Wiki Spot Board
Monday September 6, 2010
2 PM California time (UTC-7)
Dial +1 510 495-1439 or SIP:[email protected] . Use PIN '95616'. Call will be recorded.
You can also join #wikispot on irc.freenode.net, but the conference call will be the primary mode of communication. See the IRC page for more information on how to use IRC.
Call to Order.
Approval of minutes.
LocalWiki-tech project budget.
Knight Foundation agreement.
Dade Community Foundation agreement.
Any other business.
LocalWiki-tech project budget
PN: Need to finalize budget and send to Knight
PN: Changed salary to 1099 contractor of Dade Foundation instead of salary/etc. Some contentiousness on that front. But makes legalities & accounting & taxes easier for Wiki Spot.
GF (unspoken): Possible Philip & Mike could join Eupraxis Professional Co-op (California cooperative corp) and do salary through there, since we (Eupraxis) already have that set up. Knight/Dade/Wikispot would be a client, Philip/Mike would be co-owners/employees of the co-op.
PN: If we deviate by more than 5% of any particular line-item, communication with Dade and Knight will be required. Could be substantial push-back, depending.
GF: When due?
PN: Already overdue. Should vote on and send budget within next 2 days.
EE: Legal services line-item: Contingency, or specific need?
PN: Just in case.
GF: Who supervises employees, if 1099'ed via Dade?
PN: Wiki Spot board still does, regardless.
PN: Dade 1099 arrangement would not need to be permanent, and is not a requirement on their part.
GF: If all else equal, do you (Philip) prefer payroll or 1099 contract?
PN: All else equal, prefer payroll.
Knight Foundation agreement
PN: Ultimate agreement largely agrees with prior drafts. Dade fiscal agent part was big surprise. Licensing provision still a question.
EE: Agreement says OSI licenses OK, and BSD is an OSI license, so OK?
PN: Depends on Knight interpretation/understanding of different licenses. Now is probably not the time to re-engage in that part of the discussion. Not a dealbreaker to have everything only under GPL; just preferable to have BSD as an option.
EE: As long as we retain copyright, can release under BSD later.
PN: Contract says we can't.
GF: Why do we prefer a BSD license?
PN: Major advantage is license compatibility with other related software projects, such as Django, for the sake of coexistence in those other software ecosystems. GPL is better suited to large projects, not as well suited to small/components.
EE: Have diagram that explains this to non-technical people. Will send out to board.
GF: If, after end of project, all deliverables completed to mutual satisfaction, Wiki Spot retains copyright and then releases under BSD license, will drama ensue?
PN: Potentially. Better to ask an attorney, if that's the route we need to take.
WL: Thorny issue.
PN: Can talk to Berkman Center at Harvard.
PN: Not a dealbreaker. Can proceed either way.
EE: Prefer to contact free resources to answer question first. Evan will do so.
PN: Will sign&send agreement on Thursday 9th Sept 2010, absent project-delay-worthy issue arising by then.
EE: Implications of development not going exactly according to milestones?
PN: As long as we largely conform along the way, and ultimately deliver as agreed, we're OK.
EE: Milestone exactly targeted, or "at least this will be done"?
PN: "At least this will be done." Hard to say for sure; some unavoidably arbitrary; trying to be cautious.
Dade Community Foundation agreement
PN: Big, unpleasant surprise.
PN: Options are Knight could deliver money in chunks (e.g. 25% at a time) to Wiki Spot bank account, but even so all accountability would be completely detailed. Another option is having Wiki Spot spend money on things Dade says we should spend on.
PN: Ultimately will be easier this way. Possible to change later, with Knight OK.
AA: A pain either way. Surprised at how it was presented (no communication).
PN: Yup. Other Knight grantees going similar routes.
AA: Details of logistics?
PN: Easiest if Dade spends money on our behalf, vs. us spending money and getting reimbursed.
EE: Sounds easier than alternatives and overall beneficial.
EE: Given blindsiding of Dade element, any indications of other blindsiding e.g. "we won't pay for office space?"
PN: Not likely. Budgets sent to Knight to date have all included things we're talking about, e.g. office space. If e.g. we wanted to spend $20K on office furniture (vs. $2K budgeted), that would probably be an issue. But budgets to date are fairly comprehensive.
PN: We should meet next week.
GF: OK, let's do it.
EE: Existing communities: Philip was going to talk to RocWiki?
PN: Talked to some Rochester Wiki folks. Some email; some phone. Started to get pretty time-consuming. Should be coordinated along with rest of community outreach.
EE: Let's be sure to continue to improve public communication and not lose sight of existing communities.
PN: Told Rochester folks that we're doing this as open-source, and they'll be welcome to use software. Also said we probably won't use Rochester as a pilot community, but that shouldn't be a problem.
EE: That's good for one:one communication, but we need that kind of thing on the public web sites. We need to be able to give better elevator pitches to potential funders. Could you write this stuff down so we can put online?
PN: Sure, when time allows. Easier to do when on staff.
GF: Evan, could you write no more than 6 questions to this end? Others of us can endeavor to answer.
EE: Will write to the board list.
GF: OK, we're done for today. Please don't hesitate to correct my notes if I misrepresented (or failed to include) what you said.