<html><head></head><body>It seems a good idea to me.<br>Can we discuss it on the next PSC meeting, or you have reasons to hurry up?<br>Thanks.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">Il 21 novembre 2018 22:02:58 CET, Andreas Neumann <a.neumann@carto.net> ha scritto:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">Dear PSC (and active contributors),<br><br>I would like to discuss if we could change our statutes again (sorry <br>about that - and of course only if you agree - we can vote on it).<br><br>The idea is to change our current sponsorships we have to a membership <br>in the future. As it is now it would be purely voluntary - and they <br>wouldn't have voting rights. We could call them "sustaining members" or <br>"supporting members" and we could still keep different membership <br>categories. Instead of calling them gold/silver/bronze, we would could <br>them something like small (the current bronze), normal (the current <br>silver), large (the current gold) - or something similar (perhaps you <br>have better ideas about the naming) - just to make sure it is not a <br>sponsorship anymore - and gold/silver/bronze is quite attached to <br>sponsorships.<br><br>Why would I suggest such a change?<br><br>* There is a good chance that our sponsorship payments will reach a <br>limit (150k CHF = approx. 130k €), if we would surpass that limit, then <br>we would have to charge VAT on the sponsorship payments<br><br>* on the other hand membership fees of an association are not subject to VAT<br><br>* a membership could be easier for public authorities to pay, instead of <br>a sponsorship<br><br>* Maybe organizations are more likely to renew a membership fee than a <br>sponsorship (maybe more commitment) - but not sure about that.<br><br>* we would still have a public listing of sustaining members (with their <br>logos, website and location), but we wouldn't call them sponsors anymore<br><br>* Members are welcome to add a donation on top of the membership fee. <br>This would be similar to now. Some bronze sponsors maybe voluntarily pay <br>1500 instead of 500, but are still listed as bronze, until they would <br>surpass the threshold of the next level.<br><br>We can discuss or think about if we can give such sustaining/supporting <br>members some additional benefits (which would help attract more of them) <br>- e.g. a small member could name 2 bugs that get prioritized during bug <br>fixing time, for normal it would be 5 and for large some maybe 10. Or <br>maybe you would have some other ideas about benefits for such members <br>instead. I think they shouldn't have voting rights - that should stay <br>with the current voting members (the active contributors, user groups <br>and developers).<br><br>Thoughts?<br><br>Greetings,<br><br>Andreas<hr>Qgis-psc mailing list<br>Qgis-psc@lists.osgeo.org<br><a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc</a></pre></blockquote></div><br>-- <br>Sorry for being short</body></html>