FSFE Finance

[Bernhard Reiter]

For several reasons I want to avoid "member".

There would be a word clash 
between contributing FSFE members in money or code.

A practical reason: The FSFE is set up and we do not want to 
change to constitution to deal with sponsors as members without
member rights.

	Bernhard


On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 08:24:41PM +0200, joack at gmx.net wrote:
> yesterday, I think, Georg asked  for ideas to deal with sponsors, private 
> and coorporations. I'd like to propose a historic example (not quite 
> accurate, maybe) that might even appease Anders.
> The examaple is that of the _early_ Royal Society. They were in a similar 
> siotuation as the fsfe now but already overrun by the "wrong" people 
> (OpenSource in our case, I guess).
> So they came up with the following system:
> _ a patron. The King in their case; sponsors here,
> _ assosiated members; paying a regular fee.,
> _ contributing members; (obvious, I guess) and, later on even
> _ honorary members.
> None of the above had any hand in the handling of policies, no right to 
> vote. But the could call themselves Members R.S.
> 
> Lastly the nominated members, we already have those!
> I think that might work and it might even draw the comunity closer to the 
> fsfe

-- 
Professional Service around Free Software                (intevation.net)  
The FreeGIS Project                                         (freegis.org)
Association for a Free Informational Infrastructure            (ffii.org)
FSF Europe                                            	  (fsfeurope.org)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 248 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20010726/83bc27ad/attachment.sig>