[OSGeo-Discuss] Membership fee (was: Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members) [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

Tue Jul 1 16:57:38 PDT 2014

Hi Dirk,

Well said.

However as someone who fits in all four categories that you¹ve defined, I
must point out that the sponsorship dollars may perhaps not be in these
categories either.

I find it easier to contribute time as **a member of the community** and
definitely do not want to be seen as merely a sponsor.

Bruce

On 2/07/2014 2:46 am, "Dirk Frigne" <dirk.frigne at geosparc.com> wrote:

>Although I am not so active on the mailing list,  I am an OSGeo's
>advocate, and I take the opportunity to promote OSGeo wherever I can.
>
>I became an OSGeo member in 2007 because I was proud on what the
>organisation did and I wanted to support it, with the scarce resources I
>own.
>
>One of the things I appreciate enormously is
>
>- The organisation is open (as in open source)
>- Becoming a member of the organisation is totally free (*yes* like in
>free beer!)
>- the organisation has a perfect DNA:
>    - members can 
>        - act as *A* user
>        - act as *T*echnical skilled person (sofware developers,
>industry, documentation)
>        - work at *G*overmental body
>        - member of the s*C*ientific world (academic world)
>
>In the world of today *free* as in gratis, *free* as in *free* *beer*,
>doing something for
>somebody else is very rare (scarce) that it becomes very valuable.
>Being a part of a community like OSGeo not only is *fun* but also gives
>you a *good* feeling, and it is very motivating to work in a company or
>organisation that supports OSGeo.
>
>I may be naive, but for me personally this works out well, and having
>that feeling is one of the important incentives to keep contributing to
>the community. (And by the way, working with other members of the OSGeo
>community didn't result in any bad experience until now)
>
>Of course, an organisation needs money, To support some stuff (.svn or
>whathever goal is worth supporting). But I think we should keep the
>membership *free* (and not as in *free* beer!), because it is in my eyes
>a very essential part of OSGeo:
> 
>"Core principles are:
>
>    OSGeo should act as a low capital, volunteer focused organisation.
>    OSGeo should focus support on OSGeo communities and initiatives
>which support themselves. " [1]
>
>As in DNA, different chains have different roles.
>
>*G*overnments are happy to have such a movement as the Free and open
>source software [2] movement, because they can avoid vendor lock-in,
>gain control over their projects (read: become free again), and save a
>lot of money. They should take this advantage seriously and sponsor open
>source activities.
>
>the s*C*ientific world is happy to use open source solutions, because
>they can study the tools themselves and focus on research, not being
>bothered of the licenses they are using.
>They also should take this advantage seriously and donate scientific
>relevant material they don't want to exploit immediately to the community.
>
>*A*ny user should be free (*not* as in free beer) to use and experiment
>with the results of what the community is producing. The community
>should welcome *A*ny user and help him to find his way, so he can take
>his responsibility and earn respect for what he is doing.
>
>And last but not least: the *T*echnically skilled persons are the heart
>of the community. Being able to create great teamwork and donate back to
>the community. Also they should take their responsibility and earn the
>respect they deserve.
>
>But where is the money we need to operate the organisation?
>
>Personally, I don't think it are the users nor the community members who
>should take care of that. Because the belonging to the community should
>remain a *free* right, where the value comes from respect and the
>intense feeling of giving something without expecting something back.
>
>The strange thing is that many of the members are also professional
>involved into OSGeo (acting as A T G or C).
>So I suggest it should not be the (community) members who should pay for
>the support, but these professional actors.
>And they (the professional actors) should become a member (in their role
>of incorporation) to support it. But sponsored membership should not
>give rights to vote, or whatsoever. The only thing you gain is that you,
>as a professional incorporation, are happy with an organisation as
>OSGeo, fighting for your rights to be able to use *free* software.  And
>the sponsors should trust and believe that a low capital, volunteer
>focused organisation will do that for them, as they do it already today.
>
>The sponsoring should not be an obligation either, but should be the
>common responsibility of the companies sponsoring the FOSS4G events today.
>
>my 2c
>
>[1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Board_Priorities
>[2] http://www.fsf.org/about/what-is-free-software
>
>Dirk
>On 24-06-14 15:12, Even Rouault wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Interesting topic that raises quite a few questions.
>>
>> I think that all people who have commented in that thread have not
>>necessarily
>> agreed if membership fees would be something in addition to the
>>nomination and
>> election processs, or if it would replace it.
>>
>> If we switch to a paid membership, one would likely have to identify the
>> benefits brought by being a member. Voting rights for the board would
>>probably
>> not a big enough benefit. In the AAG example quoted by Paul, there are
>>several
>> benefits associated: access to journals, reduced prices to
>> publications/meetings, etc... That would mean that there is a
>>commitment of
>> OSGeo to provide the advertized benefits, and thus the question on how
>>to
>> guarantee this commitment would arise : volunteers effort, or paid
>> staff/contractors ?
>> Interestingly one of the benefit of AAG membership is access to "AAG
>>specialty
>> groups" whose equivalent in OSGeo would probably be our mailing lists.
>>So would
>> we want to restrict access to those to non members ? Mateusz also
>>mentionned
>> that bills have to be paid to maintain some OSGeo servers, like svn.
>>Would we
>> want to restrict access to those servers only to the folks who have
>>paid the
>> membership fee ? Probably not.
>>
>> We have only mentionned individual members, but would we want to extend
>>to
>> corportate members as well ?
>>
>> From my perspective, OSGeo Charter membership is a recognition for the
>> accomplishments of an individual to support OSGeo values and missions,
>>and thus
>> gets a right to define its steering through board election. Perhaps we
>>at a
>> community sometimes fail to welcome people who would deserve it,
>>because they
>> are a bit outside of our usual networks to be nominated (or because
>>people are
>> not confortable enough to do public nominations, perhaps for language or
>> cultural reasons), or because we reach the yearly quota for new
>>members. That's
>> certainly a pitty if folks feel excluded whereas I think we generally
>>try to be
>> rather inclusive.
>>
>> One thing to keep in mind is that if we translate into money the value
>>of the
>> accomplishments of OSGeo Charter members, I'm pretty sure that in
>>99.99% of the
>> cases that translates to much more than USD 70. You can probably add
>>one or two
>> zeros to that figure. So asking them for a fee, in addition to their
>>other forms
>> of contribution, would seem a bit awkward, although I can understand
>>that
>> contribution in term of money rather than time is sometimes more
>>useful. So I
>> wouldn't object to paying a membership fee.
>>
>> But IMHO the main question is : do we need membership fees to sustain
>>OSGeo ?
>> Aren't surplus funds generated by FOSS4G sufficient for that (although
>>I can
>> understand that Howard's fear that FOSS4G organization by volunteers
>>might not
>> be a sustainable model) ? Or perhaps we would need more funds to be
>>able to do
>> more things ?
>>
>> OSGeo is perhaps rather different from other organizations in the
>>geomatics
>> field in the way it manages its membership, but is it more a strength
>>or a
>> weakness ?
>>
>> Even
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>-- 
>Yours sincerely,
>
>
>ir. Dirk Frigne
>CEO
>
>Geosparc n.v.
>Brugsesteenweg 587
>B-9030 Ghent
>Tel: +32 9 236 60 18
>GSM: +32 495 508 799
>
>http://www.geomajas.org
>http://www.geosparc.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss