@chaitanya actually raised a valid point about that at the GB meet. Do you want a crowd of fewer, but more interested people, or do you want a crowd of people who are neither doing anything nor learning? I get that we do need to focus on educating people but how do you educate people who don’t want to be educated? You’re forced to make do with what you get, and in that case, I think I’d prefer a smaller crowd, where everyone is really interested.
If contributing to FOSS is generating some monetary incentive for a student, I don’t see anything wrong in that. Of course people engaged in this transaction should clearly state the interests to make it transparent and fair.
The question in that case is - What if money does get them to engage in the activity and makes them more productive?
While I know that money acts as a barrier to perceive FOSS to it’s truest sense, it could be a stepping stone as one understands what FOSS is all about.
Anyway, a detailed discussion on this could yield some results. But one question to @young_padawan would be - Where or who would you get the funds from?
According to me, if people aren’t doing anything nor learning - they won’t show up to any events. And by default the crowd will constitute of fewer people. People who are interested will always stick around or for a relatively longer period of time.
There is always a way. Even if they are not educated, they should be informed about what’s going on. There is no entropy with a small crowd. The more people you inform about what’s happening, the more get to know about it. They may not be as interested as you are but they know something. 1 in 100 maybe really interested. But if you stop informing people about what’s going on then you are accumulating knowledge and retaining it. What’s the point of that?