On Aug 18, 2013, at 8:04 PM, SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On reading the second paragraph of the above message I see that you and I might have a common objective. You mentioned that you don't know how to do that beyond what is done now. I suggested a rate for people with an open source affiliation. I did not define what open source means. I think that you will be acting in good faith and that you will be able to convince your employer that it will not make you look good if you are listed in a category which is intended to lessen the burden for open source developers who currently cannot attend meetings or who attend meetings on a very limited budget. But my point was more that "open source" is meaningless, and not what I think we're missing/need. I agree we need more developers (at least in RAI it would help), but whether the things they develop are open source or not doesn't matter. Developers of open source are no better or worse than those of closed source. And their source code "openness" is not tied to their ability to pay or not, either. -hadriel