Board Minutes 20090322

[23:59] EvaldoGardenali: teus: PhilippDunkel: perhaps, in preparation, you guys could paste 
your evidence in and make it an encrypted paste with a password shared 
to this channel? this would make it easier to read
[00:01] EvaldoGardenali: teus: that makes it harder to refer to it I think, depending on the length of the chat session, but can be done
[00:01] RobertCruikshank: I'm at the football field now
[00:01] EvaldoGardenali: teus: just do it here then
[00:01] EvaldoGardenali: ok
[00:01] EvaldoGardenali: well, guys, should we wait 2 or 3 more minutes for Greg?
[00:02] PhilippDunkel: Let's get going
[00:02] EvaldoGardenali: OK
[00:03] AlejandroMery: so, it's time, and we are here, what first?
[00:05] PhilippDunkel: As I see it there is one main issue.
[00:05] PhilippDunkel: I have the feeling that Teus has been putting hurdles into the way forward on a regular basis. It has gotten to the point that it is frustrating to me and I want to resolve this.
[00:05] PhilippDunkel: The DPA is a secondary issue, which serves as an example, but is not my main issue.
[00:07] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: can you please provide us with you inventory? (I hope you are back now)
[00:07] LogBot joined the chat room.
[00:07] EvaldoGardenali: paste slowly, or use to create an encrypted paste
[00:08] You are now known as PhilippDunkel.
[00:09] PhilippDunkel: Inventory? If you guys do not share that sentiment, then this 
meeting is over right now. Because then I am obviously wrong.
[00:10] EvaldoGardenali: well, we need something to discuss
[00:10] EvaldoGardenali: shall I proceed and ask Teus for his defense?
[00:11] PhilippDunkel: First off this is not about attack and defense at all!
[00:12] PhilippDunkel: Have a look at (Pass: cb010101)
[00:12] PhilippDunkel: That's just an example.
[00:13] PhilippDunkel: There is a rough consensus on the policy list. Then Teus comes in 
and rather than make productive comments, he writes a lengthy comment on everything BUT the 
[00:13] PhilippDunkel: Same thing happens on board.
[00:14] EvaldoGardenali: anybody unable to access the referred url?
[00:14] PhilippDunkel: When Teus reads something he does not like or agree with, but where he has no valid arguments, he writes long messages, goes on a tangent, and hopes that people will get so distracted, that they will forget the issue.
[00:14] teus: fine with the decryption.
[00:15] PhilippDunkel: Again this is not about atack/defense, it is about the frustration 
of working in this style. It makes moving forward so much more difficult than it needs to be,
[00:15] PhilippDunkel: The second thing is, that CAcert is moving toward being policy 
driven and rules based.
[00:16] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: well, what you are doing is a serious accusation, 
as I see it, and so requires me to provide Teus the space to expose his defense and 
reasoning. (I am not saying anything to the validity of it)
[00:17] PhilippDunkel: I don't have a problem with that
[00:17] GuillaumeRomagny: Philipp : policy driven is much what I am expecting
[00:17] PhilippDunkel: I actually WANT Teus to have all the space he wants to say anything 
he wants to.
[00:18] PhilippDunkel: But I do want to make clear that my aim here is not to attack, but 
rather to resolve my/our? difficulties in working.
[00:18] GuillaumeRomagny: So let's find a gentleman agreement for this.
[00:18] EvaldoGardenali: OK
[00:19] EvaldoGardenali: Teus: Can you please share your reasoning with us?
[00:19] PhilippDunkel: Well that would require the parties to be gentlemen, and I am not.
[00:20] PhilippDunkel: What I would really want is a clear statement by this board on how 
we want to work/act.
[00:20] teus: For me there is a severe accusal from PD against me and maube even the board 
at large. So I made an inventory of what I think the important parts are in the email 
exchange about this
[00:20] teus: See
[00:21] teus: This is just an overview.
[00:21] PhilippDunkel: Ok, so you want to talk about the DPA first
[00:21] PhilippDunkel: Fine by me.
[00:22] PhilippDunkel: Did we or did we not have a phone conversation last October that we 
really need to solve our DPA compliance ASAP?
[00:22] PhilippDunkel: In that conversation did you not agree to this?
[00:22] PhilippDunkel: Did the DPA not also become a big issue at the last TOP ?
[00:23] EvaldoGardenali: Teus: anything to add?
[00:24] EvaldoGardenali: RobertCruikshank, GuillaumeRomagny, AlejandroMery: Can you please 
read the proposed texts and share your opinions/insights on the matter?
[00:25] PhilippDunkel: Does not Article 66.1 threaten a fine of â\u201a¬3062 per violation 
of the DPA?
[00:25] teus: These are basically things telling: teus is not doing anything about the DPA, 
thinking about children as board, not acting on tasks given by PD. I think they are all 
false accusals.
[00:25] PhilippDunkel: Is not this a threat to current board members?
[00:26] teus: Evaldo do you want me to react in discussion with PD?
[00:26] GuillaumeRomagny: We have to figure out what risks we take (and who takes the 
risks) in case we keep we don't register with DPA. if we don't do anything, Teus will be 
the first target to NL jurisdiction.
[00:26] PhilippDunkel: Does not Article 75.2 of the DPA threaten 6 moths Jail for willful 
[00:27] PhilippDunkel: Does that not potentially affect current board members?
[00:27] EvaldoGardenali: teus: I dont want too much blood in here, so if the other members 
can share their insights, it would be easier
[00:27] PhilippDunkel: Now this is just the DPA text.
[00:28] PhilippDunkel:
[00:28] PhilippDunkel: If anyone cares to read it
[00:29] teus: The inslut is that I am neglecting the DPA. And doing nothing abouit it. 
Which is not trie by all means. Nor are things that easy as it will look like. PD is not 
believing that studies are going on and initiated by me. I am not trying to explain the DPA 
[00:29] AlejandroMery: let's try to get something constructive from this. what do we want, 
and what do we need to change/do to achieve it
[00:30] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: can you summarize what you expect from the board in 
this meeting? would be easier for us to settle
[00:30] RobertCruikshank: We had similar violations of Australian laws in the early days.  
Not registering financial statements for three years etc.  Not handing over bank accounts 
to new board.  All these events have to be taken into account along with the maturity of 
the organisation. 
[00:30] PhilippDunkel: The insult is that you are doing things, and noone knows. The insult 
is that you are still valuing Rasika as if he were a lawyer and he's not. The insult is 
that the DPA issue is just a symptom in my eyes.
[00:31] PhilippDunkel: We can deal with the DPA. I don't see it as a big problem if we work on it
[00:31] PhilippDunkel: And as you know there has been a lot of work going on.
[00:31] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: please summarize what you expect from the board, and we'll proceed to discuss that instead of personal aggressions
[00:31] PhilippDunkel: Ok
[00:31] teus: I think that DPA is a serious thing. So we take it serious. It takes quite some more time as originally expected. But PD is accusing me that I am on purpose putting CAcert in a risk. IBoard should express their opinion on this accusal
[00:32] EvaldoGardenali: RobertCruikshank, AlejandroMery, GuillaumeRomagny, do you have an opinion on Teus' last comment
[00:32] teus: PD: Rasika is not a laywer but trainee. But he gets support and connections. Mainly by me.
[00:33] PhilippDunkel: 1. I want this board to make a clear statement of when we intend to comply with the DPA
[00:33] PhilippDunkel: 2. I want this board to make a clear statement that lone wolf actions like "board does not need to vote on this" are declared wrong
[00:33] PhilippDunkel: Now Rasika told me differently when he was in Vienna
[00:33] RobertCruikshank: I think there are strong words that don't belong here. 
[00:33] PhilippDunkel: He said, that he receives almost no support
[00:34] GuillaumeRomagny: We all share the risk and currently support Teus. Of course we cannot put a burden on Philipp carelessly. We need to look closely together at the DPA document and discuss more closely about it.
[00:34] PhilippDunkel: I don't care about the burden. I care about moving CAcert forward. And I currently feel that Teus is obstructing productive work. I want to have that stop.
[00:35] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: you've made that clear
[00:35] PhilippDunkel: As I said earlier, DPA is just one of many issues.
[00:35] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: if we dont let the others express their comments, there is no point in a meeting
[00:35] PhilippDunkel: It is just an example to me, but one that shows, that this style of working is actually causing problems.
[00:35] GuillaumeRomagny: DPA is important but a side issue in my mind in the audit process. Is the DPA mandatory for the audit.
[00:35] PhilippDunkel: I hereby yield the floor until called upon.
[00:35] AlejandroMery: do we have a clear list of priorities and a plan?
[00:36] AlejandroMery: I think we need one
[00:36] EvaldoGardenali: RobertCruikshank, AlejandroMery, GuillaumeRomagny: please express your comments on the accusations
[00:37] GuillaumeRomagny: I don't feel the accusations are true but we need altogether to pay attention to the DPA problem.
[00:37] EvaldoGardenali: teus: if you have anything to add faced the last comments, please do so now
[00:38] RobertCruikshank: I've felt for some time that CAcert gets bogged down with trying to get consensus on issues when leadership is probably what is required. 
[00:38] teus: DPA is an important issue and is worked upon (see this week emails). The important factor or sentence from PD is: I don't care about the burden. I care about moving CAcert forward. And I currently feel that Teus is obstructing productive work. I want to have that stop. The board should say if they believe in that or not at all.
[00:39] PhilippDunkel: @Teus: You have summed it up nicely
[00:39] GuillaumeRomagny: I don't think Teus is slowing CAcert at all.
[00:40] PhilippDunkel: Ok can we have a rolecall? We have heard Guillaume. Please everyone use your voice.
[00:40] AlejandroMery: I think CAcert is stuck, but can't blame Teus for that
[00:40] GuillaumeRomagny: (We faced bad issues over the last board and we kept moving thanks to Teus)
[00:41] RobertCruikshank: I have not experienced Teus slowing things down.  Perhaps we muse over things too much instead of accepting a decision and getting on with it.
[00:41] AlejandroMery: sure, CAcert got refloated thanks to Teus
[00:41] PhilippDunkel: @Gullaume: I agree with that. And I need to make clear again: I think Teus has done a lot of good things. I just feel Teus is running out of steam
[00:41] AlejandroMery: but after refloating it we need to get it moving toward somewhere
[00:42] EvaldoGardenali: my comments on this: Teus worked hard to remove CAcert from the certain death path, and he is working with his many connections to get a better understanding on the DPA since the last TOP. I've talked to Rasika, Ian, Teus, PhilippDunkel and others in the last days
[00:42] GuillaumeRomagny: @Philipp : or maybe you want to push the story too fast
[00:42] EvaldoGardenali: Some of what Philipp says is true, and some of what Teus says is true
[00:42] AlejandroMery: GuillaumeRomagny: can we survive if we don't move faster?
[00:43] PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume: May well be. But I feel we are running out of time. If 
we have not resolved much of what we face by the end of the year I feel CAcert is doomed.
[00:43] EvaldoGardenali: Ian has produced a nice document on the DPA that reached my hands through Rasika, I am not sure if you got a copy yet, but if not, you will
[00:43] GuillaumeRomagny: @Alejandro : we need to move faster but not at the cost of making a mistake or losing time like moving CAcert association into .nl
[00:44] EvaldoGardenali: so far, I fail to see Teus as negligent on the DPA issue, mainly because the Board did not express its will to go other way.
[00:44] PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume: The mistake was to move servers and data into EU to begin with, but what is done is done.
[00:44] EvaldoGardenali: Teus has been working on the issue relying on volunteer work by others, and I understand that it takes some time to draw conclusions
[00:44] PhilippDunkel: Negligence comes from not pushing this issue for more than a year
[00:45] PhilippDunkel: According to Rasika, noone has worked on this issue with him
[00:45] PhilippDunkel: We got him working on it when he visited Vienna, because I refused to wait longer.
[00:46] AlejandroMery: may we do a plan?
[00:46] GuillaumeRomagny: My guess : for a long time, it seems ignoring DPA problem was an option. but maybe it is no longer now.
[00:46] teus: Do not think this is true about Rasika. I put him in contact with several 
supporters and still do. So this is not true from Rasika (and I cannot believe he said so, not to me in any way).
[00:46] PhilippDunkel: And pretty soon after that we found out, that Rasika has very little understanding of the DPA due to coming from a completely different legal tradition
[00:46] EvaldoGardenali: Rasika is not here to refute or endorse any of this, so we cant call much on his name
[00:47] teus: Agree.
[00:47] PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume: Yes it was. But I also told Teus by phone in October that I would only join the board if we would actually deal with it. That has not really happened.
[00:47] EvaldoGardenali: OK, let's have this
[00:47] teus: PD: we are busy with it more as you clearly know of.
[00:48] PhilippDunkel: @Rasika: Ok. Then don't claim he is working on it and will provide valuable output either.
[00:48] EvaldoGardenali: Aside from PhilippDunkel, who others think Teus is guilty of any negligence with his role?
[00:48] PhilippDunkel: With what exactly?
[00:48] GuillaumeRomagny: @Philipp, so it is time to look at DPA together and ask for "serious" advise
[00:48] PhilippDunkel: Security Policy? Yes I wrote that with Ian.
[00:48] PhilippDunkel: CPS? Yes I kbnow that's next
[00:48] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: can you please yield some space for my question?
[00:48] PhilippDunkel: With roughly 20 mails per week on the board list? I know I read them
[00:49] PhilippDunkel: With making sure DNS issues are handled in house? Very important
[00:49] PhilippDunkel: @Evaldo: Of course. Please rephrase the question as one that can/must be answered yes or no
[00:50] EvaldoGardenali: RobertCruikshank, AlejandroMery, GuillaumeRomagny: Do you think Teus is guilty of any negligence with his role?
[00:50] AlejandroMery: no
[00:50] GuillaumeRomagny: Teus can't be blamed as it is a too complex legal issue, I supported Teus not coping with DPA as we had other issues to solve, so now it is time to take care of DPA. So I can be blamed too.
[00:50] RobertCruikshank: no
[00:50] GuillaumeRomagny: No.
[00:51] AlejandroMery: the thing is not to blame, but to get the goals and priorities defined and push forward
[00:51] PhilippDunkel: Ok, so the first issue "negligence" is of the table with a no. I can agree with that.
[00:51] EvaldoGardenali: Teus: do you want to answer that question yourself? its optional
[00:52] EvaldoGardenali: Regarding DPA, who got Ian's 7-page PDF document about it in the last days?
[00:52] PhilippDunkel: The real question as I said earlier is: Is Teus obstructiong forward movement in CAcert?
[00:52] GuillaumeRomagny: @Alejandro  : let's read the DPA, ask for advise & decide what we 
do/not do with it
[00:52] teus: I was accused of severe neglgence. On which I do not recognize myself which is now ack'ed.
[00:52] EvaldoGardenali: OK, lets have this last poll on the subject, for its sake
[00:53] EvaldoGardenali: GuillaumeRomagny: RobertCruikshank: AlejandroMery: Is Teus obstructiong forward movement in CAcert?
[00:53] GuillaumeRomagny: @Evaldo, I started to read quickly buy I need some more time to understand the consequences
[00:53] teus: The other question is: is the board feeling that teus is obstructing.
[00:53] PhilippDunkel: So that means that Teus as an individual is not severly negligent. OK. But that means we as board are!
[00:53] GuillaumeRomagny: No.
[00:53] RobertCruikshank: no
[00:53] AlejandroMery: no
[00:53] EvaldoGardenali: me: no
[00:53] AlejandroMery: PhilippDunkel: I agree, we a re all failing
[00:53] teus: I have no vote on this: no
[00:53] PhilippDunkel: Ok, so that answers my questions.
[00:54] GuillaumeRomagny: But can we ask if we have failed as a board ?
[00:54] EvaldoGardenali: as for DPA, we shall read Ian's PDF and comment on the Board list during this week
[00:54] AlejandroMery: EvaldoGardenali: may you forward that PDF?
[00:54] GuillaumeRomagny: ok
[00:54] EvaldoGardenali: we should be able to take a clear decision on a roadmap soon
[00:55] EvaldoGardenali: so I say, in one week, we should have formulated a plan on what to do with DPA, whatever the action is
[00:55] PhilippDunkel: My conclusion to this has to be:
[00:55] PhilippDunkel: I resign from CAcert board effective immidiately. As this board has just condoned a method of acting that I have to strongly object to. When I forward this log to the board mailing list, I expect this decision to be accepted.
[00:55] EvaldoGardenali: am I supported in this?
[00:55] GuillaumeRomagny: What if we refuse ?
[00:55] AlejandroMery: PhilippDunkel: please, let's try to be constructive. we can solve this without blood
[00:56] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: having a settled plan in one week isnt good for you?
[00:56] PhilippDunkel: I further resign as Organisation Assurer, Arbitrator and Documentation Officer.
[00:56] GuillaumeRomagny: Philipp : Please
[00:57] EvaldoGardenali: if anybody objects, I will expect one week to be reasonable and enough to do it
[00:57] EvaldoGardenali: err
[00:57] EvaldoGardenali: if nobody
[00:57] PhilippDunkel: Actually having a plan in a week is not enough. I really feel that the way we are doing things is very counter productive. It is a way that I cannot and will not work. I am not willing to put my time into CAcert under these circumstances.
[00:57] teus: Phillipp wait on this do not react within seconds. Give it a thought. Better for you primary and for Cacert secondary. Allow a weekend.
[00:58] teus: Question from Evaldo was: allow a week on raod m,ap for DPA.
[00:59] PhilippDunkel: @Teus: I have been thinking about this for about 4 weeks. That is why I brought it up to begin with. I have a post-it on my screen clearly stating under which conditions I am willing to put in my time. These conditions are not met.
[00:59] EvaldoGardenali: PhilippDunkel: If your desire to resign is true, please write an email for this sole purpose to the board in at least two days, and we will take it effective as at the end of this meeting, if your wish is so
[00:59] GuillaumeRomagny: ok for the plan, comment : personal rejection of Philipp resignation
[00:59] AlejandroMery: PhilippDunkel: let's set priorities and a roadmap for DPA and the rest of CAcert issues and next saturady we vote and start pushing in that direction all together
[01:00] EvaldoGardenali: are the main objectives of this meeting fulfilled?
[01:01] GuillaumeRomagny: yes
[01:01] AlejandroMery: not my objectives, but probably the official ones yes
[01:01] teus: Yes and no. PD is making a prerequisite to be met. Board is asking him to rethink. And yes the CAcert Inc. rules say resignation eg by signed email. Still PD please rethink.
[01:02] EvaldoGardenali: If his resignation letter requests so, we'll make it effective at the end of this meeting, to avoid any conflicts on his side
[01:03] PhilippDunkel: @Teus: I have made a clear statement that I believe you to be obstructing forward movement. I believed this sentiment to be shared. I was apparently wrong. It saddens me, but it is how it is.
[01:03] PhilippDunkel: @Alejandro: What other objectives do you have?
[01:03] AlejandroMery: PhilippDunkel: set a way to get CAcert moving forward
[01:03] EvaldoGardenali: This meeting requires the Board to have a clear roadmap on DPA approved by next saturday
[01:04] AlejandroMery: PhilippDunkel: I agree CAcert is obstructed, but not by one person
[01:04] EvaldoGardenali: I hereby declare the meeting closed, the space will be open for informal discussion
[01:04] PhilippDunkel: @Evaldo: it appears that Alejandro wants a more general statement and not just about DPA
[01:04] EvaldoGardenali: Thanks for participating
[01:04] teus: Thanks for chairing Evaldo.
[01:04] EvaldoGardenali: AlejandroMery: is that so?
[01:05] AlejandroMery: EvaldoGardenali: as I said before I think we are all failing to push enough
[01:05] AlejandroMery: EvaldoGardenali: and to set a _clear_ direction
[01:05] EvaldoGardenali: AlejandroMery: do we need a formal decision on this meeting to this subject?
[01:05] GuillaumeRomagny: Alejandro: you are probably right
[01:06] AlejandroMery: EvaldoGardenali: nah
[01:06] EvaldoGardenali: AlejandroMery: OK, but please dont let this subject die, take a proper mailing list and evolve it 
[01:07] AlejandroMery:
[01:07] GuillaumeRomagny: Do we put public logs of this ?
[01:08] teus: have no objection.
[01:08] AlejandroMery: neither do i
[01:08] PhilippDunkel: Fine by me
[01:08] teus: PD?
[01:08] EvaldoGardenali: GuillaumeRomagny: as secretary, you should prepare the minutes for approval, and then keep the logs along with that
[01:09] PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume. I will send the log that I have
[01:09] EvaldoGardenali: GuillaumeRomagny: It should be available for members who request it
[01:09] GuillaumeRomagny: @Evaldo : ok @Philipp : thanks
[01:09] GuillaumeRomagny: Philipp you can also send a copy to
[01:10] teus: @all: thanks


Board/Minutes/20090322 (last edited 2009-10-06 13:15:53 by SunTzuMelange)