Non-profit - was Re: "Parallel music view" - inspiration for LilyPond editors.

[Zenaan Harkness]

On 10/5/12, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> Have you read
>>>
>>>    http://lwn.net/Articles/514964/
>>
>> Not yet, thanks for that!
>>
>>> on Bradley Kuhn's
>>>
>>>    http://sfconservancy.org/
>>
>> Actually, I've already asked for making FreeType a conservancy member
>> some months ago, and it seems to be a quite slow process...
>>
>> Maybe we should do the same for LilyPond.
>
> They then manage the project funds (deducting a flat 10%) which are only
> to be used for non-profit purposes.  I don't see that my personal
> situation, working on LilyPond financed by its users, could be labelled
> as non-profit since it is my sole source of income, and I spend it
> almost entirely on non-LilyPond related expenses like rent, food,
> personal insurance and other stuff.

I think you misunderstand. I don't have detailed knowledge, but FWIW,
the point of SFC is to fund libre projects. Your development of
lilypond is exactly what SFC funds.

Your work is purely non-profit, since your expenses are no more than
your living expenses. Your activity is purely non-profit, and on libre
software.

Consider a non-profit organisation - it funds non-profit activities.
For example it might fund a teacher to travel to a poor/disadvantaged
community, and that teacher's normal living expenses are either
covered specifically (per receipts), or almost exclusively, covered by
a salary/wage as paid to the teacher. The teacher has full discretion
to use their wage at their discretion, and presumably they pay their
usual bills, telecoms, food, rent, etc. How could it be any other way?

The only caveat is that the teacher is normally paid a salary that is
somewhat commensurate to local salaries, which in certain regions of
the world is very low by western standards. But that's so as not to
appear unbalanced, not to be unbalanced wrt the local humans. And
also, local rents, food, utilities etc are also commensurately lower
(typically) than our "normal western standards".

So dear David, our brother in spirit, please do cast aside your
misunderstanding and embrace wholly and with pride, the work that you
do, your conduct, your selfless contributions, and, as from the LWN
article above, the lower "salary" that you receive.

Respect! Kudos to you! Others have had harder times of their
transition into a dominantly community-focused living of their lives,
such as Tom Lord of GNU Arch fame (and old DVCS for those who don't
know), and Paul Davis' early days getting the Ardour (ardour.org) DAW
off the ground - check out ardour.org for a little inspiration if you
need it.

We (humans) are in a transition from focusing our lives around
self-centered activities towards self-less "community" activities.

David you are not an opportunistic investor. Far from it. You are a
worker. There is a vast difference.

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profit_(economics)

:)

Those wily accountants - got us all firetrucked up in our thinking!!
Time to banish the crap!!

> donation targets.  If we had significant non-profit expenses in the

Your wage/salary is a non-profit expense. It's that simple.

> But "provide a living for David, so that he can continue to diddle away
> on LilyPond just at what catches his fancy on the spur of a moment" will
> be a hard sell to an organisation which ultimately has to report to tax
> authorities about their non-profit expenses and planning.

Bzzt. Go check out SFC again, and send Bradley Kuhn an email.

Once you have clarity, PLEASE write up an essay, making it as concise
as possible, around your MIS-understanding, and how things REALLY are.

Then please email this to address@hidden, bradley kuhn, and wherever you
fancy. "Steal" any/all of the above, etc, etc.

Oh yes, that's right, also contact address@hidden (Johnathan Corbet) with
your second or third draft, and ask if they would like it as a feature
article, and perhaps could they send a few dollars your way as a
"guest editor".

I am confident that this shift of understanding is something that many
are going through, and these efforts at clarity will be very useful to
others.

> Hey, it is not even an easy sell on the LilyPond users we can reach

Those who are with an interest, passion, enjoyment, appreciation, care
and consideration ... of lilypond ... do not need a "sell". We are the
converted. We see the value. We value you, and your contributions, AND
of course those of all others who have and do contribute.

Some of us make small contributions and are simply glad that others benefit.

Others (eg yourself) have a greater passion for this particular
pathway of creativity and wish to be facilitated in further pursuit of
said pathway. Others (like myself), value and appreciate such passion
and dedication and wish to further and foster that, even if in a small
way.

IF, for a particular project, enough like myself, facilitate those
such as yourself, this is good. If there are not enough, then your
passion must be greater :)

> ourselves, and I guess that the audience reached by the SFC would not be
> that much larger since they don't magically have funds that have _not_
> been contributed to them for a _particular_ project.

Not relevant! Legal backing. Appearance of due diligence. Actual due
diligence. Tax deduct-ability. Administrative support. Kick-alongs
from others (eg Bradley Kuhn) on things that matter. Wider project
exposure.

Do what needs to be done! Carpe diem!

Kindest regards
Zenaan