Hi Steve ;)
   This is, IMHO, a bad idea.... corporations have a interest in the HP
3000's future and visibility.... it's called the money they have invested
into the computers and employees who run 'em!    So, let's let any and all
donate!

   Side note: Maybe Eugene can comment on whether or not these donated funds
will count as being tax deductable?

Art "just wondering :) hehe" Bahrs

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Dirickson" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Contribution confidentiality


> How about this: disallow *all* corporate contributions? I.e.,
> contributions may only come from individuals, using something (check,
> credit card, whatever) with that individual's name on it. In addition
> to eliminating the "few big corporate contributors" dismissal, it also
> eliminates accusations of deep-pocketed sponsors "buying" de-facto
> advertising space on the page. I'm confident that the appropriate
> people at HP will recognize the names on the list and know which
> companies are being represented, but it should be telling that those
> individuals chose to invest their own personal funds to help get HP's
> attention.
>
> $7K is way too high: 20 companies "buying" the page with corporate
> funds is a hell of a lot less impressive than a couple of hundred
> individuals doing so with their own hard-earned greenbacks.
>
>
> Steve Dirickson   [log in to unmask]
> WestWin Consulting  (36) 598-6111
>
>
> > >I believe the $1000 limit to be fairly important. In the
> > years prior to the
> > >Boston "riot", several vendors pushed very hard for many
> > years to get HP to
> > >change it's mind about a number of things, and many of those
> > issues then were
> > >the same as they are now. Nonetheless, the reaction from HP,
> > right up to the
> > >moment that they walked off the stage at Boston, was that it
> > "was just a
> > >bunch of noisy vendors trying to save their own asses."
> > ...
> >
> > >I do believe that the number of contributors is more
> > >important than the dollar amount. The ad can always be
> > reduced to a half-page
> > >or quarter-page if sufficient funds can't be raised. But the
> > number of
> > >contributors remains the key.
> >
> > I understand that it is vital that this is in both reality
> > and appearance a
> > community effort.  I do think that if enough companies and
> > individuals (and
> > even dogs) contribute, raising the limit to $7000 will not give the
> > impression that is being pushed by a few self-interested vendors -
> > especially since the contribution amounts are being kept
> confidential.
> >
> > So, I disagree with your disagreement.  I think that the limit can
> be
> > raised to $7000 without harming the cause.