XSF Discussion - 2024-08-02

>>> nicola: if by “establish an organization for the XSF” you mean “we need to get more organized about things like fundraising and applying for grants” then perhaps that is the best place to start. >> A more structured organisation internally > nicola: why? I've never once seen anyone complain that the XSF needs more red tape because it moves too fast. This is not a complaint but a proposal for better organization. IMHO, XSF is very active on the technical side and less so on the administrative/bureaucratic side. Although devoted to the technical side, a foundation cannot disregard organizational aspects. In any case, I have explained my proposal at length in emails sent to all members.

Sorry I wasn't saying that *you* were complaining. Just that I hadn't ever seen a complaint about lack of organization. The move to EU looks a lot like a solution in search of a problem to me. Maybe I've missed it all but the strongest argument for it I've seen so far is "uh maybe we'll get more sponsors?" It doesn't seem like we look for sponsors at all now...

moparisthebest, you probably miss part of the discussion. It’s not simple, but I try to summarize and clarify my view: 1. XSF is a Charity according to the USA legislation (it is a Foundation); 2. XSF’s members compose its community, predominantly composed of technicians and developers who focus mainly on technical aspects; 3. XSF’s members are **volunteers**; 4. I am a lawyer, and I am trying to support XSF for free with my professional expertise by considering other non-technical aspects; 5. Thus, from a “legal” perspective and my professional experience, I see tremendous potential for growth within XSF. By improving our organizational aspects, we can enhance our global presence and seize more opportunities. This is an exciting time for us to expand and develop, and I believe we can achieve great things together. 6. Point 5. can be addressed by the proactive involvement of all the members, passing by the Board (only as a filter), and maintaining the democratic structure that ensures everyone’s voice is heard and considered. 7. The possible EU presence is another chapter that derives from the reading of the Bylaws that allows more than one legal head office; thus, I made two alternative proposals: a) set up two legal head offices (one in the USA and one in the EU); or b) move the legal head office to the EU. I hope to have clarified my view.

> Guus: if you scroll back... Uh idk a month or so, I suggested we normalize handling this by queueing outgoing s2s messages on the sending server kinda like SMTP that is what i am thinking currently yeah. that its easier to "fix" this problem by shifting the model from - keep sending until it fails and then we are stuck to - have an "outgoing" box per jid and the jid when it comes online can just request messages from you. this way you use less bandwidth and dont have to care about errors of what got delivered since the recipient knows what they got. so it shifts the "track messages" function to the recipient if you will. and with MLS that also gets much easier btw

> moparisthebest, you probably miss part of the discussion. > It’s not simple, but I try to summarize and clarify my view: > 1. XSF is a Charity according to the USA legislation (it is a Foundation); > 2. XSF’s members compose its community, predominantly composed of technicians and developers who focus mainly on technical aspects; > 3. XSF’s members are **volunteers**; > 4. I am a lawyer, and I am trying to support XSF for free with my professional expertise by considering other non-technical aspects; > 5. Thus, from a “legal” perspective and my professional experience, I see tremendous potential for growth within XSF. By improving our organizational aspects, we can enhance our global presence and seize more opportunities. This is an exciting time for us to expand and develop, and I believe we can achieve great things together. > 6. Point 5. can be addressed by the proactive involvement of all the members, passing by the Board (only as a filter), and maintaining the democratic structure that ensures everyone’s voice is heard and considered. > 7. The possible EU presence is another chapter that derives from the reading of the Bylaws that allows more than one legal head office; thus, I made two alternative proposals: a) set up two legal head offices (one in the USA and one in the EU); or b) move the legal head office to the EU. > > I hope to have clarified my view. Thanks. Its also a general statement that we are officially present in the EU. Its hard to measure but I believe it will make a difference. Its also a representation that supports trust. ↺

Zash, you might want to review that one: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1368

nicola: to me, your points 5-7, and what emus just said, summarize to: > maybe more $things will happen with an EU presence Do we have concrete examples of those $things and why they have a better chance of happening if we are officially in EU vs now? This is the part I'm missing still.

emus: > I believe it will make a difference A difference to what? > representation that supports trust What? ✏

The programmer in me wants to see the requirements, what is the desired goal/functionality/improvement? Without that no one can say if this is the right direction.

https://burtrum.org/up/cbc702ef-6b0d-49a3-8ea2-3a375d6a173c/zb2rhekMps3TpuwGfx5Cu3vZ6K6cNGJvB64vjY2YLPh7M8TyG.jpg

In the proud tradition of my people I have made a meme to illustrate my impression at the moment ^

> emus: >> I believe it will make a difference > A difference to what? >> representation that supports trust > What? Difference to have no representation in Europe. It will be more trustworthy - subjectively - if we have an official office people and companies can refer to. It can also be enabling. In my company for example there are for some funded research project its required to have an EU office with Eu employees for example. so noone from US or India can work on the project. ↺

> The programmer in me wants to see the requirements, what is the desired goal/functionality/improvement? Without that no one can say if this is the right direction. I would say that at somepoint we may have no one in US being able to do the finance stuff. We are quite unrepresented there in terms of active members. This is a longterm argument. ↺

I don't know why Europe would be more trustworthy, we have representation there in the form of many of our members. Can you name anything the XSF would be eligible for if it was in the EU vs now ?

The XSF mind you, not members. I'm not sure if the XSF itself has ever done anything research/grant-wise or if it ever would...

> In the proud tradition of my people I have made a meme to illustrate my impression at the moment ^ Haha ↺