Re: [guadec-list] Terms and conditions for registration

[Philip Van Hoof <pvanhoof gnome org>]

On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 17:57 +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote:
> >> I'm OK with a two-class society where people who pay more get a little
> >> more and people who pay nothing get a little less. Events cost money,
> >> and we have to pay for them somehow. I don't want to encourage people to
> >> think of the code they write or time they spend as payment for stuff
> >> they get off the foundation. This would be a Very Bad Thing.
> > 
> > It is wrong to assume that somebody goes for free if he or she does not
> > pay a registration fee.  Any person must spend at least €300-€400 to
> > attend to GUADEC.
> 
> What is wrong is to consider that the GNOME Foundation owes any GNOME
> developers free entry to the conference. As I said, these things cost
> money, and must be paid for, and we also want to pay for hackfests and
> sysadmins and executive directors and travel subsidies...
> 
> What you said is exactly right - for a core contributor, a financial
> inability to come should not be a barrier to attendance. But when I see
> people employed by companies to work on GNOME saying that they can't
> afford a €100 registration fee, I get upset.

A lot of the companies that employ programmers that work on GNOME are
very small and work with a very small profit margin.

That they can't invoice for two weeks to their customer, because their
employees are not working for the customer during that time, already
costs them quickly several thousands of euros per head for just those
two weeks. Add to that travel costs, hotel and entrance fees.

So I don't think getting upset at these people here is the right
response.

Don't forget that they create the software, the foundation doesn't.

The foundation's purpose is to attract sponsors for the main event too.

Trying to pay for the event using registration fees is foolish at most.

Originally the registration fee was exclusively to help students pay for
the travel expenses. The registration fee was never intended as a
payment for the event itself.

And I think turning it into that is a blunder, not just a mistake.

> When I see people who can clearly afford €100 to register (or €250
> for a pro registration that they could expense to their employer)
> paying nothing, and getting the same conference experience as I get
> paying €100, I get very upset. And when I see people who have never
> made a substantial contribution to GNOME apply for, and obtain,
> travel subsidies to attend, that makes me really, really upset.

> Upset enough to pay for the €0 option rather than subsidise people who
> could afford to pay a little themselves.

> > If you add people outside of EU, that must have an extra insurance
> > (€100), some of them requires visa (€100-€200), several contributors are
> > students and does not have any income, some of them works as volunteers
> > in their extra time, so some of them or have to ask for vacation in
> > their jobs or permission without earn any salary.

> We have done a lot to ensure that we can subsidise travel and
> accommodation costs for those who need that.

And that's the only good reason to ask for entrance fees.

> And this is also why I've been pushing for a very low cost (maybe
> free) accommodation option where we can house people who can't afford
> a hotel room.

That's good.

> > If you still think they want a fee pass because they "only" write code,
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Germán, let's make sure we understand each other.
> 
> Koen talked about not wanting to have a different conference pack for
> people who pay 0, €100 or €250, so as not to undervalue "people who have
> written 30,000 lines of code".
> 
> What I'm saying is that no matter how much code you've written, you
> should not feel *entitled* to anything. You haven't *earned* anything
> off the GNOME Foundation.

...

What is the foundation's purpose then? It's not here for GNOME's
developers? What are you trying to say?

> The foundation operates (or at least, should
> operate) as a social state - from each according to their means, to each
> according to their needs. If you're attending on your own and can afford
> to pay €100 as a conference fee, then do so - and you'll get a nice
> t-shirt & mug for your trouble. If you're attending on behalf of your
> employer & can expense the conference fee, pay the top amount (which is
> pretty cheap as conferences go). You also get the t-shirt & mug, and
> attendance to a pros-only evening reception.

> That's all I'm saying, is that when it comes to the financial outlay &
> security of the conference, I think there should be a registration fee,
> which should be waived generously. But the default option should
> definitely be "pay the fee".

No, the foundation is supposed to attract sponsors for the purpose of
paying for that.

If it fails at this, it fails at its purpose. And that means we have to
start replacing the people that run it, instead of starting to ask
registration fees at a conference that always worked fine the way it
worked in the past.

> > I do prefer a more positive message for those contributors who can pay
> > the fee instead speaking about two-class society which sound negative
> > for those who can not afford it.
> 
> Yes! The positive message is: You're helping GNOME and getting something
> that you wouldn't otherwise get! Like FOSDEM.

FOSDEM has no required entrance fees either.


Cheers,

Philip


-- 


Philip Van Hoof
freelance software developer
Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be

-- 


Philip Van Hoof
freelance software developer
Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be