To Brain CAcert Inc. - CAcert.org Members Association - To Brain CAcert Inc. Committee Meeting Agendas & Minutes - last meeting - next meeting
Agenda - Committee Meeting 2009-10-10
- 1.1 Chair opens the Committee Meeting
1.2 Accept the Minutes of the last Committee Meeting
- 1.3 Ratify the Motions made since the last Committee Meeting
- 2.1 Document #2 -- "remarks on applicability" Presentation of views, as requested in last meeting.
- 2.2 Documents from last board. Response.
3 Question Time
- 4.1 Confirm next Committee Meeting: (2 per month, to be discussed.)
- 4.2 Chair closes the Committee Meeting
- 4.3 Preparation of Minutes
Minutes - Committee Meeting 2009-10-10
- Present at beginning: Ernie, Markl, Andreasbuerki (Andreas), iang.
- Apologies: phidelta (PD), at a wedding, who appeared for 20 or so minutes.
GolfRomeo arrived later. Nick was not present.
- 0. Markl opened the meeting at 16:00 UTC. Business Agenda was presented as:
2.1 Document #2 -- "remarks on applicability" Presentation of views, as requested in last meeting.
2.2 Documents from last board. Response.
- Andreas suggested another location for Minutes, to be discussed at some time. Andreas recorded that he held PD's proxy. Markl took the chair as vice president, with the consensus of the members.
1. Markl moved that we accept the minutes of the last meeting 20090913. Iang pointed out that they are not minutes, but a transcript only.
Discussion followed. Andreas pointed to a possible template.
- Markl concurred, saying "a transcript is largely worthless. The benefit of minutes is that it is possible to see an overview of the meeting, not read volumes of minute detail to sort the useful from the useless."
- Discussion moved to the difficulty of the task. It could be divided into different sections (Andreas). Meetbot or smart transcripts could be used but they don't provide minutes. It is a long and boring task. iang: it is easier if it is a native and fluent English writer. Which would leave Markl and Iang.
- Discussion moved to Secretary. Iang mentioned time pressure. Markl suggested deferring the discussion until present. Ernie mentioned she is handling the membership.
Iang moved that the minutes not be accepted at this time. All present were in favour, declared carried. Andreas was reminded to explicitly declare a second vote as PD's proxy. Iang stated he would write the minutes for this meeting.
2. Next order of business. Markl moves that we accept m20090928.1. Five ayes in favour, no Nayes, declared carried.
- 3. Markl proposed that we adjust the order of the agenda, and deal with questions from the members, and urgent business next. All in favour.
- 4. Markl asked whether anyone has any questions to bring up from the community, but none were brought up.
- 5. PD joined at this stage. PD was briefed on the earlier vote on not accepting the minutes, and asked about time pressures. PD responded that he was on the iPhone and this was not a good time. PD expressed that the transcripts are sufficient as minutes, or words to that effect. Andreas, Markl preferred to see an extract or synopsis of the meeting, "without having to read volumes of conversation and minute details." However consensus was reached not to carry on the discussion.
- 6. Iang asked that future meetings be discussed. After some discussion, this was declared as urgent business. Iang proposes weekly meetings. PD, Andreas second, Ernie agrees. Ernie states not too long, not four hours.
- Markl would be OK with an informal weekly meeting, and a formal one once a month. A formal meeting once a week would be a burden as things can be decided, and there is a risk of missing an important vote.
- Markl points out that the agenda only has one item. Iang responds that 10 things are backed up waiting for attention. Iang also is happy if not all of the weekly meetings are formal, they can be informal.
- Andreas moved 2 formal meetings per month. Seconded Markl, five Ayes, declared carried. Iang suggests we call a formal meeting, 2 weeks hence, details on the board-list.
- PD leaves at this stage and his proxy reverts to Andreas.
- A last call for questions from Community. u60 said none from him.
- 7. Markl pointed out that the next discussion may be legally prejudicial, and moved that the discussions be held privately. Seconded iang, all in favour, carried.
- This ends the public part of the meeting, 16:58 - UTC
Synopsis of Meeting Contents
- See above
Decisions Reached by Motion including Update since last Committee Meeting - Overview
m20090928.1 - Run Tverify as-is until End Of Life 20091116
(17:49:16) iang: question for us; is this likely to be a private "black chamber" meeting again? (17:49:28) iang: because of the heavy subject? (17:49:30) ernie: think so (17:50:56) iang: ok ... so we need someone to set up the private chat room. I'm not sure how that is done (17:51:00) andreasbuerki: hmmm... would need an overall agreement of the whole committee in my opinion (17:51:43) andreasbuerki: we as a board have to have in this term one common sense I think... (17:52:50) snewpy [email@example.com] hat den Raum betreten. (17:53:09) snewpy heißt jetzt markl (17:53:22) andreasbuerki: would mean we start with 1. Preliminaires in this room and vote then for private room.... (17:53:30) andreasbuerki: hi Mark (17:53:49) andreasbuerki: what you all think about this proceedure? (17:53:56) markl: hi there (17:54:30) ernie: markl, hi (17:54:42) markl: I would think we can deal with everything other than the DPA here, and then adjourn to a private meeting to discuss the DPA issue (17:55:06) iang: hi mark. yes, agree with that (17:55:21) andreasbuerki: would be fine by me @Mark (17:55:32) markl: is someone in a position to link the URL to the agenda? I don't have it handy (17:58:07) iang: the one i have been using is this: https://wiki.cacert.org/Board/NextMeetingAgenda (17:58:27) iang: andreas has suggested using another one ... but we haven't adopted it as yet (17:58:52) markl: we have several agendas, or just different places to store them? :) (17:59:03) andreasbuerki: that would be: https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/CAcertInc/Committee/MeetingAgendasAndMinutes/20091010 (17:59:39) markl: ah ok, so that one is just a template at this stage (17:59:42) andreasbuerki: The overall view: https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/CAcertInc/Committee/MeetingAgendasAndMinutes (18:00:09) andreasbuerki: The template is: https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/CAcertInc/Committee/MeetingAgendasAndMinutes/Template (18:00:34) iang: There are these two points: (18:00:43) iang: 1. Document #2 -- "remarks on applicability" Presentation of views, as requested in last meeting. (18:00:43) iang: 2. Documents from last board. Response. (18:01:21) iang: if there is anything else it possibly could be added under the "urgent / emergency" rules .... for which we'd need consensus (18:01:31) andreasbuerki: so these things can be added to: https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/CAcertInc/Committee/MeetingAgendasAndMinutes/20091010 (18:01:51) markl: well it's 1600UTC... who are we missing? (18:02:21) andreasbuerki: rise hands *rise hand* (18:03:05) andreasbuerki: for the record: Philipp Dunkel gaved me a proxy for todays motions (18:03:06) ernie: guillaume, nick, philipp (18:03:21) iang: I think Philipp D will be late / popping in and out anyway so we can not worry about him ... he is at a wedding. (18:03:26) markl: nb, golfromeo: wakey wakey :) (18:03:52) andreasbuerki: Mark, take the water gun... ;-) (18:04:49) markl: since some of us have time constaints this morning, and nb is missing... I will chair the meeting so we can get it started, if there are no objections (18:05:15) andreasbuerki: fine by me, you are the VP (18:06:02) iang: yep (18:06:13) ernie: ok (18:07:03) markl: let's get the easy stuff out of the way first.. I move that we accept the minutes of the previous board meeting, at https://wiki.cacert.org/Board/Minutes/20090913 (18:07:31) iang: i hate to be a pain ... but i don't think it is that easy :) (18:07:46) iang: the problem with the minutes there is that .. they aren't minutes, they are a transcript (18:08:02) markl: yes, I have the same problem with the transcript vs minutes thing (18:08:21) ernie: right - is transcript (18:08:23) iang: so I think there is a conscious decision we should take here: are we prepared to call the combination of the recorded transcript + the recorded motions as "the minutes" (18:08:35) iang: i don't like it ... but I won't hold back a consensus to do that. (18:08:40) markl: PD didn't seem at all interested in making minutes (18:08:41) andreasbuerki: And additionnaly I suggest, if possible from a formal point of view: https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/CAcertInc/Committee/MeetingAgendasAndMinutes/20091010 (18:08:49) markl: I don't like it either, I think that a transcript is largely worthless (18:09:37) markl: the benefit of minutes is that it is possible to see an overview of the meeting, not read volumes of minute detail to sort the useful from the useless (18:09:46) iang: the problem as I see it is that writing minutes is a very long, boring and arduous task (18:09:51) ernie: and nick would once try meet-bot - then you get automatic summary (18:09:58) andreasbuerki: Minutes could be divided in: Excerpt, Desiscions reached and Meeting Transcript... (18:10:13) markl: you still don't get minutes from meetbot, it would just make it easier to prepare them (18:10:22) iang: and I know that PD hasn't got a lot of time at the moment, and is under pressure to keep CAcert to a minimum ... so I can guess that he won't be doing minutes. (18:10:23) ernie: no - but easier to make (18:10:53) markl: if PD doesn't have the time to perform the task of secretary, perhaps someone else might want to talk to him about switching roles or something and step up to the challenge? (18:11:29) iang: next problem: it probably has to be one of the english speakers ... because writing fast and fluently is needed (18:11:40) ernie: iang - right (18:11:50) andreasbuerki: I think, minutes should be done by an English native speaker or somebody who speaks flawless Enlish (18:12:13) andreasbuerki: agree, Ian... so don't hide yourself... ;-) (18:12:18) iang: now, i haven't seen a lot from Nick lately (18:12:23) markl: lol (18:12:23) iang: which would leave Mark and myself (18:12:47) iang: the problem I have in doing it is a philosophical one .... it becomes yet another task for me :-( (18:12:48) andreasbuerki: yep (18:13:05) iang: on the other hand I think I can do it faster and more efficiently than anyone else (18:13:09) andreasbuerki: or Mark or Nick would take the job... (18:13:28) andreasbuerki: tht's true as well, Ian (18:13:51) markl: does PD's time constraints extend to other secretary functions? (18:14:06) iang: i would say yes (18:14:21) ernie: register I'm doing (18:14:28) markl: we probably need to check in with him to see if he has the time do those things, because it's certainly on par with treasurer for amount of practical work that needs to be done (18:15:13) ernie: that's the reason why the mail-box is shared, that we see what's coming in (18:15:18) ernie: or one of them (18:16:27) iang: what are the secretary functions? Minutes, registration, membership? anything else? (18:16:46) ernie: invitation meeting (18:16:53) ernie: invitation AGM (18:17:26) markl: yeah, that's the guts of it (18:17:30) iang: ok (18:17:33) markl: call meetings, handle memberships, minutes (18:18:12) iang: i might offer to write minutes from time to time ... which of course we all can do (18:18:22) markl: perhaps lets defer the decision on the minutes of the last meeting, and perhaps PD will stop by and we can ask him for his input (18:18:28) iang: if i had the membership task, I'd look around for some reliable members to handle it (18:18:49) ernie: the membership I'm handling at the moment (18:18:58) iang: yes, good point ... not a lot we should do without Nick and PD being here on this one. Also GR not seen as yet. (18:19:18) markl: yes, a final decision on any of this really should involve everyone, by consensus, IMO (18:19:34) iang: ok, i move that the minutes not be accepted at this time (18:19:34) markl: so lets defer accepting the minutes, and carry on, if everyone is agreeable to that? (18:19:51) markl: i second that... all those in favor say aye, against say no (18:20:17) markl: aye (18:20:26) andreasbuerki: aye (18:20:27) ernie: aye (18:20:28) iang: aye of course (18:20:56) markl: andreas: are you exercising PD's proxy, also? (18:21:12) andreasbuerki: yes, mark (18:21:32) andreasbuerki: is there a certain form to respect? (18:21:35) markl: you should probably vote on his behalf separately, even if the same vote, so the record reflects that (18:21:44) iang: agreed (18:21:52) markl: anything, just so long as it is reflected in the log.. something like "aye for PD" is fine (18:22:04) andreasbuerki: ok, so I say: Proxy for Philipp (18:22:06) iang: (has someone got IRC logging turned on?) (18:22:21) andreasbuerki: ok, understood Mark (18:22:36) andreasbuerki: aye for Philipp (18:22:47) markl: I declare the motion carried then (18:23:02) markl: I just turned it on, Ian, but I guess I can paste the earlier stuff in too (18:23:22) iang: me too. For the record, I'll write the minutes for this one. (18:24:00) markl: next order of business, ratifying previous motions (18:24:18) andreasbuerki: and can you add them please here, Ian: https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/CAcertInc/Committee/MeetingAgendasAndMinutes/20091010 (18:24:24) markl: I move that we accept m20090928.1 as stated in the board motions web page at https://community.cacert.org/board/motions.php?motion=m20090928.1 (18:24:41) iang: seconded, and Aye (18:24:52) andreasbuerki: aye (18:24:52) ernie: aye (18:24:59) andreasbuerki: aye for PD (18:25:06) markl: aye (18:25:19) markl: I declare the motion carried. (18:26:09) markl: being that the only other matter we have on the agenda is the DPA, I propose we adjust the order a little, and deal with everything else, including any questions from members, before adjourning to a private room to discuss the DPA (18:26:42) andreasbuerki: I second that (18:27:09) markl: so that we don't waste the time of those present who aren't committee members, if they have questions or anything, before we go into a private discussion for some time (18:27:12) iang: ok, cool (18:27:58) markl: so, I propose that we consider any urgent business, then take any questions from others in here, then adjourn to private for the DPA discussion, everyone ok with that order? (18:28:15) ernie: yes (18:28:31) andreasbuerki: aye (18:28:43) andreasbuerki: aye for PD (18:28:49) iang: yes. i'm not bringing any urgent business up, myself. (18:28:56) markl: does anyone have any urgent business to be considered? (18:28:59) phidelta [firstname.lastname@example.org] hat den Raum betreten. (18:29:11) ernie: hi philipp (18:29:13) phidelta: Hi all, (18:29:21) markl: hi Philipp (18:29:23) andreasbuerki: hi Philipp (18:29:53) markl: phidelta: we were just calling for any urgent business to be considered, if you have anything (18:29:58) phidelta: So, what's going on? (smoking break before dinner) (18:30:01) andreasbuerki: no, wiki structue is not a urgent business (18:30:26) iang: (in this section, i'd like to talk about future meetings ... and suggest once per week if possible.) (18:30:54) andreasbuerki: would make sense, Ian... just to closer to the business (18:31:11) phidelta: Second that (18:31:36) markl: firstly, do we agree to declare it urgent business? (18:31:52) markl: being that it's not on the agenda (18:32:00) iang: not for me (18:32:19) phidelta: @mark does it matter if setting up the next meeting is urgent? (18:32:26) markl: if the proposer doesn't consider it urgent business, lets start a thread on the board- list? :) (18:32:54) iang: phidelta: if you are here for a while, we earlier discussed your time pressures ... and whether you wanted to rotate out of secretary role (18:33:30) iang: hmmm... if the choice is between urgent business now and discussions on the board list; I'll say it is urgent business :) (18:33:37) andreasbuerki: lool (18:33:48) ernie: :-) (18:33:52) markl: lol.. I'm happy to support it as urgent business (18:34:13) iang: problem is, it takes about 2-3 days to set up a meeting on the board list. and we only have 2-3 days of discussion time for the next week. So, as I am proposing a weekly meeting, this current forum is far more efficient for resolving that one question. (18:34:17) phidelta: I agree to discuss it now as it raises the chances that everyone can make the meetings. :) (18:34:28) iang: if you all knock it down, then back to the board list I go ;-) (18:34:39) markl: but lets see if PD is going to have time to discuss secretary role, and see if we can resolve the minutes issue, first? (18:34:46) iang: nod (18:35:36) markl: PD, the question came up because we resolved to not accept the minutes of the previous board meeting, because there are not minutes. Ian mentioned you are under some time pressures at the moment, and we were wondering aloud if you wanted to step out of the secretary role for something with less work? (18:35:49) phidelta: Look, we can discuss it, but as I am on my iPhone this is not a good time. Also it's nit really urgent. What is the minutes issue? (18:36:46) iang: minutes is a secretary task. however i have also pointed out that writing minutes is best for a native fluent english speaker (18:37:00) iang: ernie and andreas loudly agree with this (18:37:17) andreasbuerki: yep, still do so (18:37:24) phidelta: If you decided that they are not minutes, then I call that silly and resign as secretary. Not due to time pressure, but rather because of the silliness at hand. (18:37:35) ernie: right - german no problem, quick done .. (18:38:12) andreasbuerki: PD... what would be needed is some excerpt of the transcript... (18:39:02) andreasbuerki: or call it extract (18:39:09) markl: phidelta: we decided when considering the minutes of hte previous meeting, that it is a transcript, and that it doesn't reflect what minutes are supposed to do, to provide a synopsis of the contents of the meeting, without having to read volumes of conversation and minute details (18:39:12) iang: ok, so as PD has pointed out he's on the iPhone and that's slow, why don't we defer it to next meeting? (18:39:29) phidelta: Point is I think you are being very silly. I refuse to engage in this silliness. If you persist, that is fine, bit do it without me. (18:39:48) andreasbuerki: PD... relax ;-) (18:39:50) markl: i'm happy to defer it to the next meeting, it's not particularly urgent (18:40:25) phidelta: Ok. Put it on the next agenda. (18:40:46) iang: next topic? (18:40:59) phidelta: Which leaves determining the time of "next" (18:41:09) markl: well, it seems we have consensus to treat the regularity of meetings as urgent business, so lets do that (18:41:11) iang: I propose weekly meetings. (18:41:22) andreasbuerki: second that (18:41:30) markl: I'm of two minds on this (18:41:32) phidelta: Second (18:41:49) markl: if you consider our agenda for this meeting, it has basically one item on it (18:41:50) ernie: agree (18:41:52) iang: however in discussion: I don't necessarily propose that they be formal every time (18:41:53) markl: as did the previous, iirc (18:42:14) ernie: and not too long - not four hours (18:42:17) markl: an informal weekly meeting would be ok by me, and a formal monthly meeting as we have been doing (18:42:24) iang: ernie: agreed. (18:42:38) markl: that way, people can miss them if commitments don't permit their attendance, and not worry about having missed out on a vote or something (18:42:54) iang: markl: the reason that there is nothing else on the agenda today ... from me at least ... is that I want this DPA thing solved (18:43:11) iang: i have 10 other things for the agenda, and I'm keeping the leashes on them (18:43:35) phidelta: The only difference is that I have to send out notice in advance and we can decide. So what's the prible with formal weekly? (18:43:59) iang: i don't see a problem with formal weekly ... i would also be happy with every second week (18:44:15) markl: the problem with formal weekly meetings is that they can decide things, and it means that we can't miss one, for risk of there being a vote on something that we want to be at (18:44:31) markl: and weekly meetings at strange times of the day is a bit of a problem for me (18:44:44) markl: I would be happy with formal twice monthly meetings, or informal weekly with a formal monthly meeting (18:44:59) iang: true although that's what the agendas are for (18:45:08) markl: iang: until something gets proposed as urgent business (18:45:34) markl: consider also that we have trouble getting all seven of us to a meeting once a month :( (18:45:38) iang: oh sure it is possible to hijack someone's absence. but I think we all have to live with the record (18:46:13) andreasbuerki: sumarizing that for me... twice monthly formal I would prefer (18:46:36) phidelta: If it really s urgent business, a formal meeting will be called with exactly 48hours notice and at 3am Australia time anyhow. So I think if that is your fear it's a bit much. (18:46:44) iang hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Remote host closed the connection). (18:47:05) iang [email@example.com] hat den Raum betreten. (18:47:13) phidelta: It's much because there should be a modicum of trust in the others not to do that. (18:47:14) andreasbuerki: agree, PD... this option we still have (18:47:44) markl: it's not a question of trust... any meeting *should* be able to consider stuff that is urgent (18:47:48) phidelta: And if there is some trust, formal meetings are not a problem. (18:48:11) iang: well, as a Board, we should formally decide only on formal meetings (18:48:19) iang: and informally on informal meetings :0 (18:48:30) markl: but, having formal meetings every week is too much of a burden in my opinion, and doesn't necessarily increase our productivity any more so than either informal meetings, or twice monthly formal meetings (18:48:38) phidelta: : lol (18:48:40) iang: :-) so I would suggest that we have at least consensus for 2 meetings per month (18:48:56) andreasbuerki: agree, Ian (18:49:01) markl: iang: agreed (18:49:04) ernie: 2 meetings ok (18:49:08) iang: and I am happy to invite people to a chat room every week (18:49:17) phidelta: We have consensus for at least 2 formal meetings a month (18:49:29) andreasbuerki: and if urgent matter pop's up... we still can call a 48 hours in advance meeting (18:49:41) phidelta: More are always possible if needed. (18:49:49) iang: ok. then let's call a formal meeting for 2 weeks hence? and discuss more details on the board list? (18:49:55) ernie: phidelta, right (18:49:57) markl: 2 formal meetings per month, as many informal as anyone can find people to discuss things with, and we have the option of calling meetings any time with 48 hrs notice anyway (18:50:11) markl: iang: yes, that works (18:50:16) andreasbuerki: yep... so is this now a motion? (18:50:23) markl: also, as of next week, I'm back to 2100UTC being the earliest meeting time I can make (18:50:26) markl: heading back to AU (18:50:36) iang: markl: ok (18:51:40) iang: then, so moved: 2 formal meetings per month (18:51:51) markl: seconded (18:51:58) iang: aye (18:51:59) markl: all those of that opinion, say aye, against say no (18:52:01) markl: aye (18:52:07) ernie: aye (18:52:08) andreasbuerki: So, we can say twice a month, every 1st and 3rd Sunday? (18:52:11) andreasbuerki: aye (18:52:22) phidelta: Aye (18:52:33) iang: andreas: i prefer to defer that discussion to the baord list ... time ... tic tic tic (18:52:51) markl: i declare it carried (18:52:54) iang: s/prefer/humbly suggest/ (18:53:00) andreasbuerki: ok... tell me wenn you decided... ;-) (18:53:13) markl: yeah, lets move the discussion on the date to the list if no one has a huge problem with that, so we can get on with the other business we've got today (18:53:36) phidelta: I have to run (18:53:41) phidelta hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi). (18:53:41) markl: do we have any questions from community members? (18:53:44) iang: ok ciao phidelta (18:53:54) andreasbuerki: bon appetit PD :-) (18:54:37) Uli: no question that needs be discussed right now from my side ;) (18:54:49) markl: ok, I move that we adjourn to the private channel to discuss the DPA (18:55:17) markl: for anyone who wasn't here last time, we are doing that in private because our discussions may be legally prejudicial, so it's prudent for us to do it not in public (18:55:59) iang: seconded, aye (18:56:02) markl: aye (18:56:02) andreasbuerki: support mark's statement (18:56:08) ernie: agree (18:56:12) andreasbuerki: aye (18:56:17) andreasbuerki: aye for PD (18:57:05) markl: I declare the motion carried, and declare the remainder of the meeting closed to the public. For those of you present who are not committee members, thank you for coming, and for being part of the community. (18:57:20) markl: and for those of you on the committee, please join #board-private (18:58:04) Uli: bye, cu (19:24:32) GolfRomeo: too late there (19:24:39) GolfRomeo: Hello btw
Original Place Meeting Transcript SVN CAcer.org Website - Comment: Replace in original .txt file YYYYMMDD by the real date of the meeting and after that cancel this comment.
Inputs & Thoughts
Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please
Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please
Category or Categories