maybe, grammar has never been my strongest talent. That's why editors exist.

> 2. Can you give an example of an illegitimate talk opportunity?

That is a tough one. I wrote illegitimate because I wanted people to
know that each talk would be considered and that it is not an open bank.
It may not be the talk that is illegitimate but perhaps the venue.

If we have two people that want sponsorship. One is talking to Ohio
Linux Fest, the other is keynote at FOSSDEM. I would think that assuming
the ability to only sponsor one talk, we would sponsor the FOSSDEM talk.

The reasoning is that the FOSSDEM talk is likely to provoke a wider
audience and possibly greater opportunities for FOSS software.

> 3. Does Command Prompt, Inc have a conflict of interest with SPI?
> (I ask mainly because I didn't see much on its web site about its
> mission or structure.)

I wouldn't believe so. Command Prompt is a for profit entity. Our
mission is simple, provide services and support to people and companies
using PostgreSQL.

>
> General questions, other candidates may answer too:
> 4. Would you vote for or against giving away SPI assets?

It would depend on the situation. I assume you are referring to
opensource.org. I lean toward not giving opensource.org away but it was
really hard to get a solid trail of information about what exactly were
the issues with that domain. I even read through Debian archives to try
and figure it out.

An asset that is truly SPI property (unlike say a server that is
PostgreSQL's but title to SPI because of the legality), should stay with
SPI unless SPI is getting something out of it, money, or a swap in assets.

> 5. Will you abstain from votes about things not mentioned in your
> platform?

No, I think that would be silly. Just because it isn't in my platform
doesn't mean I don't have an opinion. I would however abstain from votes
that I did not feel I had enough information to make what I deemed a
good decision.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> Thanks,

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:

>> http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote6/jdrake.txt
>>
>> I am inviting anyone who has any questions to ask them.
>
> I see that you plan
>
> * An agressive increase in the number and quality of associate projects
>
> Question is: how are you planning to increase the _quality_ of associate
> projects? And how do you measure quality in the first place?

I plan on actively recruiting new projects. There are many, many FOSS
projects out there that could use SPI services, that have no idea who we
are.

Defining a quality project is a bit difficult, it is also fairly biased
on my part. In my mind a quality project has been shown to have members
that participate in the FOSS community in general, have an open forum
for discussion, and show a willingness to participate in other communities.

PostgreSQL (obviously) is one idea of a quality community. It has a
mostly proactive community that is driven to not only create better
software but participates in the advocacy of FOSS in general. PostgreSQL
also makes it a point to participate in external events to help spread
the gospel :)

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 09:06 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> Defining a quality project is a bit difficult, it is also fairly biased
> on my part. In my mind a quality project has been shown to have members
> that participate in the FOSS community in general, have an open forum
> for discussion, and show a willingness to participate in other communities.

How many of such good natured individuals focused on one endeavor
constitute a project you'd be likely to approach?

Do you feel resources should be put into finding new and promising
projects prior to 'chicken hawkers' approaching?

How do we lure developers from closing off with "as a service" products
that can be offered free but aren't F/LOSS which seems to be the candy
the 'chicken hawkers' have to offer?

Best,
--Tim

Tim Post wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 09:06 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> Defining a quality project is a bit difficult, it is also fairly biased
>> on my part. In my mind a quality project has been shown to have members
>> that participate in the FOSS community in general, have an open forum
>> for discussion, and show a willingness to participate in other communities.
>
> How many of such good natured individuals focused on one endeavor
> constitute a project you'd be likely to approach?

If it is a 1 person project, I would say 1 other than that, I think we
need to take it on a case by case basis.

>
> Do you feel resources should be put into finding new and promising
> projects prior to 'chicken hawkers' approaching?
>
> How do we lure developers from closing off with "as a service" products
> that can be offered free but aren't F/LOSS which seems to be the candy
> the 'chicken hawkers' have to offer?

Honestly, I don't quite get what you are asking here. Your terminology
seems entirely off topic.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> Best,
> --Tim
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

Tim Post wrote:

> Do you feel resources should be put into finding new and promising
> projects prior to 'chicken hawkers' approaching?
>
> How do we lure developers from closing off with "as a service" products
> that can be offered free but aren't F/LOSS which seems to be the candy
> the 'chicken hawkers' have to offer?

For those of us not in the know, could you clarify what a "chicken
hawker" is? In Wikipedia I find two definitions (one related to
homosexuality and the other to war stance in a politician), neither of
which seem to make any sense in this context.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
"No necesitamos banderas
No reconocemos fronteras" (Jorge González)

On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 16:35 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tim Post wrote:
>
> > Do you feel resources should be put into finding new and promising
> > projects prior to 'chicken hawkers' approaching?
> >
> > How do we lure developers from closing off with "as a service" products
> > that can be offered free but aren't F/LOSS which seems to be the candy
> > the 'chicken hawkers' have to offer?
>
> For those of us not in the know, could you clarify what a "chicken
> hawker" is? In Wikipedia I find two definitions (one related to
> homosexuality and the other to war stance in a politician), neither of
> which seem to make any sense in this context.

Sorry, the term is meant most literally. Someone established who picks
up projects before patches start mixing and it becomes a service instead
of a F/LOSS project.

SAAS (Software as a service) industry wants everything common on a
desktop served via browser and its free software developers who get
recruited the most. The term originated on a list (I honestly thought it
was more well known) when developers would get approached 'on the side'
to see if they were receptive to selling. Someone called them 'chicken
hawking' and the term propagated.

This (in their ideal world) is less hands working on desktop apps and
more hands working on web 2.0 monstrosities that people pay monthly to
use under non-disclosure agreements.

A project I was working on didn't go because the guys developing the UI
got fed up that we wouldn't hold back the source, because of incoming
offers.

I guess you might have to work in the hosting industry to appreciate the
problem.

Thanks anyway,
--Tim

Tim Post wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 16:35 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Tim Post wrote:
>>
>>> Do you feel resources should be put into finding new and promising
>>> projects prior to 'chicken hawkers' approaching?
>>>
>>> How do we lure developers from closing off with "as a service" products
>>> that can be offered free but aren't F/LOSS which seems to be the candy
>>> the 'chicken hawkers' have to offer?

O.k. based on your description below I think you present a very good
"problem". The best I think we can do here is education and advocacy.
The reality is, it is there code. They can do with it as they wish.

However, it certainly benefits the community as a whole to make sure
that good projects don't disappear or be eliminated due to outside
interests purchasing all the resources.

I can see apparent problems though. A small team comes up with an idea,
announces the idea, and starts to code. The idea sparks the interest of
some would be Angel (common term in investment). The Angel offers them
*x* sum of money to finish the project, but the Angel gets all the rights.

As a member of that team, I would be hard pressed to say no. I get the
opportunity to get paid to work on my great idea.

So again, it would come back to education and advocacy. The more
proactive role SPI takes in this type of thing, the more influence SPI
would have in helping developers take a longer term consideration of the
pros and cons of doing something like this.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>> For those of us not in the know, could you clarify what a "chicken
>> hawker" is? In Wikipedia I find two definitions (one related to
>> homosexuality and the other to war stance in a politician), neither of
>> which seem to make any sense in this context.
>
> Sorry, the term is meant most literally. Someone established who picks
> up projects before patches start mixing and it becomes a service instead
> of a F/LOSS project.
>
> SAAS (Software as a service) industry wants everything common on a
> desktop served via browser and its free software developers who get
> recruited the most. The term originated on a list (I honestly thought it
> was more well known) when developers would get approached 'on the side'
> to see if they were receptive to selling. Someone called them 'chicken
> hawking' and the term propagated.
>
> This (in their ideal world) is less hands working on desktop apps and
> more hands working on web 2.0 monstrosities that people pay monthly to
> use under non-disclosure agreements.
>
> A project I was working on didn't go because the guys developing the UI
> got fed up that we wouldn't hold back the source, because of incoming
> offers.
>
> I guess you might have to work in the hosting industry to appreciate the
> problem.
>
> Thanks anyway,
> --Tim
>
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 14:36 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Tim Post wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 16:35 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> Tim Post wrote:
> >>
> >>> Do you feel resources should be put into finding new and promising
> >>> projects prior to 'chicken hawkers' approaching?
> >>>
> >>> How do we lure developers from closing off with "as a service" products
> >>> that can be offered free but aren't F/LOSS which seems to be the candy
> >>> the 'chicken hawkers' have to offer?
>
> O.k. based on your description below I think you present a very good
> "problem". The best I think we can do here is education and advocacy.
> The reality is, it is there code. They can do with it as they wish.

Its the 'angel' that becomes dynamic. The question is simple, intent. Do
you intend to make money, or do you intend to control the use of
technology? You can't do both. They need to work harder at getting it
'right' and 'correct' at the same time.

NDA = Patent on processing relational networks becomes possible. Do you
want to pay someone to study sociology?

> I can see apparent problems though. A small team comes up with an idea,
> announces the idea, and starts to code. The idea sparks the interest of
> some would be Angel (common term in investment). The Angel offers them
> *x* sum of money to finish the project, but the Angel gets all the rights.
>
> As a member of that team, I would be hard pressed to say no. I get the
> opportunity to get paid to work on my great idea.
>
> So again, it would come back to education and advocacy. The more
> proactive role SPI takes in this type of thing, the more influence SPI
> would have in helping developers take a longer term consideration of the
> pros and cons of doing something like this.

I am for anything that gets it discussed via dispassionate thought, this
is something to get 'corrected', not 'right'.

Thanks for your reply :) The question always results in confusion, so
its a good question.

I might also add, I'm an American living in the Philippines. I see
what's opening up here and its becoming alarming. Lots and lots of SAAS
dev shacks financed by US/UK 'angels'. But I think I already said,
things tend to evidence themselves prior to happening.

> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake

Best,
--Tim

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> I plan on actively recruiting new projects. There are many, many FOSS
> projects out there that could use SPI services, that have no idea who we
> are.

There are also many who know who SPI are and then still set up
independent foundations anyway. Do you know some reasons why?

One reason I have seen is that SPI does not advocate and market its
projects in the way a single-project foundation usually does. Would
you address that and how?

Another reason is that SPI is controlled by developers and not users.
Would you address that and how?

Thanks,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > 2. Can you give an example of an illegitimate talk opportunity?
>
> That is a tough one. I wrote illegitimate because I wanted people to
> know that each talk would be considered and that it is not an open bank.
> It may not be the talk that is illegitimate but perhaps the venue.
>
> If we have two people that want sponsorship. One is talking to Ohio
> Linux Fest, the other is keynote at FOSSDEM. I would think that assuming
> the ability to only sponsor one talk, we would sponsor the FOSSDEM talk.

If you have the ability to only sponsor one talk, that seems like the
Fest one is an example of a legitimate-but-not-possible talk
opportunity. Can you give an example of an illegitimate one, please?

> > General questions, other candidates may answer too:
> > 4. Would you vote for or against giving away SPI assets?
>
> It would depend on the situation. I assume you are referring to
> opensource.org. [...]

Not particularly - that puppy has been shot and we can't kill it
again. It may be an interesting case study, though.

> > 5. Will you abstain from votes about things not mentioned in your
> > platform?
>
> No, I think that would be silly. Just because it isn't in my platform
> doesn't mean I don't have an opinion.

Probably not. However, I do think it means you have no mandate about
it, so if it is not urgent, then you should abstain.

> I would however abstain from votes that I did not feel I had enough
> information to make what I deemed a good decision.

That's something.

Thanks,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

MJ Ray wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> I plan on actively recruiting new projects. There are many, many FOSS
>> projects out there that could use SPI services, that have no idea who we
>> are.
>
> There are also many who know who SPI are and then still set up
> independent foundations anyway. Do you know some reasons why?

Well I don't "know" but I could guess. SPI, just really doesn't exist.
This is an advocacy problem. We have been around for years and yet Open
Source and FOSS have ran off without us.

We have the potential to be very influential in the process.

>
> One reason I have seen is that SPI does not advocate and market its
> projects in the way a single-project foundation usually does. Would
> you address that and how?

Oh, heh see above. I have some specific ideas in mind, I mention some of
them in my platform:

* A more physical presence of SPI and the associative projects at well
known events such as OSCON, LinuxWorld, and USENIX.

* Working in FOSS hubs (such as S.F., Seattle and Portland) to foster
workshops, talks and training opportunities not only for new FOSS
community members, but also businesses that can help in the market drive
of FOSS.

* Work with SPI members to sponsor individuals to give talks related to
FOSS at every possible legitimate opportunity.

* Work to have all associative projects work together to provide a more
influential presence to communities, governments and businesses.

>
> Another reason is that SPI is controlled by developers and not users.
> Would you address that and how?

Hmmm... I am not sure this is actually a problem. At least not the way I
think you think so. As long as the respective projects work to actually
integrate SPI into their projects, this problem should largely go away.

PostgreSQL has done this quite a bit. We are very proactive in the use
of SPI.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> Thanks,

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:13:45AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> opportunity. Can you give an example of an illegitimate one, please?

I don't know if others can, but I can. Consider a talk on "open
source" that argues that some classes of license -- e.g. GNU Copyleft
-- are dangerous to the American Way and such like, while others --
e.g. the X Consortium or later BSD -- are business friendly and
therefore Good and Right. Such a talk might well actually be
promoted by certain large corporations who, themselves, make such an
argument. They'd be delighted, of course, to get implicit
underwriting by SPI or any other FOSS-community supporting groups. I
believe this sort of sly appropriating of others' message for
subversive aims is widely employed in the political world. And I
think it would be illegitimate. (Whether it can be detected is
another question entirely.)

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
Everything that happens in the world happens at some place.
--Jane Jacobs

MJ Ray wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> MJ Ray wrote:

>> If we have two people that want sponsorship. One is talking to Ohio
>> Linux Fest, the other is keynote at FOSSDEM. I would think that assuming
>> the ability to only sponsor one talk, we would sponsor the FOSSDEM talk.
>
> If you have the ability to only sponsor one talk, that seems like the
> Fest one is an example of a legitimate-but-not-possible talk
> opportunity. Can you give an example of an illegitimate one, please?

I would be hard pressed to sponsor a Debian developer to go present a
talk to a group of other Debian developers. Of course Debian could
choose to sponsor it but I don't think it would be in the best interest
of SPI itself.

>>> 5. Will you abstain from votes about things not mentioned in your
>>> platform?
>> No, I think that would be silly. Just because it isn't in my platform
>> doesn't mean I don't have an opinion.
>
> Probably not. However, I do think it means you have no mandate about
> it, so if it is not urgent, then you should abstain.

I disagree but we can't all agree on everything :)

>> I would however abstain from votes that I did not feel I had enough
>> information to make what I deemed a good decision.
>
> That's something.

:)

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

MJ Ray wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>>> 5. Will you abstain from votes about things not mentioned in your
>>> platform?
>> No, I think that would be silly. Just because it isn't in my platform
>> doesn't mean I don't have an opinion.
>
> Probably not. However, I do think it means you have no mandate about
> it, so if it is not urgent, then you should abstain.

Folks,

I would be very disturbed by any candidate planning to abstain from any
vote not addressed in their platform. For an absurd example, what if
everyone did this, but no one thought to include being in favor of ending
meetings in their platform? You would never be able to official close a
board meeting.

When I vote for members of a board, elect politicians, etc. I expect them
to use their judgement in matters brought before them. In fact, I don't even
mind them going against their election time declarations if they can give a
clear explanation of why and they show some humility about having
flip-flopped.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam(at)pobox(dot)com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> >> I plan on actively recruiting new projects. There are many, many FOSS
> >> projects out there that could use SPI services, that have no idea who we
> >> are.
> >
> > There are also many who know who SPI are and then still set up
> > independent foundations anyway. Do you know some reasons why?
>
> Well I don't "know" but I could guess. SPI, just really doesn't exist.
> This is an advocacy problem. We have been around for years and yet Open
> Source and FOSS have ran off without us.

I, too, would like to see SPI grow and accept new projects, but I prefer
to do this passively. By being an organisation that says 'yeah, we're
here, and if you need us, let us know,' I think we do the best service we
can to the community. If we take an aggressive recruiting stance I think
we raise expectations above what is reasonable for what we provide and
risk hurting the community we seek to help. As projects like PostgreSQL
and others that have joined us in the last few years find SPI's services
beneficial to their projects, word will get out and projects that need the
services we provide will find us.

Thus I don't think it is an 'advocacy problem' so much as a problem of our
history. We have been around for around a decade, but for most of that
time SPI was both dysfunctional and not actively interested in expanding.
It is only in the last few years, largely since board elections were
introduced in 2003, that SPI has become able to seriously accept and back
up projects. It takes time to build up from there to a critical mass where
projects realise that it makes more sense to go to a well-oiled SPI than
to go it alone.

Frankly I believe that for large projects that have their own foundations
to see a benefit in using SPI instead of their own organisations, SPI has
to be large enough to be able to fund a serious paid bookkeeper/accountant
around the calendar to take care of our increasingly complex books, and to
have a handful of preferably pro bono lawyers we can tap as needed for our
member projects, perhaps one day in partnership with SFLC? We also need to
have a track record of problem-free money handling, and while we appear to
be there now, our history still weighs. SPI is ready to accept more
projects, but only just.

> We have the potential to be very influential in the process.

We have to decide as an organisation if our purpose is to influence the
community or simply be the wall the community can lean against while it
does its work. Personally, I prefer and believe the latter. SPI has a very
important role not being filled by any other organisation simply to exist
for its projects and act in the best interests of our projects. This is
our niche.

> > One reason I have seen is that SPI does not advocate and market its
> > projects in the way a single-project foundation usually does. Would
> > you address that and how?
>
> Oh, heh see above. I have some specific ideas in mind, I mention some of
> them in my platform:
>
> * A more physical presence of SPI and the associative projects at well
> known events such as OSCON, LinuxWorld, and USENIX.
>
> * Working in FOSS hubs (such as S.F., Seattle and Portland) to foster
> workshops, talks and training opportunities not only for new FOSS
> community members, but also businesses that can help in the market drive
> of FOSS.
>
> * Work with SPI members to sponsor individuals to give talks related to
> FOSS at every possible legitimate opportunity.
>
> * Work to have all associative projects work together to provide a more
> influential presence to communities, governments and businesses.

I believe that we should make every reasonable effort to assist our
associated projects in doing any advocacy they wish, within the bounds of
their budgets and our charter. I don't believe our role is to be an
independent lobby group, but our projects are free to be with our backing.

SPI holds projects' assets and money, and distributes it at their bidding,
but has very little money of its own, most of which goes to administering
projects' collective assets. We can fund our projects with their own money
within the boundaries of the purposes stated on our certificate of
incorporation, but need not and probably cannot afford to do them directly
ourselves. I do not believe SPI needs a presence per se at conferences and
tradeshows and the likes; the presence of our member projects who are able
to handle smaller amounts of assets only because of SPI's backing is all
the presence SPI needs. I prefer to leave advocacy to groups who
specialise in it, and keep our role as that of a backroom organisation
that does whatever it can to sustain its member projects, rather than the
community as a whole. The whole community is the sum of its parts, and
that is the best thing we can do for it.

> > Another reason is that SPI is controlled by developers and not users.
> > Would you address that and how?
>
> Hmmm... I am not sure this is actually a problem. At least not the way I
> think you think so. As long as the respective projects work to actually
> integrate SPI into their projects, this problem should largely go away.
>
> PostgreSQL has done this quite a bit. We are very proactive in the use
> of SPI.

SPI is controlled by its membership made up mostly of the membership of
its member projects, not either developers or users specifically. How a
member project chooses to integrate SPI into itself is entirely up to it,
and as long as they are not working against SPI, its goals, or its member
projects, it will always have SPI's blessing. OFTC sees SPI as an integral
part of its own governing structure, while other projects can and do see
it as little more than a wallet.

>From my platform[1], "I would...like to see and assist with SPI's
continuing growth toward a life as a truly relevant member of the free
software/open source communities at large and to the increasing number of
projects now associated with SPI." The best way to be relevant to the
community is to be there for our member projects, not to act as an
independent project in our own right.

1: http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote6/cdlu.txt

- -
David "cdlu" Graham - cdlu(at)railfan(dot)ca
Guelph, Ontario - http://www.cdlu.net/

Frank Warmerdam <warmerdam(at)pobox(dot)com> wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...] However, I do think it means you have no mandate about
> > it, so if it is not urgent, then you should abstain.
>
> I would be very disturbed by any candidate planning to abstain from any
> vote not addressed in their platform. For an absurd example, what if
> everyone did this, but no one thought to include being in favor of ending
> meetings in their platform? You would never be able to official close a
> board meeting.

You're right - that's an absurd example. There should be the obvious
exclusions of urgent votes and procedural votes from the policy.

Platforms should include a few broad aims which will cover 80% of
votes. For example, if you vote for a Green, you know most of what
you are going to get, then you have a few more details added by their
platform and I think it's probably healthy if they abstain on the
rest, where they don't have strong enough opinions to mention them
before the vote.

In SPI's case, what's the worst that will happen? The ones who did
care strongly enough get to decide it? If not, we ask the voters?

So in general, I think it is a very good idea. I am sick of
politicians getting elected and then pulling stealth policies out of
the bag, which they didn't think to mention in their platforms, didn't
consult the members on and had no urgent reason to enact.

> When I vote for members of a board, elect politicians, etc. I expect them
> to use their judgement in matters brought before them. In fact, I don't even
> mind them going against their election time declarations if they can give a
> clear explanation of why and they show some humility about having
> flip-flopped.

I expect them to do what they said and not make stuff up as they go
along. I vote on policies or track records, not personalities.
Representation should not be a celebrity contest.

Regards,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 07:44:41AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> * A more physical presence of SPI and the associative projects at well
> known events such as OSCON, LinuxWorld, and USENIX.
>
> * Working in FOSS hubs (such as S.F., Seattle and Portland) to foster
> workshops, talks and training opportunities not only for new FOSS
> community members, but also businesses that can help in the market drive
> of FOSS.
>
> * Work with SPI members to sponsor individuals to give talks related to
> FOSS at every possible legitimate opportunity.

So presumably that ends up meaning "to give talks promoting FOSS to the
broader public at every possible opportunity", or something. I'm not sure
that SPI has the funds to do that to any significant degree at present,
but if SPI were visibly active in some way that's independent from its
member projects, I suspect it'd be easy to raise funds to support that
sort of stuff.

> * Work to have all associative projects work together to provide a more
> influential presence to communities, governments and businesses.

So I guess my question is are you willing to make those sort of goals
independent of your election? They all sound pretty interesting and
sensible expansions of SPI's mission to me, to the point that I'd like
to see them happen even if you miss out on a board seat, and presuming
whoever's elected isn't actively opposed to those sorts of ideas, it seems
like something you could lead as a "promotions committee" or something.

So ignoring the election part and endorsement as an official SPI activity,
what's it going to take to actually get this stuff going? Do we need
money or sponsors first, or do we need people to do these things, or a
strategy of what to try promoting first, or what?

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:32:16AM -0400, David Graham wrote:
> We have to decide as an organisation if our purpose is to influence the
> community or simply be the wall the community can lean against while it
> does its work.

As a community member, I don't want to feel like I've got my back up
against the wall ;)

Personally, though, I'd put that differently, more as SPI being one means
by which the community influences others -- which from SPI's perspective
still means trying to publicise and advocate various ideas, but with the
focus being taking those ideas from the free software community rather
than trying to push them onto the free software community.

> I believe that we should make every reasonable effort to assist our
> associated projects in doing any advocacy they wish, within the bounds of
> their budgets and our charter. I don't believe our role is to be an
> independent lobby group, but our projects are free to be with our backing.

The difference there is that having projects do advocacy rather
than SPI removes the opportunity for SPI to actively help projects
cooperate. SPI's in a position to have a broad overview of the goals of
an already somewhat wide range of projects and notice similarities and
help them speak with one voice; which is a bit harder to achieve from
a single project's standpoint.

Cheers,
aj

Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 07:44:41AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> * A more physical presence of SPI and the associative projects at well
>> known events such as OSCON, LinuxWorld, and USENIX.
>>
>> * Working in FOSS hubs (such as S.F., Seattle and Portland) to foster
>> workshops, talks and training opportunities not only for new FOSS
>> community members, but also businesses that can help in the market drive
>> of FOSS.
>>
>> * Work with SPI members to sponsor individuals to give talks related to
>> FOSS at every possible legitimate opportunity.
>
> So presumably that ends up meaning "to give talks promoting FOSS to the
> broader public at every possible opportunity", or something. I'm not sure
> that SPI has the funds to do that to any significant degree at present,

"at present" would be accurate.

> but if SPI were visibly active in some way that's independent from its
> member projects, I suspect it'd be easy to raise funds to support that
> sort of stuff.

Yes.

>
>> * Work to have all associative projects work together to provide a more
>> influential presence to communities, governments and businesses.
>
> So I guess my question is are you willing to make those sort of goals
> independent of your election? They all sound pretty interesting and
> sensible expansions of SPI's mission to me, to the point that I'd like

I don't see it as an expansion. I see it as continuing the efforts of
the purpose.

> to see them happen even if you miss out on a board seat, and presuming
> whoever's elected isn't actively opposed to those sorts of ideas, it seems
> like something you could lead as a "promotions committee" or something.

If such as thing existed, yes. It is something I already do with PostgreSQL.

>
> So ignoring the election part and endorsement as an official SPI activity,
> what's it going to take to actually get this stuff going? Do we need
> money or sponsors first, or do we need people to do these things, or a
> strategy of what to try promoting first, or what?
>

Excellent question. There is a lot that needs to be done. Here is a
small bullet list:

* Money
* Sponsors
* Coordination with our projects to help sponsor (For example, a webinar
on using PostgreSQL and Debian in the enterpise), SPI could give the
webninar with the help of sponsorship from PostgreSQL + Debian.
* Organization and a plan.

The last one is key. Having a plan that "this team" (whoever that is) is
going to approach the following vendors/sponsors to raise money for this
(whatever this is) goal...

> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:32:16AM -0400, David Graham wrote:
>> We have to decide as an organisation if our purpose is to influence the
>> community or simply be the wall the community can lean against while it
>> does its work.

>> I believe that we should make every reasonable effort to assist our
>> associated projects in doing any advocacy they wish, within the bounds of
>> their budgets and our charter. I don't believe our role is to be an
>> independent lobby group, but our projects are free to be with our backing.

Our charter clearly states:

* To create, form and establish an organization to formulate and
provide software systems for use by the general public without charge;
* to teach and train individuals regarding the use and application
of such systems;
* to hold classes, seminars and workshops concerning the proper use
and application of computers and computer systems;
* to endeavor to monitor and improve the quality of currently
existing publicly available software;
* to support, encourage and promote the creation and development of
software available to the general public;
* to provide information and education regarding the proper use of
the Internet;
* to organize, hold and conduct meetings, discussions and forums on
contemporary issues concerning the use of computers and computer software;
* to foster, promote and increase access to software systems
available to the general public;
* to solicit, collect and otherwise raise money and to expend such
funds in furtherance of the goals and activities of the corporation;
* to aid, assist, cooperate, co-sponsor and otherwise engage in
concerted action with private, educational and governmental
organizations and associations on all issues and matters concerning the
use of computers and computer software
and generally
* to endeavor to promote, foster and advance interest in computers
and computer software by all available means and methods.

In essence, my platform is the charter. I just didn't want to cut and
paste ;)

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Our charter clearly states:
>
> * To create, form and establish an organization to formulate and
> provide software systems for use by the general public without charge;
> * to teach and train individuals regarding the use and application
> of such systems;
> * to hold classes, seminars and workshops concerning the proper use
> and application of computers and computer systems;
> * to endeavor to monitor and improve the quality of currently
> existing publicly available software;
> * to support, encourage and promote the creation and development of
> software available to the general public;
> * to provide information and education regarding the proper use of
> the Internet;
> * to organize, hold and conduct meetings, discussions and forums on
> contemporary issues concerning the use of computers and computer
> software;
> * to foster, promote and increase access to software systems
> available to the general public;
> * to solicit, collect and otherwise raise money and to expend such
> funds in furtherance of the goals and activities of the corporation;
> * to aid, assist, cooperate, co-sponsor and otherwise engage in
> concerted action with private, educational and governmental
> organizations and associations on all issues and matters concerning the
> use of computers and computer software
> and generally
> * to endeavor to promote, foster and advance interest in computers
> and computer software by all available means and methods.
>
> In essence, my platform is the charter. I just didn't want to cut and
> paste ;)

The purpose of the charter is to outline the list of anything and
everything we are allowed to do as an incorporated non-profit, not a list
of things we necessarily intend or plan to do. As with any corporation,
the purpose must be set out at its founding and it is my understanding
that this purpose cannot be changed. It is therefore imperative for the
founders of a corporation, as the founders of SPI here tried to do, to
forsee all activities SPI may ever consider carrying out at any time. I
don't believe it was ever the intention of SPI to do all these things at
once.

That said, it is a noble goal to try and carry out everything from
government lobbying to conference organisation and to generally promote,
foster and advance interest in computers and computer software by all
available means and methods. Thanks to our charter, we can adopt member
projects who do any of these things.

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:32:16AM -0400, David Graham wrote:
> > We have to decide as an organisation if our purpose is to influence the
> > community or simply be the wall the community can lean against while it
> > does its work.
>
> As a community member, I don't want to feel like I've got my back up
> against the wall ;)

Ok, perhaps a bad analogy, how about providing a bar table to sit at? ;)

> Personally, though, I'd put that differently, more as SPI being one
> means by which the community influences others -- which from SPI's
> perspective still means trying to publicise and advocate various ideas,
> but with the focus being taking those ideas from the free software
> community rather than trying to push them onto the free software
> community.

I can't disagree with that; influence by osmosis instead of by aggressive
lobbying is quite constructive. I don't want SPI's focus to be on lobbying
or advocacy primarily because SPI is alone in its much needed niche and we
should concentrate on that niche as our primary focus.

> > I believe that we should make every reasonable effort to assist our
> > associated projects in doing any advocacy they wish, within the bounds
> > of their budgets and our charter. I don't believe our role is to be an
> > independent lobby group, but our projects are free to be with our
> > backing.
>
> The difference there is that having projects do advocacy rather than SPI
> removes the opportunity for SPI to actively help projects cooperate.
> SPI's in a position to have a broad overview of the goals of an already
> somewhat wide range of projects and notice similarities and help them
> speak with one voice; which is a bit harder to achieve from a single
> project's standpoint.

That's a point on the surface, but I don't necessarily see it that way: I
am not suggesting that SPI not actively help its projects cooperate or
even advocate, only that we do so by the request of our member projects,
and not on our own whim. If projects want to work together or seek to work
together, then that is a kind of request they can make to SPI if they so
choose and SPI can then approach the other projects, for example. This
would be fine with me. I simply have reservations about SPI overtly doing
the advocacy or lobbying without the urging of its member projects whose
interests we are meant to be primarily focused on.

- -
David "cdlu" Graham - cdlu(at)railfan(dot)ca
Guelph, Ontario - http://www.cdlu.net/

David Graham wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

>> In essence, my platform is the charter. I just didn't want to cut and
>> paste ;)
>
> The purpose of the charter is to outline the list of anything and
> everything we are allowed to do as an incorporated non-profit, not a list

That does not change my assertion that my platform is the charter.

> of things we necessarily intend or plan to do.

As you just said, "intend" or "plan" to do. That is the exact point I am
making.

As with any corporation,
> the purpose must be set out at its founding and it is my understanding
> that this purpose cannot be changed.

Actually it can. Well at least it can from a for profit corp perspective.

> It is therefore imperative for the
> founders of a corporation, as the founders of SPI here tried to do, to
> forsee all activities SPI may ever consider carrying out at any time. I
> don't believe it was ever the intention of SPI to do all these things at
> once.

Was it ever the intention to do any of them? At present I see we do
"one" of the eleven.

>
> That said, it is a noble goal to try and carry out everything from
> government lobbying to conference organisation and to generally promote,
> foster and advance interest in computers and computer software by all
> available means and methods. Thanks to our charter, we can adopt member
> projects who do any of these things.

Well understand that I am not in any way looking through rose colored
glasses here. I would "like" to do these things. I "will" work toward
them. I do "not" expect that if I am elected the next week or even next
six months will bring about fundamental change in the SPI way of performing.

Incremental, steady, organized progression.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:32:16AM -0400, David Graham wrote:
>>> We have to decide as an organisation if our purpose is to influence the
>>> community or simply be the wall the community can lean against while it
>>> does its work.
>> As a community member, I don't want to feel like I've got my back up
>> against the wall ;)
>
> Ok, perhaps a bad analogy, how about providing a bar table to sit at? ;)
>
>> Personally, though, I'd put that differently, more as SPI being one
>> means by which the community influences others -- which from SPI's
>> perspective still means trying to publicise and advocate various ideas,
>> but with the focus being taking those ideas from the free software
>> community rather than trying to push them onto the free software
>> community.
>
> I can't disagree with that; influence by osmosis instead of by aggressive
> lobbying is quite constructive. I don't want SPI's focus to be on lobbying
> or advocacy primarily because SPI is alone in its much needed niche and we
> should concentrate on that niche as our primary focus.
>
>>> I believe that we should make every reasonable effort to assist our
>>> associated projects in doing any advocacy they wish, within the bounds
>>> of their budgets and our charter. I don't believe our role is to be an
>>> independent lobby group, but our projects are free to be with our
>>> backing.
>> The difference there is that having projects do advocacy rather than SPI
>> removes the opportunity for SPI to actively help projects cooperate.
>> SPI's in a position to have a broad overview of the goals of an already
>> somewhat wide range of projects and notice similarities and help them
>> speak with one voice; which is a bit harder to achieve from a single
>> project's standpoint.
>
> That's a point on the surface, but I don't necessarily see it that way: I
> am not suggesting that SPI not actively help its projects cooperate or
> even advocate, only that we do so by the request of our member projects,
> and not on our own whim. If projects want to work together or seek to work
> together, then that is a kind of request they can make to SPI if they so
> choose and SPI can then approach the other projects, for example. This
> would be fine with me. I simply have reservations about SPI overtly doing
> the advocacy or lobbying without the urging of its member projects whose
> interests we are meant to be primarily focused on.
>
> - -
> David "cdlu" Graham - cdlu(at)railfan(dot)ca
> Guelph, Ontario - http://www.cdlu.net/
> _______________________________________________
> Spi-general mailing list
> Spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
> http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 03:43:36PM -0400, David Graham wrote:
> That's a point on the surface, but I don't necessarily see it that way: I
> am not suggesting that SPI not actively help its projects cooperate or
> even advocate, only that we do so by the request of our member projects,
> and not on our own whim.

So I guess the way I view this is more that when a member project wants
to "request" stuff like this, the way that should work is by having some
of the people in that project get more actively involved in SPI and make
it happen -- which is pretty much what Joshua's doing.

As long as that doesn't end up as trying to force other projects to
be involved in projects when they don't want to -- which is possible,
but I think easily avoidable if we keep it in mind -- then it's all good.

Obviously, YMMV, but free software and grass roots activities and
promotion in the US really seems like something that could do a lot of
good to me.

Cheers,
aj

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 12:04:38PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>* Work to have all associative projects work together to provide a more
> >>influential presence to communities, governments and businesses.
> >So I guess my question is are you willing to make those sort of goals
> >independent of your election? They all sound pretty interesting and
> >sensible expansions of SPI's mission to me, to the point that I'd like
> I don't see it as an expansion. I see it as continuing the efforts of
> the purpose.

Sorry, I meant an expansion of what's actually being done (and what
people actually expect SPI to do at the moment), not what was planned
or predicted originally.

> Excellent question. There is a lot that needs to be done. Here is a
> small bullet list:
> * Money
> * Sponsors
> * Coordination with our projects to help sponsor (For example, a webinar
> on using PostgreSQL and Debian in the enterpise), SPI could give the
> webninar with the help of sponsorship from PostgreSQL + Debian.
> * Organization and a plan.
> The last one is key. Having a plan that "this team" (whoever that is) is
> going to approach the following vendors/sponsors to raise money for this
> (whatever this is) goal...

I think Debian's had some offers for tech to get webinar stuff done
with minimal effort already, so we might be able to do that already
without needing any money. The cooperation aspect (joing psql/debian,
eg) is something SPI could help with though, along with just advocating
that this is something worth doing.

Cheers,
aj

Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 03:43:36PM -0400, David Graham wrote:
>> That's a point on the surface, but I don't necessarily see it that way: I
>> am not suggesting that SPI not actively help its projects cooperate or
>> even advocate, only that we do so by the request of our member projects,
>> and not on our own whim.
>
> So I guess the way I view this is more that when a member project wants
> to "request" stuff like this, the way that should work is by having some
> of the people in that project get more actively involved in SPI and make
> it happen -- which is pretty much what Joshua's doing.

:)

>
> As long as that doesn't end up as trying to force other projects to
> be involved in projects when they don't want to -- which is possible,
> but I think easily avoidable if we keep it in mind -- then it's all good.
>

Well of course we can't force them and there will be projects that are
only interested in a subset of whatever we offer. I think that is par
for the course.

> Obviously, YMMV, but free software and grass roots activities and
> promotion in the US really seems like something that could do a lot of
> good to me.

I think so.

Joshua D. Drake

>
> Cheers,
> aj
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spi-general mailing list
> Spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
> http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 03:43:36PM -0400, David Graham wrote:
> As with any corporation, the purpose must be set out at its founding
> and it is my understanding that this purpose cannot be changed.

This is entirely incidental to the main thrust of the discussion, but
the corporate purposes can be changed. We would, however, have to follow
the procedure for amending our articles of incorporation (and also our
bylaws since the purposes are unfortunately duplicated there), then file
the updated copies with New York and send them to the IRS to give them
the opportunity to raise any problems that the new wording might
introduce regarding our tax exemption. (No, we don't have to reapply,
nor pay another IRS fee, but we do have to notify them in case they find
an issue.)

Of course, making any such amendment would require us to fix the same
problems that are preventing us from reforming our bylaws (i.e. too many
inactive contributing members making it effectively impossible to reach
quorum in a member vote.) I see no need to amend the corporate purposes
right now, anyway.

- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...] is an example of a legitimate-but-not-possible talk
> > opportunity. Can you give an example of an illegitimate one, please?
>
> I would be hard pressed to sponsor a Debian developer to go present a
> talk to a group of other Debian developers. Of course Debian could [...]

Ah, so illegitimate also covers not-our-audience stuff?

Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> wrote:
> I don't know if others can, but I can. Consider a talk on "open
> source" that argues that some classes of license -- e.g. GNU Copyleft
> -- are dangerous to the American Way and [...]

I had overlooked the possibility of an illegitimate talk, rather than
an illegitimate opportunity. Thank you.

Regards,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 10:51 -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:13:45AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > opportunity. Can you give an example of an illegitimate one, please?
>
> I don't know if others can, but I can. Consider a talk on "open
> source" that argues that some classes of license -- e.g. GNU Copyleft
> -- are dangerous to the American Way and such like, while others --
> e.g. the X Consortium or later BSD -- are business friendly and
> therefore Good and Right. Such a talk might well actually be
> promoted by certain large corporations who, themselves, make such an
> argument. They'd be delighted, of course, to get implicit
> underwriting by SPI or any other FOSS-community supporting groups. I
> believe this sort of sly appropriating of others' message for
> subversive aims is widely employed in the political world. And I
> think it would be illegitimate. (Whether it can be detected is
> another question entirely.)
>
> A
>

The solution to this is more talkers, which doesn't fit the case in
point of deciding where only one could benefit.

I think the 'open bank' needs revisiting which is the opposite of this
point.

It seems to be the half that is the cause. We're just discussing the
effect and voting day is getting near :)

Best,
--tim

MJ Ray writes ("Re: [Spi-private] Re: Inviting questions from SPI"):
> Another reason is that SPI is controlled by developers and not users.
> Would you address that and how?

If I may answer a question addressed to another candidate:

I think it's correct that SPI is controlled by contributors to Free
Software rather than users of Free Software. That's the way Free
Software is developed: by the choices of its contributors.

Using contribution as a the criterion also makes the organisation more
resistant to entryism (that is, some bunch of people with some
unfortunate axe to grind will find it harder to just join).

Ian.
(spi-private removed from the CC list)