Hello there, five months after #1 landed on my ToDo list, I took the time to finish that. I marked this WIP, please check for spelling mistakes and merge afterwards.
I rebased this into a single commit, if you want to contribute, please checkout en-bylaws and push your changes there.
Hello there, five months after #1 landed on my ToDo list, I took the time to finish that. I marked this WIP, please check for spelling mistakes and merge afterwards.
I rebased this into a single commit, if you want to contribute, please checkout `en-bylaws` and push your changes there.
Very cool, thank you for taking over this large task!
I'll definitely contribute corrections, might take a few days though for me to go through all of it. Up to the point I'm at right now there were almost no typos, but a few words and phrases aren't 100% carried over in meaning, so I'll definitely make sure to correct those. (On a few of them we'll want to follow up because they already seem quite ambiguous in meaning in the original german text haha :D)
Anyhow, very elegant translation and a pleasure to proof-read so far, thanks again!
Very cool, thank you for taking over this large task!
I'll definitely contribute corrections, might take a few days though for me to go through all of it. Up to the point I'm at right now there were almost no typos, but a few words and phrases aren't 100% carried over in meaning, so I'll definitely make sure to correct those. (On a few of them we'll want to follow up because they already seem quite ambiguous in meaning in the original german text haha :D)
Anyhow, very elegant translation and a pleasure to proof-read so far, thanks again!
Nice! If it helps, the English translation of the KDE bylaws contains some legalese templates for translation of commonly used phrases in this kind of documents: https://ev.kde.org/corporate/statutes/.
Nice! If it helps, the English translation of the KDE bylaws contains some legalese templates for translation of commonly used phrases in this kind of documents: https://ev.kde.org/corporate/statutes/.
(1) The purpose of the association is to promote the creation, collection, distribution and preservation of Free Content (Open Content, Free Cultrural Work) and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and their documentation in selfless work to enable equal opportunities regarding the access to knowledge and education. Therefore the awareness of related social and philosophical questions should also be increased.
While the dominating software tools that made this collaboration possible were developed as Free and Open Software (a good example is "GIT"), the succeeding collaboration tools are proprietary online services of commercial companies, which are mostly operating under US law. This lead to the paradox situation that millions of volunteers create knowledge, text contributions and software of unrecognizable value while the control is handed over to these commercial platforms.
The non-profit and free as Open-Source developed code that makes our modern communication in the Internet and the connected life possible, even the products of publicly funded science, are inserted into private and commercially operating platforms, whose software and stock cannot be controlled from outside, whose control is not even attempted.
In both of these two beginnings, I would replace "that" with "which" (While the dominating software tools that made) and (Open-Source developed code that makes our)
In both of these two beginnings, I would replace "that" with "which" (While the dominating software tools that made) and (Open-Source developed code that makes our)
(1) The purpose of the association is to promote the creation, collection, distribution and preservation of Free Content (Open Content, Free Cultrural Work) and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and their documentation in selfless work to enable equal opportunities regarding the access to knowledge and education. Therefore the awareness of related social and philosophical questions should also be increased.
(2) While collecting and distributing Free Content, open and commonly used Repository and Version Control Systems ("RCS" and "VCS") should be used and generally made available primarily but not exclusively that save and preserve the whole history of the creation and improvement of of Open Source software and make it freely available to the society via the Internet. Prominent example is "GIT", a software created from Linux developer Linus Thorvalds.
This is a little vague, "Internet systems" - "Internet connected systems"? the phrase "Internet systems" is something I've not heard before, I think it's a bit too vague for a legal-type document such as this.
This is a little vague, "Internet systems" - "Internet connected systems"? the phrase "Internet systems" is something I've not heard before, I think it's a bit too vague for a legal-type document such as this.
The term is literally translated from the German version. We usually do not speak of "Internetsystemen" as well but it's what is written there ...
I keep it as is, but I'm open for further discussion if the translation is even worse than the German original.
The term is literally translated from the German version. We usually do not speak of "Internetsystemen" as well but it's what is written there ...
I keep it as is, but I'm open for further discussion if the translation is even worse than the German original.
This one is hard, I am not sure - Google shows this phrase is common in several other languages (I am seeing German, Dutch and Polish). The most common translations I am seeing are "Internet-access" and "Internet-based" which make sense to me linguistically (both work) but I am not sure what more-legally-correct would be... colloquially, "Internet-access" feels more like an ISP (AOL! haha) which provides you with connections, and "Internet-based" feels more like Codeberg - systems on the Internet for use. $0.02 USD no refunds :)
This one is hard, I am not sure - Google shows this phrase is common in several other languages (I am seeing German, Dutch and Polish). The most common translations I am seeing are "Internet-access" and "Internet-based" which make sense to me linguistically (both work) but I am not sure what more-legally-correct would be... colloquially, "Internet-access" feels more like an ISP (AOL! haha) which provides you with connections, and "Internet-based" feels more like Codeberg - systems _on_ the Internet for use. $0.02 USD no refunds :)
"Internet connected systems" sounds very nice to me in formal speech tone, and I feel it describes what Codeberg is providing and is very close to the original word in German.
"Internet connected systems" sounds very nice to me in formal speech tone, and I feel it describes what Codeberg is providing and is very close to the original word in German.
- the operation of Internet systems for the creation, collection and distribution of Free Software (Open Source) and Free Content.
- the distribution and support of the distribution of Free Software and Free Content via different methods, for example via digital or printed medium.
- the creation, serving and distribution of information as well as public relations work on the topic of Free Software and Free Content.
- the clarification of scientific, social, cultural and legal questions related to Free Software, Free Content, Repository and Version Control Systems and Wikis. Examples are reports, studies and orders for the research and development of systems necessary for the operation of the platform as well as the award of scholarships in these domains. They must directly serve the purpose of Codeberg e. V. and results must be published and made available to the public on time. Additionally, orders, awards and their award guidelines must be publicly announced.
(3) Active members have active and passive election rights as well as the right to submit requests, to vote and to speak on general assemblies. Employees and former employees of the association whose employment relationship did not end more than one year ago are not eligible.
(4) Supporting members have the right to submit requests and to speak on assemblies but no voting or election rights.
For both items "on assemblies" I think should be "at assemblies" (it's a gathering of people, yes? "on" is more a phsycial object, I stepped on a bug. I speak at a conference. etc. "Assembly" is what I'm reading to mean organization, controlling entity, group of people in the German laws/context?)
For both items "on assemblies" I think should be "at assemblies" (it's a gathering of people, yes? "on" is more a phsycial object, I stepped on a bug. I speak at a conference. etc. "Assembly" is what I'm reading to mean organization, controlling entity, group of people in the German laws/context?)
The assemblies are the general meetings of the association's members. I referred to the general assemblies quite often. You can propose a better term if the meaning is not really clear.
You are right, this is a mistake.
The assemblies are the general meetings of the association's members. I referred to the general assemblies quite often. You can propose a better term if the meaning is not really clear.
I think assembly / assemblies is correct for this document, it has a legal meaning which is proper and I just have to learn. :) https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assembly
(1) The membership must be applied for in writing to the executive board. Application via E-Mail or online form is permitted. The board decides over the application if the Praesidium does not contradict it. The board is not obliged to inform the applicant about the reasons for disapproval. The disapproved applicant can call the main assembly to take a final decision on his application.
(3) The leave of an active member or honorary member must be declared in written form by the end of the fiscal year. The board decides on termination of membership during the year upon application by the member.
(4) The leave of a supporting member can be declared at any time and with immediate action as terminal in writing or via E-Mail.
(4) The leave of a supporting member can be declared at any time and with immediate action as terminal in writing or via E-Mail.
(5) The exclusion of a member with immediate action and with important reason can be declared in case the member violated the bylaws, additional orders, the association's purposes or its interests. The praesidium decides about the exclusion of a member with a majority of two-third of the votes. In advance to the decision, the member bust be granted with the opportunity to comment on the accusations within a period of two weeks.
The last part about how the vote is done is confusing to read. I would probably reword it as it's an important issue when/if it happens in real life to be more "legal sounding". Perhaps something like "The exclusion of a member shall require the majority of two-thirds of a vote by the praesidium." (?)
In advance to the decision -> In advance of the decision (to -> of)
with an important reason (+an)
The last part about how the vote is done is confusing to read. I would probably reword it as it's an important issue when/if it happens in real life to be more "legal sounding". Perhaps something like "The exclusion of a member shall require the majority of two-thirds of a vote by the praesidium." (?)
In advance to the decision -> In advance of the decision (to -> of)
(5) The exclusion of a member with immediate action and with important reason can be declared in case the member violated the bylaws, additional orders, the association's purposes or its interests. The praesidium decides about the exclusion of a member with a majority of two-third of the votes. In advance to the decision, the member bust be granted with the opportunity to comment on the accusations within a period of two weeks.
(6) With the end of membership for any reason, all claims from the membership end. A refund of fees, donations or other supporting services is generally precluded. The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members is hereby not touched.
"The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members is hereby not touched."
I don't quite know what is meant here specifically, but I don't think "touched" is proper in this context.
"The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members is hereby not touched."
I don't quite know what is meant here specifically, but I don't think "touched" is proper in this context.
I understand it clearly, 👍 - it might sound better if "on" is replaced with "regarding" - "The claim of the association regarding overdue fees of active members remains unaffected.".
I understand it clearly, 👍 - it might sound better if "on" is replaced with "regarding" - "The claim of the association regarding overdue fees of active members remains unaffected.".
(6) With the end of membership for any reason, all claims from the membership end. A refund of fees, donations or other supporting services is generally precluded. The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members is hereby not touched.
(7) The membership ends with removal if the address of the member is unknown against § 4 paragraph 2 sentence 2 or if in spite of reminders at minimum intervals of two weeks the membership fee was not paid. The second reminder must have been sent in written form and must contain a notice of the removal. After expiry of a declaration period of three month, the membership ends automatically. The period starts with the sending of the second reminder.
(1) Highest body of the association is the main assembly. The main assembly has to decide over fundamental questions and issues of the association. It has in particular the following tasks:
i) decide to raise loans with which the sum of the association's total liabilities would exceed four percent of the total revenues of the preceding year.
My comment was based on aligning the items (the others were capitalized) - the grammar rules for lists are based on the content and not as simple as rules, let me link a document which explains it better. https://getitwriteonline.com/articles/vertical-lists/ (section "C. Punctuating and Capitalizing the Items in a List")
My comment was based on aligning the items (the others were capitalized) - the grammar rules for lists are based on the content and not as simple as rules, let me link a document which explains it better. https://getitwriteonline.com/articles/vertical-lists/ (section "C. Punctuating and Capitalizing the Items in a List")
Ahhh yes I'm sorry, I was missing it - it's because in Markdown, a > at the beginning of it's line is a quotation marker. This has to be done (or we use I think \> to escape it), it's a technical need for this document. Apologies.
Ahhh yes I'm sorry, I was missing it - it's because in Markdown, a `>` at the beginning of it's line is a quotation marker. This has to be done (or we use I think `\>` to escape it), it's a technical need for this document. Apologies.
(7) Decisions of the main assembly are recorded in a protocol and are signed by the executive board and two members of the Praesidium. The protocol has to be made available to the members within four weeks of the assembly. It becomes valid if there were no objections raised within four weeks after publication from a member of the Praesidium or the chairperson of the meeting or at least 10 % of the attending members.
(3) The main assembly takes decisions with simple majority. In case of equal votes, the request is considered as rejected.
(4) Changes to the bylaws and decisions for the dissolution of the association require a majority of two third of the recorded votes. Changes to the bylaws may only be voted upon if this item has already been mentioned in the agenda in the invitation (as of the period mentioned in the bylaws) to the main assembly and if the current and proposed text of the bylaws were appended to invitation.
item has already been mentioned in the agenda -> "mentioned" is a very weak word for this task, I would use "stated" or "listed" to indicate "it was on the official list of agenda items" (mentioned could mean "random comment" and not a line-item on the agenda)
majority of two third -> thirds (plural)
item has already been mentioned in the agenda -> "mentioned" is a very weak word for this task, I would use "stated" or "listed" to indicate "it was on the official list of agenda items" (mentioned could mean "random comment" and not a line-item on the agenda)
- decide changes to the economic plan for the current year;
- represent the association in bodies, in which it is involved in accordance with § 2 (5).
(4) In case a member of the Praesidium leaves or is elected as of sentence 1 into another position, the Praesidium may decide with a majority of two-third to co-opt another electable member as an assessor or start a re-election at the next main assembly. If the number of elected members of the Praesidium is less than three, a re-election on the main assembly has to be performed.
What does "as of sentence 1" mean? What context is this phrase trying to point me at, it's unclear here
a re-election on the main assembly has to be performed -> shall be performed
What does "as of sentence 1" mean? What context is this phrase trying to point me at, it's unclear here
a re-election on the main assembly has to be performed -> shall be performed
(5) The liability of the Praesidium is limited to intention and gross negligence.
(6) If a member of the Praesidium violates the regulations or the interests of the association in negligible way or heavily interferes with the work of the Praesidium, it can be suspended from its position with important reason. The Praesidium decides over the suspension with a majority of two-third. Prior to the decision, the member of the Praesidium must obtain the possibility to comment on the accusations made. The rights and duties resulting of the position of the concerned person are dormant. The suspension takes at maximum until the next main assembly. If the term of office is not about to end by then, the members of the association decide over a dismissal from the office.
must obtain the possibility -> must be provided the possibility
position of the concerned person are dormant. -> are dormant during the suspension?
The suspension takes at maximum until the next main assembly -> The maximum length of the suspension will last until the next main assembly (?)
If the term of office is not about to end by then -> If the term of office does not end before the next main assembly (? it's a little unclear to me but I think that's what this means)
it can be suspended -> they can be suspended
majority of two-third -> two-thirds (plural)
must obtain the possibility -> must be provided the possibility
position of the concerned person are dormant. -> are dormant during the suspension?
The suspension takes at maximum until the next main assembly -> The maximum length of the suspension will last until the next main assembly (?)
If the term of office is not about to end by then -> If the term of office does not end before the next main assembly (? it's a little unclear to me but I think that's what this means)
I applied your last proposal. What is meant is the following: IF a member of the praesidium is suspended, this lasts until the next main asssembly. Then the term of office either ends automatically, because the member has never been elected for longer than till then, or the members vote over the dismissal or the end of the suspension.
I applied your last proposal. What is meant is the following: IF a member of the praesidium is suspended, this lasts until the next main asssembly. Then the term of office either ends automatically, because the member has never been elected for longer than till then, or the members vote over the dismissal or the end of the suspension.
(1) The executive board according to § 26 BGB (German Civil Code) must consist of at least one person. The Praesidium can order more people to the board. Board members must be members of the association, but may not be part of the Praesidium.
(2) The board is elected by the Praesidium for a duration of two years. Re-election is permitted. The board can be dismissed by a resolution with a two-thirds majority of votes by the Praesidium.
I think this is the implicit meaning of this but since the German text is no more precise at this point I don't want to create an explicit translation which might be wrong if there are further regulations related to this point I don't know.
I think this is the implicit meaning of this but since the German text is no more precise at this point I don't want to create an explicit translation which might be wrong if there are further regulations related to this point I don't know.
(1) The main assembly elects at least one and up to four cash auditors for the duration of one year. If more than one cash auditor retires before the end of its period of office, all vacant positions bust be remotely re-elected for the rest of the current period of office.
extra space between "four" and "cash" (this comment takes longer than the fix :) )
Is "cash" the correct term for some of these phrases? For example in the next section (2) below, I would more commonly think that is stated "(2) The financial auditors..." - why is "cash" used, is that some sort of legal definition? In the US I thought it was a slang word for physical printed government money ("fiat") or representing as such ("cash and equities" where cash means actual money dollars)
extra space between "four" and "cash" (this comment takes longer than the fix :) )
Is "cash" the correct term for some of these phrases? For example in the next section (2) below, I would more commonly think that is stated "(2) The financial auditors..." - why is "cash" used, is that some sort of legal definition? In the US I thought it was a slang word for physical printed government money ("fiat") or representing as such ("cash and equities" where cash means actual money dollars)
Well, I actually looked up a translation for "Kassenprüfer" (cash auditors) and found the terms "auditors" and "cash auditors". I chose the last one as I considered it more precise. I think that cash must be an official term then but I'd love to see some more discussion on that ...
First thing fixed.
Well, I actually looked up a translation for "Kassenprüfer" (cash auditors) and found the terms "auditors" and "cash auditors". I chose the last one as I considered it more precise. I think that cash must be an official term then but I'd love to see some more discussion on that ...
I Googled "kassenprüfer englisch legal" and found this list of translations, it would appear "cash" is sometimes dropped in writing, but it's still used in other places. I understand the meaning as a native speaker and would hear in my mind "financial auditor" just because "cash" is slang to me. But it's very possible "cash" has a Legal meaning which is very important... https://www.linguee.de/deutsch-englisch/uebersetzung/als+kassenpr%C3%BCfer+fungieren.html
I Googled "kassenprüfer englisch legal" and found this list of translations, it would appear "cash" is sometimes dropped in writing, but it's still used in other places. I understand the meaning as a native speaker and would hear in my mind "financial auditor" just because "cash" is slang to me. But it's very possible "cash" has a Legal meaning which is very important... https://www.linguee.de/deutsch-englisch/uebersetzung/als+kassenpr%C3%BCfer+fungieren.html
@fnetX Thanks for working on this, I've tried to jump and help quality check! Sorry for so many comments. :)
I have recently learned about the US "501(c)7" IRS tax bracket which is a "social organization" and reads very, very similar to this document (membership, dues, etc.) for the German legal system. It might be of help to have this US IRS view for combined German + US tax things: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/social-clubs (I learned of this due to SDF - https://sdf.org/?welcome )
@hw - this may be the wrong document, but I had a concern - "where is the financial data published, where is it's transparency?" My concern in general is have we (Codeberg, e.V.) stated the financials will be transparent and published for review of the members? The finances need to be Open Source. :)
@fnetX Thanks for working on this, I've tried to jump and help quality check! Sorry for so many comments. :)
I have recently learned about the US "501(c)7" IRS tax bracket which is a "social organization" and reads very, very similar to this document (membership, dues, etc.) for the German legal system. It might be of help to have this US IRS view for combined German + US tax things: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/social-clubs (I learned of this due to SDF - https://sdf.org/?welcome )
@hw - this may be the wrong document, but I had a concern - "where is the financial data published, where is it's transparency?" My concern in general is have we (Codeberg, e.V.) stated the financials will be transparent and published for review of the members? The finances need to be Open Source. :)
@hw - this may be the wrong document, but I had a concern - "where is the financial data published, where is it's transparency?" My concern in general is have we (Codeberg, e.V.) stated the financials will be transparent and published for review of the members? The finances need to be Open Source. :)
Financial audits for NGOs in Germany are mandatory part of the annual report presented and discussed in the annual member assembly as defined in bylaws §8 (1) a-i.
Additionally, informally, the monthly letter sent out to member contains the unaudited monthly financials snapshot.
> @hw - this may be the wrong document, but I had a concern - "where is the financial data published, where is it's transparency?" My concern in general is have we (Codeberg, e.V.) stated the financials will be transparent and published for review of the members? The finances need to be Open Source. :)
Financial audits for NGOs in Germany are mandatory part of the annual report presented and discussed in the annual member assembly as defined in bylaws §8 (1) a-i.
Additionally, informally, the monthly letter sent out to member contains the unaudited monthly financials snapshot.
Financial audits for NGOs in Germany are mandatory part of the annual report presented and discussed in the annual member assembly as defined in bylaws §8 (1) a-i.
Additionally, informally, the monthly letter sent out to member contains the unaudited monthly financials snapshot.
Fantastic, thank you - for people like me who are unaware of how NGO finances work, what you wrote here is perfect for my curiosity as a new person. Maybe a part of the FAQ for the Donate page? https://liberapay.com/codeberg/donate
> Financial audits for NGOs in Germany are mandatory part of the annual report presented and discussed in the annual member assembly as defined in bylaws §8 (1) a-i.
>
> Additionally, informally, the monthly letter sent out to member contains the unaudited monthly financials snapshot.
Fantastic, thank you - for people like me who are unaware of how NGO finances work, what you wrote here is perfect for my curiosity as a new person. Maybe a part of the FAQ for the Donate page? https://liberapay.com/codeberg/donate
Update: I'm about half-way through now, quite a demanding text :) (again I bow down to @fnetX for fearlessly tackling this 👍).
Looking ahead: I'm technically a bit unsure how I can/should add my changes as soon as I'm done with this, as (as far as I understand it) I cannot push to the PR (or can I?)? If you have any ideas please let me know :) (otherwise my practical idea would be we already merge @fnetX's changes to main, and I open another PR with my changes? maybe this makes reviewing easier too).
Update: I'm about half-way through now, quite a demanding text :) (again I bow down to @fnetX for fearlessly tackling this 👍).
Looking ahead: I'm technically a bit unsure how I can/should add my changes as soon as I'm done with this, as (as far as I understand it) I cannot push to the PR (or can I?)? If you have any ideas please let me know :) (otherwise my practical idea would be we already merge @fnetX's changes to `main`, and I open another PR with my changes? maybe this makes reviewing easier too).
@simonrepp I'll push @tengels (now Ghosts) changes to this PR and you can decide whether you want to fork my repo and push there or if you wait until this is merged and create a new PR there.
@simonrepp I'll push @tengels (now Ghosts) changes to this PR and you can decide whether you want to fork my repo and push there or if you wait until this is merged and create a new PR there.
Since @Ghost already reviewed many detailed changes, I removed the WIP label so this can actually be merged. @simonrepp you could actually checkout this commit and rebase your changes onto it.
Since @Ghost already reviewed many detailed changes, I removed the WIP label so this can actually be merged.
@simonrepp you could actually checkout this commit and rebase your changes onto it.
Thanks, merging this already and I'll just open a new PR still sounds like the easiest option to me right now, the alternative approaches still sound messy in my head. :)
Thanks, merging this already and I'll just open a new PR still sounds like the easiest option to me right now, the alternative approaches still sound messy in my head. :)
@simonrepp I'll push @tengels (now Ghosts) changes to this PR and you can decide whether you want to fork my repo and push there or if you wait until this is merged and create a new PR there.
Just ping us if this is ready for merge, we can also do incremental merges if sections are still WIP
> @simonrepp I'll push @tengels (now Ghosts) changes to this PR and you can decide whether you want to fork my repo and push there or if you wait until this is merged and create a new PR there.
Just ping us if this is ready for merge, we can also do incremental merges if sections are still WIP
Alternatively, if you don't want to be flooded with MRs, I could take over all preparation in my fork and manage all subsequent changes and will occasionally create MRs if there's a lot of process.
Alternatively, if you don't want to be flooded with MRs, I could take over all preparation in my fork and manage all subsequent changes and will occasionally create MRs if there's a lot of process.
@simonrepp let's do it like that then, if you're comfortable with this. You can find my repo over at https://codeberg.org/fnetX/codeberg-org and we can prepare everything there.
Are we really in danger of a flood of MRs? Mine's the only one I know of right now, unless a horde of translation people hyped for action is gearing up in the background haha. But yeah just let me know, I'll base the MR to wherever you want it. :)
Are we really in danger of a *flood* of MRs? Mine's the only one I know of right now, unless a horde of translation people hyped for action is gearing up in the background haha. But yeah just let me know, I'll base the MR to wherever you want it. :)
Well I considered adding some Readme and maybe providing more translated files, restructuring things, whatever ...
Yeah, you're right, just base your MR here and I'll do my stuff in my repo, that's a lot easier and you are independent of my mood in the likely case I won't manage to do this in the near future :-)
Well I considered adding some Readme and maybe providing more translated files, restructuring things, whatever ...
Yeah, you're right, just base your MR here and I'll do my stuff in my repo, that's a lot easier and you are independent of my mood in the likely case I won't manage to do this in the near future :-)
@hw What about pointing the "Bylaws / Satzung" link in the footer to the English translation? The larger audience might expect an English document and it states that the German version is the legally binding one.
Otherwise, I'll add an English statement above of the German text to forward people to the English version ...
@hw What about pointing the "Bylaws / Satzung" link in the footer to the English translation? The larger audience might expect an English document and it states that the German version is the legally binding one.
Otherwise, I'll add an English statement above of the German text to forward people to the English version ...
@fnetX@hw we could also leave "Bylaws/Satzung" and link each word to the respective language version, respectively split it up such as " Policy... | Bylaws[en] | Satzung[de] | Imprint... ", although keeping them directly adjacent probably helps to convey that they are one and the same in different languages.
@fnetX gotcha, will do :)
@fnetX @hw we could also leave "Bylaws/Satzung" and link each word to the respective language version, respectively split it up such as " Policy... | [Bylaws[en]](DUMMY) | [Satzung[de]](DUMMY) | Imprint... ", although keeping them directly adjacent probably helps to convey that they are one and the same in different languages.
@fnetX@hw we could also leave "Bylaws/Satzung" and link each word to the respective language version, respectively split it up such as " Policy... | Bylaws[en] | Satzung[de] | Imprint... ", although keeping them directly adjacent probably helps to convey that they are one and the same in different languages.
Alternativaly, or in combination, a header for each of the documents cross-linking all the translations?
> @fnetX gotcha, will do :)
>
> @fnetX @hw we could also leave "Bylaws/Satzung" and link each word to the respective language version, respectively split it up such as " Policy... | [Bylaws[en]](DUMMY) | [Satzung[de]](DUMMY) | Imprint... ", although keeping them directly adjacent probably helps to convey that they are one and the same in different languages.
sounds good. (this would require a PR to https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/build-deploy-gitea/src/branch/master/etc/gitea/templates/custom/extra_links_footer.tmpl).
Alternativaly, or in combination, a header for each of the documents cross-linking all the translations?
@hw thanks for pointing out the template location 👍
I finished my detailed review of the english translation of the bylaws today and I'll include the footer change with the MR for that then (tomorrow or the next days sometime when I get to wrap it all up).
I thought about it some more though - is it an actual german legal requirement that there is a direct link "Satzung" on each page or is that more or less arbitrary? Because if the latter is the case I would actually suggest to replace "Bylaws/Satzung" with (for instance) "Organization", and link that to a short, seperate document (which I'll gladly write) which gives a bird's eye view on what kind of an organization codeberg is and only from there links to the de/en versions of the bylaws (plus maybe other documents, as there is enough space), including commentary why one might want to read them. My thinking with this is that probably neither "Bylaws" and especially not "Satzung" is very appealing to anyone in the footer (AGB/EULA are not even read when they are put in front of people ;D), whereas if I personally saw "Organization" in the footer I'd be much more curious to click, because it actually sounds like it will answer the question "Who is behind codeberg?" which I would argue is something a lot of people are curious about. Agreement/Thoughts? :)
@hw thanks for pointing out the template location 👍
I finished my detailed review of the english translation of the bylaws today and I'll include the footer change with the MR for that then (tomorrow or the next days sometime when I get to wrap it all up).
I thought about it some more though - is it an actual german legal requirement that there is a direct link "Satzung" on each page or is that more or less arbitrary? Because if the latter is the case I would actually suggest to replace "Bylaws/Satzung" with (for instance) "Organization", and link that to a short, seperate document (which I'll gladly write) which gives a bird's eye view on what kind of an organization codeberg is and only from there links to the de/en versions of the bylaws (plus maybe other documents, as there is enough space), including commentary why one might want to read them. My thinking with this is that probably neither "Bylaws" and especially not "Satzung" is very appealing to anyone in the footer (AGB/EULA are not even read when they are put in front of people ;D), whereas if I personally saw "Organization" in the footer I'd be much more curious to click, because it actually sounds like it will answer the question "Who is behind codeberg?" which I would argue is something a lot of people *are* curious about. Agreement/Thoughts? :)
is it an actual german legal requirement that there is a direct link "Satzung" on each page [...]
No, only imprint/impressum and privacy poilcy are mandatory (not necessarily in footer, but easy to reach).
In Codeberg/Design#23 various really good ideas for a new footer design have been proposed, but nothing has been implemented yet afaik.
> is it an actual german legal requirement that there is a direct link "Satzung" on each page [...]
No, only imprint/impressum and privacy poilcy are mandatory (not necessarily in footer, but easy to reach).
In https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Design/issues/23 various really good ideas for a new footer design have been proposed, but nothing has been implemented yet afaik.
Ah thanks for that crossreference! In the spirit of getting this (translation task) done I'll not touch upon design in the upcoming MR, and the layout and visual fidelity can be adressed separately anyhow I guess (the proposed designs offer more space for links, so nothing to lose right now hooray :))
Ah thanks for that crossreference! In the spirit of getting *this* (translation task) done I'll not touch upon design in the upcoming MR, and the layout and visual fidelity can be adressed separately anyhow I guess (the proposed designs offer more space for links, so nothing to lose right now hooray :))
Hello there, five months after #1 landed on my ToDo list, I took the time to finish that. I marked this WIP, please check for spelling mistakes and merge afterwards.
I rebased this into a single commit, if you want to contribute, please checkout
en-bylawsand push your changes there.fnetX referenced this pull request 2 years agoVery cool, thank you for taking over this large task!
I'll definitely contribute corrections, might take a few days though for me to go through all of it. Up to the point I'm at right now there were almost no typos, but a few words and phrases aren't 100% carried over in meaning, so I'll definitely make sure to correct those. (On a few of them we'll want to follow up because they already seem quite ambiguous in meaning in the original german text haha :D)
Anyhow, very elegant translation and a pleasure to proof-read so far, thanks again!
Nice! If it helps, the English translation of the KDE bylaws contains some legalese templates for translation of commonly used phrases in this kind of documents: https://ev.kde.org/corporate/statutes/.
Ah cool these might indeed come in handy, thanks @hw!
## § 2 Purpose and Tasks(1) The purpose of the association is to promote the creation, collection, distribution and preservation of Free Content (Open Content, Free Cultrural Work) and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and their documentation in selfless work to enable equal opportunities regarding the access to knowledge and education. Therefore the awareness of related social and philosophical questions should also be increased.Cultrural -> Cultural
While the dominating software tools that made this collaboration possible were developed as Free and Open Software (a good example is "GIT"), the succeeding collaboration tools are proprietary online services of commercial companies, which are mostly operating under US law. This lead to the paradox situation that millions of volunteers create knowledge, text contributions and software of unrecognizable value while the control is handed over to these commercial platforms.The non-profit and free as Open-Source developed code that makes our modern communication in the Internet and the connected life possible, even the products of publicly funded science, are inserted into private and commercially operating platforms, whose software and stock cannot be controlled from outside, whose control is not even attempted.In both of these two beginnings, I would replace "that" with "which" (While the dominating software tools that made) and (Open-Source developed code that makes our)
(1) The purpose of the association is to promote the creation, collection, distribution and preservation of Free Content (Open Content, Free Cultrural Work) and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and their documentation in selfless work to enable equal opportunities regarding the access to knowledge and education. Therefore the awareness of related social and philosophical questions should also be increased.(2) While collecting and distributing Free Content, open and commonly used Repository and Version Control Systems ("RCS" and "VCS") should be used and generally made available primarily but not exclusively that save and preserve the whole history of the creation and improvement of of Open Source software and make it freely available to the society via the Internet. Prominent example is "GIT", a software created from Linux developer Linus Thorvalds."A prominent example..." and "a software created by" (not from)
(4) The purpose of the association shall be served in particular by- the operation of Internet systems for the creation, collection and distribution of Free Software (Open Source) and Free Content.This is a little vague, "Internet systems" - "Internet connected systems"? the phrase "Internet systems" is something I've not heard before, I think it's a bit too vague for a legal-type document such as this.
The term is literally translated from the German version. We usually do not speak of "Internetsystemen" as well but it's what is written there ...
I keep it as is, but I'm open for further discussion if the translation is even worse than the German original.
This one is hard, I am not sure - Google shows this phrase is common in several other languages (I am seeing German, Dutch and Polish). The most common translations I am seeing are "Internet-access" and "Internet-based" which make sense to me linguistically (both work) but I am not sure what more-legally-correct would be... colloquially, "Internet-access" feels more like an ISP (AOL! haha) which provides you with connections, and "Internet-based" feels more like Codeberg - systems on the Internet for use. $0.02 USD no refunds :)
Would terms like "web systems" or "Internet platforms" be more adequate?
"Internet connected systems" sounds very nice to me in formal speech tone, and I feel it describes what Codeberg is providing and is very close to the original word in German.
- the operation of Internet systems for the creation, collection and distribution of Free Software (Open Source) and Free Content.- the distribution and support of the distribution of Free Software and Free Content via different methods, for example via digital or printed medium.- the creation, serving and distribution of information as well as public relations work on the topic of Free Software and Free Content.- the clarification of scientific, social, cultural and legal questions related to Free Software, Free Content, Repository and Version Control Systems and Wikis. Examples are reports, studies and orders for the research and development of systems necessary for the operation of the platform as well as the award of scholarships in these domains. They must directly serve the purpose of Codeberg e. V. and results must be published and made available to the public on time. Additionally, orders, awards and their award guidelines must be publicly announced.Examples are -> Examples include ?
(3) Active members have active and passive election rights as well as the right to submit requests, to vote and to speak on general assemblies. Employees and former employees of the association whose employment relationship did not end more than one year ago are not eligible.(4) Supporting members have the right to submit requests and to speak on assemblies but no voting or election rights.For both items "on assemblies" I think should be "at assemblies" (it's a gathering of people, yes? "on" is more a phsycial object, I stepped on a bug. I speak at a conference. etc. "Assembly" is what I'm reading to mean organization, controlling entity, group of people in the German laws/context?)
You are right, this is a mistake.
The assemblies are the general meetings of the association's members. I referred to the general assemblies quite often. You can propose a better term if the meaning is not really clear.
I think assembly / assemblies is correct for this document, it has a legal meaning which is proper and I just have to learn. :) https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assembly
## § 5 Begin and End of the Membership(1) The membership must be applied for in writing to the executive board. Application via E-Mail or online form is permitted. The board decides over the application if the Praesidium does not contradict it. The board is not obliged to inform the applicant about the reasons for disapproval. The disapproved applicant can call the main assembly to take a final decision on his application.his -> their (remove gender in English)
(3) The leave of an active member or honorary member must be declared in written form by the end of the fiscal year. The board decides on termination of membership during the year upon application by the member.(4) The leave of a supporting member can be declared at any time and with immediate action as terminal in writing or via E-Mail.leave -> leaving? termination? retirement? resignation?
I chose to replace it with resignation.
(4) The leave of a supporting member can be declared at any time and with immediate action as terminal in writing or via E-Mail.(5) The exclusion of a member with immediate action and with important reason can be declared in case the member violated the bylaws, additional orders, the association's purposes or its interests. The praesidium decides about the exclusion of a member with a majority of two-third of the votes. In advance to the decision, the member bust be granted with the opportunity to comment on the accusations within a period of two weeks.with an important reason (+an)
The last part about how the vote is done is confusing to read. I would probably reword it as it's an important issue when/if it happens in real life to be more "legal sounding". Perhaps something like "The exclusion of a member shall require the majority of two-thirds of a vote by the praesidium." (?)
In advance to the decision -> In advance of the decision (to -> of)
(5) The exclusion of a member with immediate action and with important reason can be declared in case the member violated the bylaws, additional orders, the association's purposes or its interests. The praesidium decides about the exclusion of a member with a majority of two-third of the votes. In advance to the decision, the member bust be granted with the opportunity to comment on the accusations within a period of two weeks.(6) With the end of membership for any reason, all claims from the membership end. A refund of fees, donations or other supporting services is generally precluded. The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members is hereby not touched."The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members is hereby not touched."
I don't quite know what is meant here specifically, but I don't think "touched" is proper in this context.
I reworded the last sentence to "The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members remains unaffected.".
Is this more clear?
I understand it clearly, 👍 - it might sound better if "on" is replaced with "regarding" - "The claim of the association regarding overdue fees of active members remains unaffected.".
(6) With the end of membership for any reason, all claims from the membership end. A refund of fees, donations or other supporting services is generally precluded. The claim of the association on overdue fees of active members is hereby not touched.(7) The membership ends with removal if the address of the member is unknown against § 4 paragraph 2 sentence 2 or if in spite of reminders at minimum intervals of two weeks the membership fee was not paid. The second reminder must have been sent in written form and must contain a notice of the removal. After expiry of a declaration period of three month, the membership ends automatically. The period starts with the sending of the second reminder.month -> months
## § 8 main assembly(1) Highest body of the association is the main assembly. The main assembly has to decide over fundamental questions and issues of the association. It has in particular the following tasks:has to decide -> shall decide?
h) Decisions to the membership fee regulations,i) decide to raise loans with which the sum of the association's total liabilities would exceed four percent of the total revenues of the preceding year.decide -> Decide (cap D)
Applied. How is the rule in English? Do you capitalize in lists where there are no complete phrases?
My comment was based on aligning the items (the others were capitalized) - the grammar rules for lists are based on the content and not as simple as rules, let me link a document which explains it better. https://getitwriteonline.com/articles/vertical-lists/ (section "C. Punctuating and Capitalizing the Items in a List")
I'd replace them with lower case letters ..
nod according to the rules, this would be appropriote. This is not a strong grammar area for me personally so let's use the rulebook.
> 1 - 1000: At least 10 % of the members,> > 1000: At least 100 members.Was this meant to be a HTML entity?
Yes, it was like that in the German version so I assumed it was meant to be a markdown dialect which supports this.
Ahhh yes I'm sorry, I was missing it - it's because in Markdown, a
>at the beginning of it's line is a quotation marker. This has to be done (or we use I think\>to escape it), it's a technical need for this document. Apologies.> > 1000: At least 100 members.(7) Decisions of the main assembly are recorded in a protocol and are signed by the executive board and two members of the Praesidium. The protocol has to be made available to the members within four weeks of the assembly. It becomes valid if there were no objections raised within four weeks after publication from a member of the Praesidium or the chairperson of the meeting or at least 10 % of the attending members.has to be made available -> shall be made available
(3) The main assembly takes decisions with simple majority. In case of equal votes, the request is considered as rejected.(4) Changes to the bylaws and decisions for the dissolution of the association require a majority of two third of the recorded votes. Changes to the bylaws may only be voted upon if this item has already been mentioned in the agenda in the invitation (as of the period mentioned in the bylaws) to the main assembly and if the current and proposed text of the bylaws were appended to invitation.majority of two third -> thirds (plural)
item has already been mentioned in the agenda -> "mentioned" is a very weak word for this task, I would use "stated" or "listed" to indicate "it was on the official list of agenda items" (mentioned could mean "random comment" and not a line-item on the agenda)
- decide changes to the economic plan for the current year;- represent the association in bodies, in which it is involved in accordance with § 2 (5).(4) In case a member of the Praesidium leaves or is elected as of sentence 1 into another position, the Praesidium may decide with a majority of two-third to co-opt another electable member as an assessor or start a re-election at the next main assembly. If the number of elected members of the Praesidium is less than three, a re-election on the main assembly has to be performed.What does "as of sentence 1" mean? What context is this phrase trying to point me at, it's unclear here
a re-election on the main assembly has to be performed -> shall be performed
It's refering to § 10 (1) ("The Praesidium consists ...") // line 166.
(5) The liability of the Praesidium is limited to intention and gross negligence.(6) If a member of the Praesidium violates the regulations or the interests of the association in negligible way or heavily interferes with the work of the Praesidium, it can be suspended from its position with important reason. The Praesidium decides over the suspension with a majority of two-third. Prior to the decision, the member of the Praesidium must obtain the possibility to comment on the accusations made. The rights and duties resulting of the position of the concerned person are dormant. The suspension takes at maximum until the next main assembly. If the term of office is not about to end by then, the members of the association decide over a dismissal from the office.it can be suspended -> they can be suspended
majority of two-third -> two-thirds (plural)
must obtain the possibility -> must be provided the possibility
position of the concerned person are dormant. -> are dormant during the suspension?
The suspension takes at maximum until the next main assembly -> The maximum length of the suspension will last until the next main assembly (?)
If the term of office is not about to end by then -> If the term of office does not end before the next main assembly (? it's a little unclear to me but I think that's what this means)
I applied your last proposal. What is meant is the following: IF a member of the praesidium is suspended, this lasts until the next main asssembly. Then the term of office either ends automatically, because the member has never been elected for longer than till then, or the members vote over the dismissal or the end of the suspension.
(1) The executive board according to § 26 BGB (German Civil Code) must consist of at least one person. The Praesidium can order more people to the board. Board members must be members of the association, but may not be part of the Praesidium.(2) The board is elected by the Praesidium for a duration of two years. Re-election is permitted. The board can be dismissed by a resolution with a two-thirds majority of votes by the Praesidium.Is there any limit on the number of times a person can be re-elected? ("Re-election is permitted an unlimited number of times.")
I think this is the implicit meaning of this but since the German text is no more precise at this point I don't want to create an explicit translation which might be wrong if there are further regulations related to this point I don't know.
## § 13 Cash Auditing(1) The main assembly elects at least one and up to four cash auditors for the duration of one year. If more than one cash auditor retires before the end of its period of office, all vacant positions bust be remotely re-elected for the rest of the current period of office.extra space between "four" and "cash" (this comment takes longer than the fix :) )
Is "cash" the correct term for some of these phrases? For example in the next section (2) below, I would more commonly think that is stated "(2) The financial auditors..." - why is "cash" used, is that some sort of legal definition? In the US I thought it was a slang word for physical printed government money ("fiat") or representing as such ("cash and equities" where cash means actual money dollars)
First thing fixed.
Well, I actually looked up a translation for "Kassenprüfer" (cash auditors) and found the terms "auditors" and "cash auditors". I chose the last one as I considered it more precise. I think that cash must be an official term then but I'd love to see some more discussion on that ...
I Googled "kassenprüfer englisch legal" and found this list of translations, it would appear "cash" is sometimes dropped in writing, but it's still used in other places. I understand the meaning as a native speaker and would hear in my mind "financial auditor" just because "cash" is slang to me. But it's very possible "cash" has a Legal meaning which is very important... https://www.linguee.de/deutsch-englisch/uebersetzung/als+kassenpr%C3%BCfer+fungieren.html
So in the end we'd stay with the term "cash auditor", right? It appears to be the common one.
Yes, I don't want to accidentally make a wrong choice about this (too important) so leaving with the literal translation is the safe choice. :)
@fnetX Thanks for working on this, I've tried to jump and help quality check! Sorry for so many comments. :)
I have recently learned about the US "501(c)7" IRS tax bracket which is a "social organization" and reads very, very similar to this document (membership, dues, etc.) for the German legal system. It might be of help to have this US IRS view for combined German + US tax things: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/social-clubs (I learned of this due to SDF - https://sdf.org/?welcome )
@hw - this may be the wrong document, but I had a concern - "where is the financial data published, where is it's transparency?" My concern in general is have we (Codeberg, e.V.) stated the financials will be transparent and published for review of the members? The finances need to be Open Source. :)
Financial audits for NGOs in Germany are mandatory part of the annual report presented and discussed in the annual member assembly as defined in bylaws §8 (1) a-i.
Additionally, informally, the monthly letter sent out to member contains the unaudited monthly financials snapshot.
Fantastic, thank you - for people like me who are unaware of how NGO finances work, what you wrote here is perfect for my curiosity as a new person. Maybe a part of the FAQ for the Donate page? https://liberapay.com/codeberg/donate
good idea .. give us some time!
@tengel I'll have a look at your feedback later, thank you a lot.
Update: I'm about half-way through now, quite a demanding text :) (again I bow down to @fnetX for fearlessly tackling this 👍).
Looking ahead: I'm technically a bit unsure how I can/should add my changes as soon as I'm done with this, as (as far as I understand it) I cannot push to the PR (or can I?)? If you have any ideas please let me know :) (otherwise my practical idea would be we already merge @fnetX's changes to
main, and I open another PR with my changes? maybe this makes reviewing easier too).@simonrepp I'll push @tengels (now Ghosts) changes to this PR and you can decide whether you want to fork my repo and push there or if you wait until this is merged and create a new PR there.
8aaa20c5c1tofd368f720c2 years agoWIP: Unofficial translation of bylaws into Englishto Unofficial translation of bylaws into English 2 years agoSince @Ghost already reviewed many detailed changes, I removed the WIP label so this can actually be merged.
@simonrepp you could actually checkout this commit and rebase your changes onto it.
Thanks, merging this already and I'll just open a new PR still sounds like the easiest option to me right now, the alternative approaches still sound messy in my head. :)
Just ping us if this is ready for merge, we can also do incremental merges if sections are still WIP
@hw you can merge this, all further changes will be new MRs.
fd368f720cinto master 2 years agomerged
Alternatively, if you don't want to be flooded with MRs, I could take over all preparation in my fork and manage all subsequent changes and will occasionally create MRs if there's a lot of process.
@simonrepp let's do it like that then, if you're comfortable with this. You can find my repo over at https://codeberg.org/fnetX/codeberg-org and we can prepare everything there.
Are we really in danger of a flood of MRs? Mine's the only one I know of right now, unless a horde of translation people hyped for action is gearing up in the background haha. But yeah just let me know, I'll base the MR to wherever you want it. :)
Well I considered adding some Readme and maybe providing more translated files, restructuring things, whatever ...
Yeah, you're right, just base your MR here and I'll do my stuff in my repo, that's a lot easier and you are independent of my mood in the likely case I won't manage to do this in the near future :-)
@hw What about pointing the "Bylaws / Satzung" link in the footer to the English translation? The larger audience might expect an English document and it states that the German version is the legally binding one.
Otherwise, I'll add an English statement above of the German text to forward people to the English version ...
@fnetX gotcha, will do :)
@fnetX @hw we could also leave "Bylaws/Satzung" and link each word to the respective language version, respectively split it up such as " Policy... | Bylaws[en] | Satzung[de] | Imprint... ", although keeping them directly adjacent probably helps to convey that they are one and the same in different languages.
sounds good. (this would require a PR to https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/build-deploy-gitea/src/branch/master/etc/gitea/templates/custom/extra_links_footer.tmpl).
Alternativaly, or in combination, a header for each of the documents cross-linking all the translations?
@hw thanks for pointing out the template location 👍
I finished my detailed review of the english translation of the bylaws today and I'll include the footer change with the MR for that then (tomorrow or the next days sometime when I get to wrap it all up).
I thought about it some more though - is it an actual german legal requirement that there is a direct link "Satzung" on each page or is that more or less arbitrary? Because if the latter is the case I would actually suggest to replace "Bylaws/Satzung" with (for instance) "Organization", and link that to a short, seperate document (which I'll gladly write) which gives a bird's eye view on what kind of an organization codeberg is and only from there links to the de/en versions of the bylaws (plus maybe other documents, as there is enough space), including commentary why one might want to read them. My thinking with this is that probably neither "Bylaws" and especially not "Satzung" is very appealing to anyone in the footer (AGB/EULA are not even read when they are put in front of people ;D), whereas if I personally saw "Organization" in the footer I'd be much more curious to click, because it actually sounds like it will answer the question "Who is behind codeberg?" which I would argue is something a lot of people are curious about. Agreement/Thoughts? :)
No, only imprint/impressum and privacy poilcy are mandatory (not necessarily in footer, but easy to reach).
In Codeberg/Design#23 various really good ideas for a new footer design have been proposed, but nothing has been implemented yet afaik.
Ah thanks for that crossreference! In the spirit of getting this (translation task) done I'll not touch upon design in the upcoming MR, and the layout and visual fidelity can be adressed separately anyhow I guess (the proposed designs offer more space for links, so nothing to lose right now hooray :))
fd368f720c.