The Outreach Program for Women (OPW) has proven to be extremely popular and has grown quite rapidly both in terms of the number of interns and the number of participating organizations. GNOME, as the lead organization, has been responsible for managing the finances for the entire effort. However, as the program grew, the processes did not keep up. The changes were not tracked effectively from the point when other organizations joined the OPW. This impacted not only our ability to manage the OPW administration, but also to keep up with the core financial tasks of the Foundation -- tasks which already needed the full attention of the Foundation's employees and the board.
Name:
Anonymous2014-04-14 18:37
For me, this means, nothing.
Name:
Anonymous2014-04-14 18:43
are there any girls here? upload pic of self and link it here please
Standard ignorant confirmation bias, perhaps you should read up about OPW before making stuff up.
Here's how it works. An organisation such as KDE decides to participate in OPW and so finds some sponsors to pay the US$5,500 stipend for each intern. In KDE's case we found one of our corporate sponsors who was willing to pay. The participating organisation collects the sponsorship money and pays this to the Gnome Foundation who then pays the interns. The Gnome Foundation also charges the participating organisation an admin fee to cover their expenses in running the program. There are at least 18 organisations who have participated in OPW in this way, including Mozilla, VideoLAN, Fedora, and the Linux Foundation. In the last round there were 30 interns from 8 organisations, only 3 interns were from Gnome.
There's two problems with this:
1) All the money passes through the Gnome Foundation accounts, making it appear they have spent 25% of their income on OPW, when in fact it isn't really an income or an expense to the Gnome Foundation, e.g. last round they paid out US$165,000 of which only US$16,500 was their own money, the rest was paid on behalf of the other orgs.
2) The program got so successful so fast that the Gnome Foundation's internal financial processes couldn't cope, they had to pay the interns before they had received all the sponsorship money from the participating organisations, and they used their own cash reserves to cover the gap. Once the participating orgs pay up, the Gnome Foundation will be back to normal again.
Anyone who's ever run a small business will recognise this as a classic cash-flow crisis from growing too big too fast before your admin has a chance to catch up. The lesson here is that the Gnome Foundation needs to set up a separate set of books for OPW and work harder to get the other orgs to pay the sponsors money up front.
So those of you slandering Karen Sandler claiming she's "stolen" money from Gnome for her own personal agenda really have some apologizing to do.
One other point to make is that the Gnome Foundation, just like the KDE eV, has absolutely no say over the direction of development of Gnome, they are just there to provide financial support to the direction the developers choose to take.
So those of you slandering Karen Sandler claiming she's "stolen" money from Gnome for her own personal agenda really have some apologizing to do.
There are two kinds of people who were claiming that: idiots and trolls. Apologizing is against policy for trolls, so anyone who does apologize must be an idiot.
Also I don't see why we would assume untrustworthiness for modern feminist subgroups we find distasteful. The human mind is relatively compartmentalized, and an individual who is a hypocritical cunt on certain issues could be a perfectly upstanding citizen in every other way. Demonizing one's opponent in such a manner, regardless of whether "they do it too", is unscientific and ultimately destructive.
If I wasn't drowning in work I would go look for actual references in actual mental health journals. But for now I'll just say this: consider phobias. They are very common, and they form a tiny area of irrationality in an otherwise healthy individual.
Science has nothing to do with anything that isn't science.
Are you trolling or do you seriously not know the origin of the phrase ``unscientific and ultimately destructive''?
