[Qgis-psc] Discussion around changing sponsors to members in QGIS.ORG

[Paolo Cavallini]

Agreed.
Thanks.

Il 21 novembre 2018 22:14:14 CET, Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net> ha scritto:
>Hi,
>
>We can discuss it at the meeting - but depending on the general
>reaction 
>before the next PSC meeting I could perhaps propose some wording for
>the 
>changes in the statutes until the meeting.
>
>Andreas
>
>
>Am 21.11.18 um 22:10 schrieb Paolo Cavallini:
>> It seems a good idea to me.
>> Can we discuss it on the next PSC meeting, or you have reasons to 
>> hurry up?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Il 21 novembre 2018 22:02:58 CET, Andreas Neumann 
>> <a.neumann at carto.net> ha scritto:
>>
>>     Dear PSC (and active contributors),
>>
>>     I would like to discuss if we could change our statutes again
>(sorry
>>     about that - and of course only if you agree - we can vote on
>it).
>>
>>     The idea is to change our current sponsorships we have to a
>membership
>>     in the future. As it is now it would be purely voluntary - and
>they
>>     wouldn't have voting rights. We could call them "sustaining
>members" or
>>     "supporting members" and we could still keep different membership
>>     categories. Instead of calling them gold/silver/bronze, we would
>could
>>     them something like small (the current bronze), normal (the
>current
>>     silver), large (the current gold) - or something similar (perhaps
>you
>>     have better ideas about the naming) - just to make sure it is not
>a
>>     sponsorship anymore - and gold/silver/bronze is quite attached to
>>     sponsorships.
>>
>>     Why would I suggest such a change?
>>
>>     * There is a good chance that our sponsorship payments will reach
>a
>>     limit (150k CHF = approx. 130k €), if we would surpass that
>limit, then
>>     we would have to charge VAT on the sponsorship payments
>>
>>     * on the other hand membership fees of an association are not
>subject to VAT
>>
>>     * a membership could be easier for public authorities to pay,
>instead of
>>     a sponsorship
>>
>>     * Maybe organizations are more likely to renew a membership fee
>than a
>>     sponsorship (maybe more commitment) - but not sure about that.
>>
>>     * we would still have a public listing of sustaining members
>(with their
>>     logos, website and location), but we wouldn't call them sponsors
>anymore
>>
>>     * Members are welcome to add a donation on top of the membership
>fee.
>>     This would be similar to now. Some bronze sponsors maybe
>voluntarily pay
>>     1500 instead of 500, but are still listed as bronze, until they
>would
>>     surpass the threshold of the next level.
>>
>>     We can discuss or think about if we can give such
>sustaining/supporting
>>     members some additional benefits (which would help attract more
>of them)
>>     - e.g. a small member could name 2 bugs that get prioritized
>during bug
>>     fixing time, for normal it would be 5 and for large some maybe
>10. Or
>>     maybe you would have some other ideas about benefits for such
>members
>>     instead. I think they shouldn't have voting rights - that should
>stay
>>     with the current voting members (the active contributors, user
>groups
>>     and developers).
>>
>>     Thoughts?
>>
>>     Greetings,
>>
>>     Andreas
>>    
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     Qgis-psc mailing list
>>     Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>>     https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Sorry for being short 

-- 
Sorry for being short
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20181122/04a86c68/attachment.html>