[Osmf-talk] sponsored membership

Donal Hunt donal.hunt at gmail.com
Wed Sep 27 16:18:38 UTC 2017


This seems to somewhat overlap with the thread on the Membership Waiver
Program. Allowing members to support such programs financially when joining
/ renewing may be a way to offset the cost to the organisation. e.g. pay
10% extra and support program X.

The individual programs would be able to set their own criteria and report
on status of buy-in / engagement levels.

d.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de>
wrote:

> On Wednesday 27 September 2017, joost schouppe wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > So a very simple proposition: make it possible for a person to pay
> > the price of two memberships, with the express condition that someone
> > is allowed to join for free in return.
> > The safest is possibly to just allow donating into a pool, and then
> > have people applying for the open spaces created in that pool.
> >
> > The alternative would be that the donator chooses to whom it goes.
> > But that might seem paternalistic and opens the door to worries of
> > influence-buying, especially if institutional donors would open their
> > purses.
>
> I had thought about this in context of my suggestion for making the
> membership fee optional as well - kind of as a cost neutral version of
> my suggestion.
>
> The problem for me is that allowing the donors to choose who they
> sponsor is really problematic.  The most important task for OSMF
> members is to vote on resolutions and elect the board and even the mere
> implication there is some duty of those who got a sponsored membership
> to vote in the interest of their sponsor would be unacceptable IMO.
>
> And as a potential sponsor i would not want my money to be given to an
> applicant based on the subjective selection by a third party (i.e. the
> MWG or whatever committee evaluates the applications).
>
> So the only way i would see this working is
>
> a) based on an anonymous pool.
> b) granted based on transparent, objective and neutral criteria for the
> applicants.  This could be either on a first come - first served basis
> with constant requirements, i.e. there would be a waiting list in case
> there are more qualified applicants than there are sponsors or with
> dynamic requirements (the smaller the sponsor pool the higher the
> thresholds for being accepted as member without paying a fee).
>
> As Martin indicated you would also need to think about if to give
> renewals of previously sponsored memberships priority over new
> applicants.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20170927/5b614165/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list