[Ambassadors] EMEA: Preliminary Statutes

Gerold Kassube gerold at lugd.org
Mon Jan 21 21:01:53 UTC 2008

Hi all,

this point you brought up here is future! First we have to bring up the
Please be careful and don`t through "normal membership" together with
"funding" and other possibilitys to support ...

Am Sonntag, den 20.01.2008, 22:02 +0100 schrieb Jeroen van Meeuwen:
> red_alert wrote:
> > I was thinking about different types of membership as well. For 
> > starters, I'd suggest to make at least two different fees: one for 
> > natural and one for legal persons.
> > 
> > As for silver/gold/platinum/whatever memberships...I'd not do that. I'd 
> > rather make basic/silver/.../whatever sponsorships.
> > 
> > e.g. if the membership fee is set to a maximum of 1,000:
> > - up to 1,000 contribution: (basic) sponsor
> > - 1,000 - 2,000: silver sponsor
> > - 2,000 - 5,000: gold sponsor
> > - 5'000 and over: platinum sponsor
> > 
> > Or maybe we should base the grades on the mandatory fee (which will 
> > probably change more often than the maximum fee) and express the 
> > different sponsorships in percents based on that.
> > e.g. (based on the mandatory fee)
> > - up to 100% of the mandatory fee: basic
> > - up to 200%: silver
> > - up to 500%: gold
> > - over 500%: platinum
> > 
> > ...of course, the latter would result in smaller contributions for each 
> > grade unless we state percentages like 1,000% which would look really 
> > greedy in turn.
> > 
> I'm not sure how free we are in defining different types of memberships 
> or sponsorships. Here also, Gerold may be in a better position to answer 
> that.
> A legal person as a member would be saying; "hey, I support you", 
> whereas a legal person as a sponsor is saying "hey, I support you and 
> here's what you need to continue and expand what you're doing". Being 
> completely different, I'm not sure we would want to distinguish between 
> different types of sponsorships at all, other then maybe "primary" and 
> "secondary" sponsorships. Either way, this is kind of far-fetched 
> speculation on what might happen in some future whereas we're not sure 
> we even need to describe such differentiation between sponsorships in 
> the Statutes -opposed to memberships, I haven't seen sponsorships being 
> mentioned anywhere before.
> So, at least in this discussion, let's stick to the memberships rather 
> then all the relationships that might or might not be accomplished in 
> the future.
> You suggest we should not differentiate between different kinds of 
> memberships which I think is OK as it both simplifies the Statutes, 
> bookkeeping and accounting, and isn't as obscure to (potential) new 
> members. If anyone thinks differently though, now is the time to tell us ;-)
> > I'd say honorary members would be a good thing, but we should make sure 
> > that it's really hard to award it. 1) we wouldn't want to have too many 
> > of them, 2) the less such members there are and the harder it is to 
> > become one, the more "worth" it is to earn that sort of membership.
> > 
> > ...maybe we could put something into the statutes that makes it harder. 
> > 3/4 of the GMM must agree, one must be a normal member for at least 5 
> > years befor he/she can become a honorary member, ...what else could we 
> > do to make it harder?
> > 
> If we're not getting any contra's, the concept of honorary members is 
> getting in the Statutes. The way someone could become an honorary member 
> is to be determined at a later point when we have something drafted up. 
> I'm sure there'll be something such as a 3/4 majority GMM has to agree 
> and maybe something like only the board can propose such, although I'm 
> not much in favor of the minimum 5 years of membership limit.
> Anyone with ideas on the topic, feel free to draft something up that 
> would fit right in with the Statutes and send it here.
> Kind regards,
> Jeroen van Meeuwen
> -kanarip
> --
> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
> Fedora-ambassadors-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ambassadors-list
Gerold Kassube <gerold at lugd.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/attachments/20080121/3793333a/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list