[Linux-aus] Should Linux Australia change its name?

[John Vandenberg]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Chris Neugebauer <chrisjrn at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 12:32, Adam Nielsen <a.nielsen at shikadi.net> wrote:
>>
>> Isn't this more of a problem with the way the sponsorship is promoted?
>> Did anyone have to explain why IBM sponsored LCA?  ("No no, it's not a
>> conference about running Linux on IBM mainframes.")
>>
>
> No, the issue I'm referring to is having to explain the function of
> Linux Australia, as the parent body of PyCon Australia.  That is,
> Linux Australia is the body who issues our invoices, and to whom
> sponsors address their payments.
>
> This is entirely different to, say, IBM, which is one of many
> organisations providing sponsorship.  IBM have no "control" over LCA
> as such.  LA is the sole body responsible for PyCon Australia -- they
> provide the seed funding, and they take the profit once the conference
> is done.
>
> Think of it as "PyCon Australia, a Linux Australia Conference".
>
> It is *that* capacity that I have to explain to sponsors who are
> interested in giving PyCon Australia money -- who gets the money in
> the end, and what their purpose is.  Writing out a cheque to "Linux
> Australia" when they're supporting a Python conference feels dubious.

LA could set up a separate bank account and/or trading name for each
annual conference.  Add to that some Rules controlling transfers of
money between these per-conf accounts and the main LA accounts, and
the sponsors should be even happier as they know the money will go to
the conference they are supporting, and they will know what happens
with surpluses.

-- 
John Vandenberg