On Apr 25, 2014 9:26 AM, "Sindhu S" <sindhus live in> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Marina Zhurakhinskaya <marinaz redhat com> wrote:
>>
>> This was done because Diego e-mailed the board with a special request and the majority of directors felt that it was reasonable to reimburse for visa expenses, when we will not be reimbursing for a larger amount we earlier approved that would be needed for the person to make the trip.
>
>
> I approached the board too. My visa expenses didn't exceed the sponsorship approved either. The email was sent to board gnome org and here's a screenshot:
> http://i.imgur.com/FivZRwB.png. Why didn't the rest of the board respond then?
>
The original plan was that Diego was going to pay for the visa processing and the foundation was going to pay for the ticket. Unfortunately, he was unable to get a visa and was out a significant amount of money and had asked if the board would pay for the visa application in lieu of the plane ticket. Meaning if we were already going to pay for a larger sum of money anyway it should be OK to pay for the smaller amount.
That conversation lead to an overall look at how we view the policy of visa processing since you pointed out we don't generally pay for them.
The difference between your situation and Diego is that Diego isn't going anywhere and is out of money. The second difference is that Diego only applied for the visa because I asked him to come to the west coast hackfest. So it wasn't even his idea or his initiative but mine. That's why it was looked at as a special case.
I hope that clears things up.
Sri
>>
>> As you can see, this reimbursement was done by a separate vote as an exception to the current rule.
>>
>> I'm sorry an exception or a policy review were not considered when you were denied a visa. As you can see, the board also decided we should discuss amending the policy about reimbursement for rejected visas in the future.
>
>
> What is so special about Diego that his situation has provoked a policy change? Why was the reimbursement policies upheld in my case and relaxed in his?
> The current situation on GNOME's financials was very much made public and in between being low on cash, how is that board can make such an exception?
>
> If the board is going to make a policy change, then please bring it into working *first* and then entertain cases that occur after it not before. Otherwise it's just plain unfair.
>
> -Sindhu
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
