Janko,

>From what I know from good business practices is that what helps in keeping
things in order is good financial management and transparency.

So, the general ledger should be made accessible so things are clear on
that front.

For the Google story, upfront payment by ESUG while waiting for Google
money should have been registered with postings that reflected that (like
with an account on "expected revenue from Google") and balanced against it.

If one would spend money beyond the credit limits, there would be an issue.
So, escalation should be taking place to decide.

There seems to be a board, and the board ultimately decides on that front.
Which it apparently did.

Whoever is not happy with that decision will at one point accept it as this
is the top decision point. Or start a revolution, split, or whatever.

There are always things going on behind the curtain. Politics is a fact of
life. I you have a personal gripe with some members, you put the dead rat
on the table. Now is it time time speak up about who/what/why and discuss
that with them.

Now, the Smalltalk community appears to be fragmented, and the Pharo|Squeak
technology, even if very cool, is currently not helping me much on the
revenue making front. My bottom line isn't booking more that EUR 15K on
Pharo related sales. Not that I am not pushing. I'd love to be putting
decent bread on the table through Pharo.

FWIW, when it comes to current trends like Internet of Things, BigData
[Hadoop stuff], and Mobile, Smalltalk is at ground zero given the
ecosystem. So, fighting internally like that isn't getting us forward while
everything is swooshing past.

Phil

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek at eranova.si>wrote:

> Phil,
>
> This matter is actually very important for Smalltalk community, because
> it exposes nontransparent, meddling behind the scenes, and in some cases
> blatantly unethical behavior of some ESUG board members. Which is
> certainly bad for our community on long term.
>
> Such matters need to be clarified and some conclusions to be made for a
> community to preserve health and go on. Otherwise you are drowning into
> murky waters more and more.
>
> Best regards
> Janko
>
> Dne 10. 02. 2014 09:12, piše phil at highoctane.be:
> > Guys,
> >
> > From the outside it just looks like a couple of spoiled kids battling in
> > the kindergarten.
> >
> > All of this is not moving Smalltalk and Pharo any single bit forward.
> > Backwards, there is a fair chance.
> >
> > Now, could you take this discussion elsewhere? Pick up a phone and talk.
> >
> > Who cares if anyone is right? Oh yeah, EUR 4K, what a huge amount to
> > fight over for an European org... (rolleyes).
> >
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Luc Fabresse <luc.fabresse at gmail.com
> > <mailto:luc.fabresse at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi Janko,
> >
> >     I do not have all numbers at hand now but in 2013 there were 4
> >     extra-GSOC but we paid only 3 because one student gave
> >     up (Jean-Baptiste Beuzelin).
> >     So yes you are probably right that it remains money if we integrate
> >     last year BUT we were willing to spend it.
> >
> >     Luc
> >
> >
> >     2014-02-09 Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek at eranova.si
> >     <mailto:janko.mivsek at eranova.si>>:
> >
> >         Dear all,
> >
> >         First to Luc: from your numbers it is clear that you are not to
> be
> >         blamed on anything, because you were obviously misinformed and
> >         misguided.
> >
> >         Facts namely are:
> >
> >         1. GSoC mentors decided to pay extra stipendiums 3000 USD [1]
> while
> >            ESUG without approval paid 2000 more, 5000 USD, without any
> >         report
> >            back to GSoC mentors,
> >
> >         2. GSoC mentors decided to add past GSoC2012 amount to the pool
> for
> >            paying extra projects [2][3].
> >
> >         Calculation (without the Summit expenses) therefore is:
> >
> >         Income: GSoC 2012  13x 500 =  6.500 USD
> >                 GSoC 2013  13x 500 =  6.500 USD
> >                 ------------------------------
> >                                      13.000 USD
> >
> >         Expenses:
> >                 Extra stipendiums: 3x 3.000 = 9.000 USD
> >
> >         Difference: + 4.000 USD
> >
> >         If ESUG would follow the decisions of GSoC mentors it wouldn't
> >         loose any
> >         money but gain 4.000 USD.
> >
> >         Those that misinformed and misguided you needs therefore to
> >         apologize to
> >         you Luc, to the GSoC mentors and to me as admin!
> >
> >         Janko
> >
> >         [1]
> >
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/Yrlj8dIgGPg
> >         [2]
> >
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/WwnxpkXzAB8
> >         [3]
> >
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/tR44jdPT5Hw
> >
> >
> >         Dne 09. 02. 2014 17:26, piše Luc Fabresse:
> >         > Hi all,
> >         >
> >         > ------------
> >         > FACTS
> >         >
> >         > As you all know, I am the ESUG treasurer.
> >         > So please find the numbers attached for the ESUG support of
> GSOC
> >         > projects in 2013.
> >         >
> >         > ESUG sponsored 3 "extra-GSOC" meaning extra slots not accepted
> >         by Google.
> >         > In the file it is: Alejandro Infante, Pablo Estefo and
> >         Benjamin Arezki.
> >         >
> >         > All in all we paid:
> >         > - 3695EUR (~5000USD at that time i.e. same cost as a regular
> >         GSOC) each
> >         > projects
> >         > - Serge trip to Mentor summit
> >         >
> >         > And we received 5552EUR from Google
> >         >
> >         > so yes we lost ~6582EUR
> >         > That is easy 13*500 USD would only cover 1 plain extra-Gsoc
> and we
> >         > sponsorized 3.
> >         >
> >         > I also think that it is important to send someone to the GSoc
> >         mentor
> >         > summit because it participates to the fact that Google
> >         recognizes ESUG
> >         > ang gives slots the next year.
> >         >
> >         > It is alos important to note dates.
> >         > ESUG paid first and then has been refund by Google.
> >         > It would not be possible to do it without ESUG.
> >         >
> >         > ------------
> >         > FROM HERE, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THIS STORY:
> >         >
> >         > As some of you know, I doing the ESUG treasury stuff on my
> >         *own* time
> >         > and it takes a lot!
> >         > I am doing it because I strongly believe that Smalltalk (all
> >         falvors!)
> >         > is a really great language that should be more widespread.
> >         >
> >         > I also completely open to discussions.
> >         > The ESUG board can also explain its actions and even money
> status.
> >         > I can do errors too.
> >         > So if Janko wants some details on GSOC related money, JUST ASK!
> >         >
> >         > I cannot admit that:
> >         >
> >         > - Janko wrote about some money accusation. This is directly
> >         directed
> >         > against the treasurer so me.
> >         > And honestly, just reading again that I am biased and that I
> >         hide or
> >         > steal money make me think that I should better quit.
> >         >
> >         > - Janko asked for apologies! what is that? even if I would
> >         have done a
> >         > mistake (and ESUG did not loose money), YOU STILL MUST THANK
> >         ME for
> >         > DOING THIS BORING TASK!  and then I can correct mistakes if any
> >         >
> >         > - People wants an answer fast, this conversation started
> >         yesterday and I
> >         > am spending my week-end with my kids
> >         >
> >         >
> >         > I am really fed up with this kind of attitude.
> >         > Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the
> >         problems together
> >         > if any.
> >         > But I think it will never happen...
> >         >
> >         > #Luc
> >         > The disgusted Treasurer of ESUG who will finish his week-end
> >         in bad mood
> >         >
> >
> >
> >         --
> >         Janko Mivšek
> >         Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Janko Mivšek
> Svetovalec za informatiko
> Eranova d.o.o.
> Ljubljana, Slovenija
> www.eranova.si
> tel:  01 514 22 55
> faks: 01 514 22 56
> gsm: 031 674 565
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20140210/b8074289/attachment.htm