The truth on GSOC, ESUG and bad attitude
I support it, too.
The only path to action I see is to act. And in this situation, Paolo was
the only one that offered a pragmatic way out. Thank you, Paolo! :)
So, I suggest this:
- we take Marcus' suggestion and have the present issue be handled at the
next ESUG general assembly. Like this we ensure that the problem is going
to be addressed in a more effective environment (namely, more structured,
and not via mail). - we go forward with Paolo as an admin. Like this we ensure that action
happens now.
Cheers,
Doru
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Esteban Lorenzano estebanlm@gmail.comwrote:
I support this, along with a general require that you keep this discussion
in private.
Esteban
On 10 Feb 2014, at 12:10, Stephan Eggermont stephan@stack.nl wrote:
I no longer have confidence in Janko running as GSoC admin
and want Paolo to take over as admin for Esug as mentoring organisation.
Stephan Eggermont
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
"Every thing has its own flow"
+1 on this.
On Feb 10, 2014, at 9:14 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
I support it, too.
The only path to action I see is to act. And in this situation, Paolo was the only one that offered a pragmatic way out. Thank you, Paolo! :)
So, I suggest this:
- we take Marcus' suggestion and have the present issue be handled at the next ESUG general assembly. Like this we ensure that the problem is going to be addressed in a more effective environment (namely, more structured, and not via mail).
- we go forward with Paolo as an admin. Like this we ensure that action happens now.
Cheers,
Doru
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Esteban Lorenzano estebanlm@gmail.com wrote:
I support this, along with a general require that you keep this discussion in private.
Esteban
On 10 Feb 2014, at 12:10, Stephan Eggermont stephan@stack.nl wrote:
I no longer have confidence in Janko running as GSoC admin
and want Paolo to take over as admin for Esug as mentoring organisation.
Stephan Eggermont
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
"Every thing has its own flow"
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On 10 Feb 2014, at 11:57, Janko Mivšek janko.mivsek@eranova.si wrote:
Dne 10. 02. 2014 11:08, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Janko CAN YOU STOP!
"blatantly unethical behavior”
Really
Stef
Stef, we are waiting to you. Will you tell us your part of the story
about your GSoC 2010 act or shall I start by myself?
What?
What are you talking about?
Janko can you stop to systematically insult me because you are.
Stef
Janko
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@highoctane.be
mailto:phil@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@gmail.com
mailto:luc.fabresse@gmail.com
mailto:luc.fabresse@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@eranova.si
mailto:janko.mivsek@eranova.si
mailto:janko.mivsek@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
On 10 February 2014 11:00, Reinout Heeck reinout@soops.nl wrote:
dear Smalltalk promoters,
I have too many friends that are in a divorce with kids in the picture.
I have an understanding with them: they can talk (rant) to me about
anything regarding their divorce, but not in public and not at parties.
So this stuff:
Now, I want to have details about your message. What do you mean by
"blatantly unethical behavior"? At which point have we been unethical?
I do agree, that using phrasing "lost money" was inappropriate.
ESUG is a non-profit organization and such phrasing simply cannot be
applied to indicate that it was spent more money than it received.
If it would be a commercial organization, such phrasing would be totally
adequate.
That is my only issue concerning current flame-out.
I want to ask ESUG board members to not use such phrasing anymore, because
they are inadequate.
But i am far from calling that "blatantly unethical behavior".
After all, ESUG mission is about 'losing' all the money they can get from
sponsors to help promoting smalltalk.
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.
On 10 Feb 2014, at 17:03, Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 February 2014 11:00, Reinout Heeck reinout@soops.nl wrote:
dear Smalltalk promoters,
I have too many friends that are in a divorce with kids in the picture.
I have an understanding with them: they can talk (rant) to me about anything regarding their divorce, but not in public and not at parties.
So this stuff:
Now, I want to have details about your message. What do you mean by
"blatantly unethical behavior"? At which point have we been unethical?
I do agree, that using phrasing "lost money" was inappropriate.
Yes, you are right. I am very sorry… when discussing ESUG things like the conference I got used
to use this term, which might be wrong.
“So the low scenario is XX? What if even less come? How much would we lose? Could we afford it (even
if extremely unlikely)?”
Marcus