> 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.



Janko CAN YOU STOP!

"blatantly unethical behavior”
Really

Stef


> 
> 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/20140210/23b04dc6/attachment.htm