[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [chairs] Membership for open source implementers
Scott While no-one has paid multiple individuals to join TCs, I know of several companies have populated TCs with a large number of members, most of whom only speak up at a vote or at rollcall, so I don't think its beyond the bounds of belief. Paul Scott McGrath wrote: > Gabe, > > At some level, many members are here because their peers, partners, > suppliers or customers have encouraged them to join OASIS. But we have not > witnessed any situation where a member thinks so strongly of their cause as > to directly encourage them with their checkbook in a "buying plurality" way. > Could it happen, I suppose. Is it likely? I don't know. I do know that > I'd like to hear from any members who *have* convinced their management to > pay several member fees, because we might learn some interesting sales > techniques ;-) > > Going forward... > We should move this dialogue to member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org. I can > add an announcement to the next Member news that this dialogue is there now > and every member (not the subset that are chairs) can share their views on > this. > > Scott... > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gabe Wachob [mailto:gabe.wachob@amsoft.net] >> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 8:51 PM >> To: 'Scott McGrath'; Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM; chairs@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [chairs] Membership for open source implementers >> >> Eduardo, Scott, et al: >> >> OK, so taking my alternative, does anyone see a risk of a company >> astroturfing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing) a TC by paying for >> individual memberships for individuals acting under their "command"? >> >> Am I just paranoid? The point of the TC process was to avoid process >> manipulation, and to maximize transparency. I'd like to enable open source >> implementer participation in as transparent a way as possible, but it feels >> broken for me (as a OASIS member) to be able to pay for someone else's >> participation and not be required to disclose that fact. >> >> -Gabe >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Scott McGrath [mailto:scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 4:00 PM >>> To: 'Gabe Wachob'; Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM; chairs@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: RE: [chairs] Membership for open source implementers >>> >>> Gabe, Eduardo, All, >>> >>> OASIS doesn't have an "Invited Expert" but does have something of similar >>> net effect - >>> >>> A TC Chair can advocate for a free membership for someone who cannot >>> afford >>> to share the financial burden of supporting the OASIS infrastructure, >>> someone who is an important technical asset. Patrick can grant a >>> complimentary membership - which I pay for from my budget. (There are >>> accounting reasons for not just giving away membership, but not to bore >>> you >>> with accounting practices here) alternatively, our Member Sections can >>> also >>> use some of their budget to serve their market needs by paying for >>> memberships of someone one might deem as an expert. >>> >>> I should point out that the budget for such things is justifiably >> limited, >>> and probably ranges around a dozen in total. I'd also point out that the >>> Individual class of membership (Individuals and Associates) is deeply >>> subsidized. These are hundreds of members who willingly pay something >>> (approximately 1/2 our cost per member to operate) willingly, because >> they >>> do want to help support the overhead. So in essence, one might argue in >>> terms of finite budgets, we can support two Individuals at the same cost >>> as >>> 1 complimentary member. >>> >>> As Eduardo points out, the Individual membership is an extraordinary >>> bargain, and an option not offered by many organizations that do offer >>> some >>> "Invited Expert" memberships. I'm jaded by proximity, but I am proud >> that >>> we can enable hundreds of Individual members at a cost that is reasonable >>> for them. I am proud of the operational efficiency of OASIS and how >>> effectively our members share resources of time and financial support. >>> >>> You know that as a non-profit, we balance revenue with operations costs. >>> I >>> am inclined to seek more revenue so we can provide more services to more >>> members--because there is nearly an infinite amount of work we can do in >>> support of the OASIS mission. That said, we are working with your dues, >>> so >>> we are open to your guidance on where to spend more of it ;-) >>> >>> Thanks, I'll step off the soapbox now. >>> >>> Scott... >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Gabe Wachob [mailto:gabe.wachob@amsoft.net] >>>> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 6:20 PM >>>> To: Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM; chairs@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: RE: [chairs] Membership for open source implementers >>>> >>>> Two things: >>>> >>>> 1) OASIS used to have "invited experts" - I was one a number of years >> ago >>>> (though I think the "expert" tag was maybe misapplied to me ;). >>>> >>>> 2) Eduardo, I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not saying that any >>>> individual can show up and say they are an implementer and become a >>> member >>>> for free. I'm talking about people who have demonstrated to the TC their >>>> willingness to contribute to the TC's body of work in ways which don't >>>> involve paying money to OASIS. The point here is that we (at least our >>> TC) >>>> need to support open source implementations to the fullest extent >>> possible, >>>> and where the implementer is an individual and not getting paid for >> their >>>> implementation by an employer or other party, we're effectively pushing >>>> them >>>> away from our work. Bad Idea, if you ask me. >>>> >>>> It sounds like the answer you are proposing is "have someone in the TC >>> pay >>>> for that person's membership" - which is definitely one solution. But I >>>> think it raises issues about transparency and independence of TC >>>> membership. >>>> But if that's the way OASIS makes us do it, then I guess that's the way >>>> we'd >>>> do it... >>>> >>>> -Gabe >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM [mailto:Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 3:07 PM >>>>> To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>> Subject: Re: [chairs] Membership for open source implementers >>>>> >>>>> Ken is right, "invited expert" does not exist in OASIS, that is W3C >>>>> parlance. >>>>> >>>>> But: >>>>> >>>>> - anybody can read the email of the TC through the archives (yes, >> there >>>> is >>>>> a slight delay and it's a pull not push system, but hey, it's >>> gratis...) >>>>> - anybody can send comments to the TC through the comment mechanism, >>>> which >>>>> means they first have to agree (and be legally bound by their >>> agreement) >>>>> that >>>>> whatever IPR they contribute to the TC is offered under the same IPR >>> mode >>>>> as the TC. >>>>> >>>>> So now you know what $300 buys you. >>>>> >>>>> As to the argument that "for someone doing good >>>>> work that benefits the OASIS community, it seems odd that we'd throw >>>>> a barrier up for them to contribute even more directly.", hm, since >>>>> we all are doing work that benefits the OASIS community, why don't we >>>>> just eliminate fees for all? >>>>> >>>>> Just kidding... >>>>> >>>>> On 04/05/2007 02:44 PM, G. Ken Holman wrote: >>>>>> I'm not so quick to just let any project committer participate >> unless >>>>>> they are first obliged to adhere to the OASIS membership agreement. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think money is the issue ... I think intellectual property >>>>>> rights are more important. Contributions to the committees have to >>> be >>>>>> unencumbered and the OASIS membership agreement attempts to address >>>>> this. >>>>>> Preventing people from just "joining our list and contributing" is >>> not >>>>>> at all absurd. As a committee chair I want to ensure contributions, >>>>>> through the membership agreement, are acceptable to use without >>>>>> burdening the chair to any due diligence. The due diligence is >>> covered >>>>>> off by the agreement. Legal experts have covered all this in the >>>>>> membership terms and I don't want to have to be in a position to >>>>>> interpret them personally ... that is clearly not my expertise. >>>>>> >>>>>> BTW, where in http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php is >>>>>> "invited expert" defined? I was unaware of Gabe's assertion that >>> such >>>> a >>>>>> concept exists in OASIS parlance. How do committees identify, >>> qualify >>>>>> and accredit such experts without obligating them under the >>> membership >>>>>> rules? >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope these comments are considered constructive. >>>>>> >>>>>> . . . . . . . . . . . . Ken (Code List Representation TC Chair) >>>>>> >>>>>> At 2007-04-05 22:30 +0100, Paul Fremantle wrote: >>>>>>> Gabe >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I completely agree. I think that any committer on any project >>> actively >>>>>>> implementing an OASIS specification under an OSI license should be >>>>>>> able to apply for a Open Source Membership free-of-charge. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Personally I don't think this is going to cost OASIS any loss of >>>>>>> income, but it certainly will encourage a wider view of OASIS >>>>> standards. >>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gabe Wachob wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Chairs- >>>>>>>> This is a topic that's come up for us I think at least >>>>>>>> twice. We have a community member (not an OASIS member) who is >>>>>>>> actively implementing our specification (XRI) and is interested in >>>>>>>> the spec discussion. However, we can't let them join our list and >>>>>>>> contribute because they have to be an OASIS member. So the only >>>>>>>> answer we can give them is "pay $300 to participate". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This seems absurd. Their implementation of our spec is >>>>>>>> one of the most valuable contributions to the TC's work at this >>> point >>>>>>>> in the lifecycle of the spec. Their feedback on implementation >>> issues >>>>>>>> and recommendations for how to adjust the spec are absolutely >>>>>>>> critical. And yet, they are left out of the conversation. The >>> thought >>>>>>>> of forcing them to pay $300 to participate seems a bit ludicrous, >>>>>>>> since they are already contributing (in this case, as an >> individual >>>>>>>> on their own time). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OASIS has a concept of "invited expert". Could there >> be >>> a >>>>>>>> new category of "invited open source implementer"? As I've said >>> many >>>>>>>> times before, I think OASIS should be trying to facilitate Open >>>>>>>> Source implementations of the Open Standards it produces to the >>>>>>>> maximum extent it can (and to the extent its TC's wish that to >>> allow >>>>>>>> Open Source - but that's a different discussion). You may think >>> that >>>>>>>> $300 a year is a trivial amount of money, but for someone doing >>> good >>>>>>>> work that benefits the OASIS community, it seems odd that we'd >>> throw >>>>>>>> a barrier up for them to contribute even more directly. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm sure any potential abuse could be managed, just >>> like >>>>>>>> I assume it's managed for the "invited expert" category. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alternatively, I suppose the membership of the TC >> could >>>>>>>> "chip in" for membership of the open source implementer, but this >>>>>>>> seems like a "hack" that raises some questions about independence >>> of >>>>>>>> participation and potential appearance of manipulation of the >>>>>>>> membership. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Gabe >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Paul Fremantle >>>>>>> VP/Technical Sales, WSO2 >>>>>>> OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle >>>>>>> paul@wso2.com >>>>>>> (646) 290 8050 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training >>>>>> RSS feeds: publicly-available developer resources and training >>>>>> G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com >>>>>> Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ >>>>>> Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995) >>>>>> Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc >>>>>> Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Eduardo Gutentag | e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM >>>>> Technology Director | Phone: +1 510 550 4616 (internal x31442) >>>>> Corporate Standards | Sun Microsystems Inc. >>>>> W3C AC Rep / W3C AB / OASIS BoD > > -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technical Sales, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle paul@wso2.com (646) 290 8050 "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]