374
edits
Difference between revisions of "Organization Proposal"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Overview
(Transferred content from (briefly used) Talk page) |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
* Move the XSF entirely to Europe | * Move the XSF entirely to Europe | ||
** emus: Sorry, did we decide this? I would argue to keep both. The more location we have, the more access and representation we have. I believe this is very important. Going back is way harder, that try to do the efforts to keep it. Many big companies are based in US. It also has positive representation to non-US instances if we have one there, too. | |||
* Create a subsidiary in Europe | * Create a subsidiary in Europe | ||
* Make no organizational changes (this is always an option!) | * Make no organizational changes (this is always an option!) | ||
** But should we? | |||
These options are explained in more detail below. | These options are explained in more detail below. | ||
| Line 22: | Line 24: | ||
In order to move the XSF from the U.S. to a European country, we would probably need to form a separate organization in Europe and then shut down the XSF. | In order to move the XSF from the U.S. to a European country, we would probably need to form a separate organization in Europe and then shut down the XSF. | ||
- emus: Where are the arguments to move it? I think there is value to keep both. | |||
== Subsidiary == | == Subsidiary == | ||
| Line 38: | Line 42: | ||
* Who will do the work in Europe? | * Who will do the work in Europe? | ||
* emus offers help. I would like to create a team around this. | |||
* Who could help to keep it up in US? | |||
* Who cannot do the work (e.g., can only citizens of the domicile country be board members)? | * Who cannot do the work (e.g., can only citizens of the domicile country be board members)? | ||
* What about succession planning? | * What about succession planning? | ||
| Line 62: | Line 68: | ||
The second ("it might be easier to obtain grants") and third ("we might be able to have more influence over European policy") are worded very cautiously (the word 'might' is used). Are we at all certain about this? Are there examples of grants or obstacles to assert influence that we're currently experiencing? As a counter-example: EU funding (through Next Generation Internet / NLnet) has already found its way to a significant amount (about 20, at the time of writing) of XMPP-related projects. | The second ("it might be easier to obtain grants") and third ("we might be able to have more influence over European policy") are worded very cautiously (the word 'might' is used). Are we at all certain about this? Are there examples of grants or obstacles to assert influence that we're currently experiencing? As a counter-example: EU funding (through Next Generation Internet / NLnet) has already found its way to a significant amount (about 20, at the time of writing) of XMPP-related projects. | ||
* And what about US funding? | |||