Re: Membership dues [ was: Re: Advisory Board Letter ]

["John R. Sheets" <dusk ravendusk org>]

On Friday, August 04, 2000, Joe Shaw <joe@helixcode.com> wrote:
> > I'd rather see companies working for inclusion than buying it.  I'm
> > sensing a desire to compromise here from many of us, but $10K is not a
> > compromise, it's an average.  $10K is still about $10K too high for my
> > taste. 
> 
> Beyond that, companies that pay a fee to be on the board may think that
> GNOME "owes" them something in return, and then there's the pressure that
> we may do something they want but we don't want because we've become so
> dependent on their contributions.

Perhaps word the membership fees section so that the "member donation"
is optional, but strongly encouraged.  Larger companies who skip the
donation would be seen as cheap.  Also, smaller companies could make
more modest donations without losing face (especially if they make up
for it by donating hardware or developer time).  

If the wording is carefully chosen to imply that the membership dues are
donations, I think we can avoid the entitlement issues you mention
above.  This would keep the foundation from becoming too beholden to the
money, since it would not be guaranteed.  And it would be a good way to
establish good faith with corporate members: If they don't have to
contribute, but do anyway, it shows even more that they are truly
interested in GNOME.

John

-- 
dusk@ravendusk.org                            http://www.gnome.org
jsheets@codeweavers.com                  http://www.worldforge.org
               http://advogato.org/person/jsheets