@tonyalaribe, @aniravi24, @fabfianda and others here, if it works for you, could you please make an entry in:
I believe either an alphabetical list or a tier system is probably best. Listing exact amounts has a number of problems, ranging from the possibility that people feel their privacy is violated to discouraging new donors to contribute at low amounts if there are large donations. I like the Functor/Applicative/Monad tiers, but of course the amounts would need to be adjusted for individuals. Or, to keep the thresholds the same, you could add new tiers (Semigroup? Monoid?) that apply only to individual donations.
I think the easiest solution is best for now unless anyone has strong opinions on this (I donāt). Alphabetical or ordered by longest supporting (with a total count of number of individuals) would be easier to do, right? Maybe if anyone wants to be private, they could have a way to indicate that. I wonder how many people actually mind whether their name is anonymized - I would test that out and see if anyone really wants their name to be hidden completely prior to trying to accommodate for it, assuming we go with the option of listing everyone.
I share the same opinion as @cdsmith that I personally donāt care for whether I am named or not, but I think it would help the rest of the community see that:
- It is actually possible to contribute individually
- There are other individuals trying to contribute as well, not only companies
1 Like
Absolutely. I wasnāt critizising how the money is spent. My idea was rather that I want my donations to be used for a particular purpose.
Iām not sure how feasible that is for small donations, but that would be a requirement for me to consider regular donations.
I think that listing individual donors would be good. It could be alphabetical, by tiers, or simply single vs recurring. Judging from other organizations I donate to, anonymous donations should be possible.
If people would like more control over where their contributions go, perhaps one can direct donations. I think that broad categories, e.g., outreach, documentation, open source, might make more sense than specific projects. And there should be a option for āwhere most neededā.
Thinking of some of the fund raising campaigns for public radio, etc. perhaps having a matching campaign might encourage donations.
BTW, I have not been an individual donor because until this discussion in the discourse I had no idea I could.
2 Likes
I would personally welcome if I could do monthly donations to HF via open collective. There people can choose if their donations are visible or not. Also keeping the list of individual donors up to date on HF website might become tedious, especially once there are many small contributors.
To be honest @cdsmith 's blog really struck a chord in me and I wanted to setup some regular monhtly donation. But in the end the combination of my laziness and the fact that Iām donating wouldnāt be visible anywhere left me hesitating.
5 Likes
Weāve looked into open collective, and there are several hurdles we will need to clear before thatās possible. Having said that, once we do it opens the door to us helping the community there in several ways.
Thank you all for your feedback! I have opened a github issue to list individual donors, and we can start with a simple alphabetical list with some indication of recurrence.
If this is not satisfying, please open another issue and let us know why! I will not consider this the end of the discussion, but rather the beginning.
5 Likes
An update for those of you interested in this subject, Iāve opened a ticket for the website (https://github.com/haskellfoundation/haskellfoundation.github.io/issues/140) to track adding this data to the HF website.
If you would be interested in working on this, please let me know!
1 Like
Iām copying this over from: https://github.com/haskellfoundation/haskellfoundation.github.io/issues/140#issuecomment-948796614
Revealing anything about how much someone donates is questionable to me, including even indicating approximate donation levels, I think we should ask peoplesā permission first before doing that, if we are going to do that. I donāt personally like the idea of that kind of recognition, but I would leave it to others to decide this point (and Iāve heard some people say it would be meaningful to them).
As a separate issue from recognizing donorsā¦ As long as names are not associated with amounts, listing the dates of individual donations along with the exact amounts donated should be okā¦as long as the name for each donation is not revealed. If names are not given along with the dates and amounts, there is no reason for anyone to oppose that, right?
Having that data be public allows people to check that their donations are being received and properly recorded. If Iām donating $55 on august 3rd and the foundation lists this type of information, but doesnāt include my $55 then I can raise the concern.
Even better we could have a donor ID number or a paypal transaction number or something like that listed along with the date and amount of the donationā¦so then if there are 3 donations of $55 on a specific date, I can be sure that my $55 is one of them (because I can recognize my own ID number).
(Iām imagining this log to be a separate page on the Haskell Foundationās website)
1 Like