[kwlug disc.] FLOSS Fund update

[Unsolicited at gto.net]

May I request ... something presented should take priority over those not.
e.g. both Blender and Gimp were presented. The presenter(s) spent
significant time with a product and felt strongly enough about it to develop
(a presentation) and present on it. Presumably some members of the audience
will check it out further.

I don't mean to fuzz the issue, but this leads to (a) a project isn't vetted
as worthy until at least the month following a presentation, based upon
member response? (b) some sort of show of hands at the meeting as to who
gets it.

I have no problem with the managers asking for a quick show of hands as a,
or an additional, decision making method. Including ignoring that show of
hands if they so choose.

-----Original Message-----
From: kwlug-disc-bounces at kwlug.org [mailto:kwlug-disc-bounces at kwlug.org] On
Behalf Of Adam Glauser
Sent: December 15, 2006 11:53 AM
To: kwlug-disc at kwlug.org
Subject: Re: [kwlug disc.] FLOSS Fund update


	I thought this was settled. Having said that, I don't remember which
it was. 
	It was either (a) show of hands for candidates at the meeting, or
(b) the
	fishbowl manglers autonomously choose which of the nominees they
prefer.


Andrew and I were discussing this a bit after the last meeting, and based on
that discussion, my proposal is (c) let's go through the project nominations
in FIFO (First In First Out) order.  The nominator must provide a
description of the project and the method of contribution to the cabal, and
optionally a 'why this is a great project' statement, to be read by someone
(preferably the nominator) at the meeting.  Once a project has been 'project
of the month', it can not be contributed to again unless (i) the project
queue is empty, or (ii) one year has passed.  If someone has an argument
against a particular project, they can present that at the meeting (or ask
the cabal to read a statement, no anonymous statements allowed).  This keeps
it simple, fair, and no one can "stuff the ballot box" without it being
fairly obvious.

If this arrangement becomes unmanageable we can always come up with a better
solution.



	It was my understanding that the results of the prior meeting's
fishbowl
	contributions would be announced at the next meeting. 


Sounds good to me.  With luck we can post this info on kwlug.org as well,
which will also serve to keep track of which projects are ineligible for
repeat- see (ii) above.