(this was also queried on the FSF LibrePlanet list[1])
Does either organization (FSF or FSFE) have a position on dual membership, being a member of both organizations?
Was this contemplated when the relationship between the two organizations originated?
Has there been any discussion about a reduced membership fee or offering a single joining procedure for people to join both organizations in one go? For example, on the membership form for one organization, people could tick a box to join the other at the same time for some additional fee that is potentially less than the outright fee for the other organization.
1. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2017-07/msg00011.html
There will be pros and cons. because the legislative, historical and cultural context of the institutions and the FS movement in Europe is not the same as the US making joint policy agreements perhaps marginally sub-optimal for FSF and FSFE.
From the perspective of members of both organizations though, it seems
pedantic to have to administer two sets of subscriptions for organizations with identical aims.
A lot would depend on the demand from members for some sort of joint venture on public affairs and also for some arrangement with members subscription payments, which would have to be beneficial in some way for both orgs of course.
Given funding is always an issue for non-profits, there could also be trivial squabbles over resourcing for particular campaigns. DRM might be more of a priority in the US for example, whereas FS in public administrations may be worth targeting more resources on in Europe (or the reverse!).
It could also be that overall each org would experience a downturn in revenue which would not be helpful to either one.
Given each org already has a charitable approach to subs leaving the choice to the individual may be the best strategy.
Data from each org. about duplicate memberships might shed some light on what is really at stake financially and administratively here I think, but making that kind of personal data available would I think also require some form of special dispensation from the members of both orgs?
Mat
Hi Mat,
Given each org already has a charitable approach to subs leaving the choice to the individual may be the best strategy.
For the FSFE and FSF, this is clearly what we do. Which organisation you support financially or with your volunteer time should depend on which organisation you feel closest to and which organisations' activities you would like to support.
Our activities are largely disjoint and we typically do not have many activities which we do together. That we're both a Free Software Foundation might be confusing to some, but we also believe it's a great strength for the community and our movement to have multiple voices giving weight to the Free Software movement, and each with their own set of priorities and activities.
Hi Mat,
Given each org already has a charitable approach to subs leaving the choice to the individual may be the best strategy.
For the FSFE and FSF, this is clearly what we do. Which organisation you support financially or with your volunteer time should depend on which organisation you feel closest to and which organisations' activities you would like to support.
Our activities are largely disjoint and we typically do not have many activities which we do together. That we're both a Free Software Foundation might be confusing to some, but we also believe it's a great strength for the community and our movement to have multiple voices giving weight to the Free Software movement, and each with their own set of priorities and activities.
This is the correct analysis in my opinion. All other things being equal, the best thing that can happen to a small coffee shop is for another one to open across the street, because then the locality gets a better reputation for serving coffee and attracts more visitors. In a market where FS needs to obviously needs to 'compete' with non-free - the more FS orgs there are the better I think.
Hi Daniel,
thanks for raising this point, as a member of both I'd indicate that the reason I joined both is so that they both have my money :). I can see a personal benefit to reduced friction, but have no need for reduced cost. That said, for those who can't afford to do that, a single, lower, "global supporter of freedom" membership cost would be a help.
Cheers, Graham.
From: Daniel Pocock daniel@pocock.pro To: FSFE Discussion discussion@fsfeurope.org Sent: 19/07/2017 11:34 AM Subject: dual FSF and FSFE membership
(this was also queried on the FSF LibrePlanet list[1])
Does either organization (FSF or FSFE) have a position on dual membership, being a member of both organizations?
Was this contemplated when the relationship between the two organizations originated?
Has there been any discussion about a reduced membership fee or offering a single joining procedure for people to join both organizations in one go? For example, on the membership form for one organization, people could tick a box to join the other at the same time for some additional fee that is potentially less than the outright fee for the other organization.
1. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2017-07/msg00011.html _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Hello, Fellows,
On 07/19/2017 12:34 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
(this was also queried on the FSF LibrePlanet list[1])
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2017-07/msg00011.html
I also think that it would be nice, if the several Free Software organisations worked stronger together on campaigns and shared some money.
On 20/07/17 09:50, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Money wouldn't necessarily have to be passed between the two organizations: both organizations may simply agree to collaborate on campaigns or split the costs of an event that serves all members.
From the perspective of members, it may be more tax efficient for people in some countries to give more money to a local organization and then make a token donation (e.g. $1) to join FSF.
As long as all the money is spent in the pursuit of the same goals, I don't think anybody could see this as a loss to FSF. Local groups would also be in a better position to decide on the appropriate contribution level based on local economic factors.
We could also take this idea further and incorporate a "Free Software Organization Of The World" (or something like that), where organizations like the FSFE, FSF, FSFLA etc. could be represented. This would be a great opportunity not just to support each other but to also help financially and structurally weak organizations establishing local structures.
Live long and free software
-- Erik (egnun)
Hi Erik,
We could also take this idea further and incorporate a "Free Software Organization Of The World" (or something like that), where organizations like the FSFE, FSF, FSFLA etc. could be represented.
I would support this, and it's actually similar to what we had in mind for the long term when the FSF network (with FSF-NA, FSFE, etc) was created. To support each other globally, and take a joint responsibility for the decision making on Free Software.
We continue to be interested in this development and would be interested in a structure (whether this is a separate organisation or not, I don't know), where FSF-NA and FSFE (initially) would be equally represented.