[FAmSCo] FAD Rheinfelden Reimbursements was - FAmSco meeting 2012-12-27 minutes

[Joerg Simon]

coming back to the FAD Rheinfelden - Travel reimbursement Discussion -

> 17:22:13 <cwickert> has anybody been reimbursed for FAD Rheinfelden
> already?
> 17:22:20 * cwickert doesn't think so
> 17:23:19 <sesivany> cwickert: my request hasn't even been approved
> yet. rbergeron assured me in a private mail that I would get paid,
> but no progress so far.
> 17:25:02 <cwickert> same for all the others
...
> 17:29:21 <cwickert> I mean, take FAD Rheinfelden again
> 17:29:36 <cwickert> the person who is supposed to make the payments
> is probably kital
> 17:29:43 <cwickert> or not?
> 17:29:57 <sesivany> yes
> 17:30:01 <sesivany> he is
> 17:30:11 <cwickert> I mean, can a CC holder make payments for the
> premier events budget or only from regional support?
> 17:32:00 <sesivany> that's a question. I think he should be able to
> do both. It's just a tool to pay people and it shouldn't matter from >
what budget it goes. That's a different problem.
> 17:32:53 <sesivany> but then we need to do some internal accounting
> to tie cc holder's expenses to budgets they belong to.

there are two things -
1. from what budget FAD-Budget goes and if FAmSCo can decide on it in
the future or not?

something you have to discuss Robyn and Ruth - as already mentioned in
the log somewhere.

2. the current pending FAD Travel reimbursement-requests for this FAD

https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/334 - 135.05 euro
https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/335 - 125,00 euro
https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/336 - $146.74

before you solve issue 1. - can we at least decide on 2. - so the people
get their money?
according to
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Sponsoring_event_attendees
they made all their event reports and requests and valuable contribution
on this event ...

as soon as someone from FAmSCo, the EventOwner or Robyn assign this
tickets to me, i will reimburse them

I hope i do not mix up too much topics here - but a general
note/clarification - i may be wrong or misunderstood the underlying
intention - i have the impression from the past discussions with
Christoph that FAmSCo feels called to manage/command how the
CommCardHolders should work/act - i think John made the point much
better than i could do:


Replying to emea-swag-tracking #193 [comment:8 inode0] - :
> I guess there are a number of different issues coming into play here.
>
> I have explained to FAmSCo in the past, or at least tried to, that the
existing Community Credit Card holders entered into an agreement with
Red Hat Finance governing the use of those cards. That agreement is what
binds me in making determinations about its use. The bottom line is that
anything FAmSCo says about it is irrelevant as it isn't their credit
card to control and I have no agreement with them about its use one way
or the other.
>
> Now while I have stated that before and that is still my position I do
understand FAmSCo is tasked with managing a part of the Fedora budget
and has an interest in what we are doing when we pay expenses from that
part of the budget. So we need to be sure to work with FAmSCo to help
them accomplish this task. In the past reporting our use was deemed
sufficient and I know that both kital and I have recorded all such
activity diligently on the wiki. If and when there is a better way to
report expenses for internal budget use I'm sure we will cooperate in
doing so.
>
> Our fundamental task is to help Red Hat pay legitimate Fedora expenses
and Red Hat has trust in us to decide what makes an expense legitimate.
In almost every case in my experience my judgment is formed by accepting
the legitimacy of FAmSCo, FAmNA, the FPL, and potentially other
established decision making points that have prior to the expense being
made authorized or approved it. Everyone understands prior approval
isn't always possible and in unusual cases a decision after the fact
must be made and normally common sense is used in such cases. Very few
people will ever take it upon themselves to make an expense without
prior approval.
-- 
Joerg (kital) Simon
jsimon at fedoraproject.org
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JoergSimon
http://kitall.blogspot.com
Key Fingerprint:
3691 0989 2DCA 58A2 8D1F 2CAC C823 558E 5B5B 5688

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/famsco/attachments/20121228/eb70c670/attachment-0001.sig>