COI: Competitive Bids on Developer Contracts (was Re: Conflict of Interest policy, 1 March 2012 draft)

[Tony Sebro]

On 03/05/2012 01:11 PM, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 12:54:34PM -0500, Tony Sebro wrote:
>> In those rare instances, Conservancy needs to be able to make the
>> best financial decision available and hire a developer to support
>> the PLC's stated technical direction.  If we adopted your suggested
>> sentence, Conservancy could still act as a "check" to protect a
>> conflicted PLC from an inappropriate contract, but we'd also be
>> immobilized from pursuing our charitable mission during
>> time-sensitive scenarios.
> I think in that case it is up to the PLC to agree that "We cannot agree
> on who to choose, so we instead agree to let Conservancy decide".
>
> I don't think it is Conservancy's responsibility to ensure that projects
> succeed.
Well, Conservancy does try to help projects along under our mission, 
including in the unlikely event that a PLC isn't able to do so.  We have 
a responsibility as a fiscal sponsor to manage the funds raised on 
behalf of Member Projects, as outlined in our fiscal sponsorship 
agreements.  While it's unlikely that Conservancy would ever need to 
intervene in the way we're discussing, all of our FSAs do allow for it, 
and we don't want to use the conflict of interest policy to de facto 
narrow the FSA.

I do want to address any concerns that you might have about this.  If 
you still have concerns about Conservancy having the unilateral right to 
spend Member Project funds in some circumstances, we should discuss it 
in the context of the FSA, not the conflict of interest policy.

Best, -Tony

-- 
Tony Sebro, General Counsel, Software Freedom Conservancy
212.461.3245 x11
tony at sfconservancy.org
www.sfconservancy.org

_______________________________________________
policies-discuss mailing list
policies-discuss at sfconservancy.org
http://lists.sfconservancy.org/mailman/listinfo/policies-discuss