1 (14:01:28) egal: hi, hello and welcome ... 2 (14:01:36) iang: goodmorning 3 (14:01:38) dops1: Hi all 4 (14:01:38) egal: (sorry for being late for a minute ... ;-) ) 5 (14:02:29) iang: we have a quorum, let’s open the meeting. 6 (14:02:43) egal: (had to find my 2fa-device to connect to my machine upstairs 7 via nuremberg ... ;-) ) 8 (14:03:14) iang: Any minutes? 9 (14:03:22) egal: sgm i had seen ... ;-) 10 (14:03:32) iang: indeed. 11 (14:03:33) egal: (at least, that they are there ... ;-) ) 12 (14:03:38) katzazi: next sgm should be finished soon ;-) 13 (14:03:42) dops1: unfortunately no minutes 14 (14:04:07) iang: ok. perhaps we can ask someone to help… 15 (14:04:32) katzazi: /taking cover 16 (14:05:06) iang: The Chair recognises @katzazi 17 (14:05:09) iang: :P 18 (14:05:20) iang: well … never mind... 19 (14:05:22) iang: let’s move on. 20 (14:05:50) katzazi: I cannot help with last meeting I don't have my own 21 transcript I could help with this meeting 22 (14:06:19) iang: Someone should be able to post the transcript into the agenda 23 at least. Not me. 24 (14:07:50) egal: sure ... 25 (14:07:59) iang: On the private mailing list I see discussion of Eva’s 26 resignation request; a mail from Etienne about move status, DRO from Eva, 27 paypal frm Eva? and discovery that the other resignation could be Sebastian by 28 iang. 29 (14:08:28) iang: Also Membership fees period by Piers; and a request to hand 30 over iCM roles by Eva. 31 (14:08:40) iang: Oh and more dispute reports. 32 (14:09:00) iang: I’m sure some of that could be done on the main board list :) 33 (14:09:17) katzazi: not stuff that is send to dro 34 (14:09:19) dops1: The transscript is uploaded to https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/ 35 CAcertInc/Committee/MeetingAgendasAndMinutes/2016-12-03?action=AttachFile&do= 36 view&target=transscript_2016-12-03.txt 37 (14:09:23) katzazi: you can forward it though 38 (14:09:40) iang: Hmmm… yes, DRO is possibly harder. 39 (14:09:47) dops1: But not linked on the page for the last meeting yet - must 40 click on attachments. 41 (14:09:58) iang: Any actions from the last meeting? 42 (14:11:09) katzazi: and paypal was send to members as well 43 (14:11:24) egal: members list? 44 (14:11:45) iang: Members list - ah yes - a mail was sent out to the list 45 admins. 46 (14:11:49) katzazi: yes, there was discussion on that topic on members list ... 47 (14:13:27) katzazi: a member asked about when (new) members are due to pay to 48 be eligible to vote at an AGM 49 (14:13:29) iang: Well, I thought mail had been sent out. I can’t find it. I’ll 50 try again :( 51 (14:14:24) iang: Unless there is any more … I’ll push on. to Businesss? 52 (14:14:43) iang: 1. Personal matters by Dirk? 53 (14:15:19) iang: I think here you mean Personnel matters, being matters to do 54 with the people in the group. Personal matters is private matters, it’s one of 55 those things where English is annoying ;) 56 (14:16:13) iang: - Membership-status of members named there/in mails - @dops1 57 do we have any summary of the members? 58 (14:16:39) dops1: yes 59 (14:16:50) dops1: I sent it to Dirk 60 (14:17:05) iang: @egal 61 (14:17:33) egal: i used this list to send out the invitation-mails ... ;-) 62 (14:18:10) egal: ah ... and i got one mail about resigning from cacert inc from 63 a.p. 64 (14:19:42) iang: Is there a list of people who are behind on their fees? 65 (14:19:50) dops1: no, not yet. 66 (14:19:57) iang: As in people who need to be reminded to pay? I might be in 67 that list myself :( 68 (14:20:23) katzazi: mark: at least one member has asked for clarification on 69 such topics on members list 70 (14:20:26) egal: we need a list of members allowed to vote until AGM ... 71 (14:20:34) iang: we silent disenfranchised… but are we a majority ? 72 (14:20:46) dops1: To get valid results I must figure out how to get something 73 like a "members balance". If not otherwise possible, I create it from list of 74 transactions. 75 (14:20:51) dops1: This is planned for today. 76 (14:21:36) iang: ok. if we can get that out, it will help to reduce the 77 discussion on the day. 78 (14:21:54) dops1: yep, that must not happen... 79 (14:21:58) dops1: (the discussion) 80 (14:22:08) iang: OK - so is there one resignation from the membership? 81 (14:23:11) egal: correct ... alexander prinsier ... 82 (14:26:08) iang: ok - I can’t see the email :( is there any reason to believe 83 we shouldn’t accept the resignation? 84 (14:27:52) egal: it was sent to me ... ;-) 85 (14:28:00) dops1: He is paid up. 86 (14:28:14) egal: let me forward this mail to us ... ;-) 87 (14:28:18) iang: thanks 88 (14:28:53) egal: done 89 (14:30:24) iang: OK I see that. I see no reason to not accept, we should always 90 be kind to our people who feel their time is up. 91 (14:30:32) iang: These rules do not apply to Eva tho ;-) 92 (14:30:48) iang: Who we have under point 4 for discussions today hopefully 93 (14:31:10) iang: Resolved, to accept the resignation of Alexander P and to 94 thank him for his many years of membership. 95 (14:31:16) egal: second and aye 96 (14:31:20) iang: Aye. 97 (14:31:25) dops1: aye 98 (14:31:39) iang: Motion carried. 99 (14:31:51) iang: Are there any other matters to do with membership and the 100 association? 101 (14:32:05) iang: Oh - yes - Sebastian. 102 (14:32:41) iang: I found in the private list of the board that Sebastian K had 103 attempted to resign. He was possibly the second missing resignation. Has anyone 104 confirmed this matches? 105 (14:33:05) iang: @eva I think it was you chasing it for the minutes of the AGM 106 but my memory is ancient old and slow... 107 (14:33:32) katzazi: no I was stumbling over it in the minutes of a board 108 meeting and then found no further reference to it 109 (14:33:45) katzazi: no need to know this for any GM minutes that I was asked to 110 do 111 (14:34:13) iang: OK. Does anyone know Sebastian? 112 (14:34:32) egal: @iang ... you and me ... ;-) 113 (14:34:37) egal: personally ... ;-) 114 (14:35:11) iang: aha - could you reach out to him and say “old board appeared 115 to have not responded to your request to resign, do you still consider yourself 116 having resigned?” 117 (14:36:13) iang: I read the emails surrounding the board’s treatment of the 118 affair, suffice to say … I’m not recommending we follow their approach ;0 119 (14:36:16) iang: ;) 120 (14:36:35) egal: agreed to ian ... 121 (14:36:51) egal: i wanted to contact him by this week ... but ran out of time 122 ... ;-( 123 (14:37:09) iang: ok cool. 124 (14:37:12) egal: will try to contact him again (have some secure-u things for 125 him, too) 126 (14:37:33) iang: Who was the other member that we had identified as resigning - 127 and was he accepted as well? 128 (14:37:35) katzazi: egal: I will be in that area this week, you are not coming 129 as well, correct? 130 (14:38:18) egal: @katzazi ... not as far as i know ... ;-( 131 (14:38:20) iang: ok. let’s move on. 132 (14:38:30) iang: 2. AGM preparation by dirk 133 (14:38:39) iang: and our big dependency - financial report - @dops1 134 (14:38:51) GuKKDevel: wytze was the other one, dirk wanted to contact 135 (14:39:04) egal: correct ... will do it, too ... 136 (14:39:44) dops1: I created a template for the new report with first basic data 137 here: https://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/FinancialReport/2016 138 (14:40:14) dops1: For the balance a document attached to the current meeting 139 provides numbers: https://wiki.cacert.org/Brain/CAcertInc/Committee/ 140 MeetingAgendasAndMinutes/2016-12-11?action=AttachFile&do=view&target= 141 account.financial.report_fy2015_16_balancesheet.pdf 142 (14:40:37) dops1: (to be added to the wiki page, again not linked in the wiki 143 text) 144 (14:41:15) dops1: Assets minus the at end of FY open secure-u invoice is a 145 total of 3706.51 AUD. 146 (14:41:37) dops1: But our expenses are currently greate that the income. 147 (14:42:58) dops1: I guess the the ration from the balance is still valid, so 148 expenses are roughly 1.5 times the income. 149 (14:43:27) dops1: Although there were gratious donations. 150 (14:45:04) iang: So, actually income looks slightly up and expensies look down? 151 (14:45:41) iang: Is the expenses being down because of just the way the bills 152 end up falling … we’ve got a pending bill which will wipe any difference? 153 (14:45:50) dops1: The differences on the wiki page are old from last year - yet 154 to be prepared :-) 155 (14:45:59) iang: ah! 156 (14:46:34) dops1: On the wiki please look only at the column "2015/2016" 157 (14:47:44) iang: Ah - so still lots of work to be done there. OK but progress. 158 (14:47:50) iang: wel good news. 159 (14:49:39) iang: ok. so perhaps better to defer much discussion until it’s 160 done. 161 (14:49:59) iang: But in essence - are we in good shape to present the numbers 162 at the AGM? 163 (14:50:20) dops1: At the end of the day I think so... 164 (14:50:56) iang: end of today? Super. If you can put an email out to point 165 peopel at the basics that would help. 166 (14:51:05) dops1: When the remaining parts are filled in and differences to 167 last year are shown. Btw, the wiki is ugly. 168 (14:51:50) iang: ugly … in what way? Aesthetically? Unpleasing numbers? 169 (14:52:31) dops1: for editing 170 (14:53:23) dops1: ok, next. Board report? 171 (14:53:42) iang: Yep. 172 (14:53:56) iang: OK, so I made a start at board report last week https:// 173 wiki.cacert.org/AGM/BoardReport/2016 174 (14:54:14) iang: and quickly found I had a problem - half of it has to be the 175 board report from the last board … 176 (14:54:45) iang: which sucked me into the topic of the Special Report as per 177 SGM … So I’ve made a start at that at: https://wiki.cacert.org/CAcertInc/ 178 SpecialReport2016 179 (14:55:16) iang: Now, that’s much bigger than the Board report. But it contains 180 the same content, more or less, for that section. So it sort of has to come 181 first. 182 (14:55:54) katzazi: thank you ian for finally starting that :) 183 (14:55:56) iang: Now, Eva reminds me (!!!) that the Special Report should be 184 added to by all people… so comment and critique should be added in there. 185 (14:55:59) egal: which means: you give summary for the last board on 2015/2016 186 board report ... and point to the "bigger" one ... 187 (14:56:21) egal: ... and i have to summarize the time from summer to november 188 ... 189 (14:56:52) katzazi: uhm actually, the motion for that reoport was: 190 (14:56:53) katzazi: 6. RESOLVED, the new committee is to create a detailed and 191 fully transparent, uncensored report of the old committee's activities 192 since the AGM to which all members of the community may contribute. This report 193 is to be presented to a general meeting for ratification. 194 (14:56:56) iang: But if you want to add a critique, it might be easier to add 195 it in, in a way that is stylistically different so we can see what you’re 196 critiquing and fix it up. 197 (14:57:08) katzazi: it cannot be ratified ad this AGM as it is not part of the 198 invitation, or was it? 199 (14:57:38) egal: "a general meeting" may be AGM or SGM ... ;-) 200 (14:57:45) katzazi: (sorry just editied those SGM minutes) 201 (14:57:49) katzazi: yes egal 202 (14:58:28) iang: oh ok - good point. 203 (14:58:34) katzazi: (but there has to be the "usual" board report, anyway) 204 (14:59:01) iang: just added the resolution in for completeness. 205 (14:59:27) katzazi: you can use an anchored link for that, that directly points 206 to the resolution 207 (14:59:29) iang: well we can probably discuss it under Board report at least. 208 (14:59:52) iang: link … where is? 209 (15:00:09) katzazi: https://wiki.cacert.org/SGM/20160409#sgm20160409.7 210 (15:00:11) egal: that's what i said: small summary in this boards report 211 ... with a link to the complete one ... 212 (15:00:12) katzazi: should work 213 (15:00:21) iang: Anyway. Just to notify you all - this is a work in progress. 214 ANd you should all look and read and critique and fill in the gaps... 215 (15:00:41) iang: I don’t need to notify Eva who has already sent me substantial 216 critique … But EVERYONE ELSE!!!! 217 (15:00:47) egal: i don't think, that the report for 2015/2016 has to 218 contain every single detail of the last board ...;-) 219 (15:00:50) katzazi: :) 220 (15:01:32) iang: No, it doesn’t. So I originally had all that text in the 221 future Board report but it got a bit overweight and fell over. Now pulled out 222 into its own Special Report 223 (15:03:17) iang: OK. 224 (15:03:35) iang: Moving on…. Other reports? 225 (15:03:54) iang: I imagine the Arbitrators can knock up a little report fairly 226 easily… 227 (15:04:02) katzazi: it already was 228 (15:04:06) katzazi: only has to be placed in the wiki 229 (15:04:25) iang: Ah super. 230 (15:04:43) katzazi: and I'm designing something for PolG as well - which 231 also could go there - but both are no "real" team reports as reports of other 232 heads 233 (15:05:03) egal: working on "my" reports ... 234 (15:09:10) egal: a small status from my site to one "action item" for AGM: up 235 to now i did not receive any nominations ... 236 (15:09:45) egal: (well ... it's still some hours left to keep the 237 7-days-deadline ... ;-) ) 238 (15:09:45) katzazi: I plan to add some today 239 (15:10:11) dops1: Ahem ... The Inc. should care that regarding board elections 240 big surprises are avoided. 241 (15:10:21) dops1: Imagine some deja-vu 242 (15:10:40) egal: ACK to dops ... ;-) 243 (15:10:42) katzazi: there is a ruling from last AGM about nominations of board 244 candidates 245 (15:11:13) iang: please summarise ? 246 (15:11:16) katzazi: because I named some too late, last time ... that is likely 247 to kick in for my nominations, again ... 248 (15:11:42) katzazi: iang: not really worth it - it was about which are valid 249 when slightly send before or after deadline 250 (15:12:17) katzazi: it only effectively would make a difference if there would 251 be a lot of valid ones send much earlier, as last time 252 (15:12:31) iang: Ah - sure - in that if it effects candidates, then yes but if 253 not then no. 254 (15:12:42) iang: thansk 255 (15:13:19) iang: So, reports by teams, presentations-not-reports from Arb & 256 Pol, … any others? 257 (15:13:35) iang: 2.4 - payments for members done? 258 (15:13:49) iang: @dops1 you mentioned you would be able to summarise that to 259 members today? 260 (15:15:04) dops1: I hope so. OpenERP doesn't provide reliable overviews about 261 payments. So in worst case I need to extract the base data and do it outside of 262 it. 263 (15:15:17) iang: ok. good luck! 264 (15:15:33) dops1: We have an item "last complete reconcilation", but it is not 265 possible to see behind it and check for errors in data input. 266 (15:15:34) iang: Moving on … 3. DRO by board. 267 (15:16:03) katzazi: uhm another question to AGM: will board / secretary remind 268 about proxy / early votes? 269 (15:16:15) iang: ah yes please :) 270 (15:16:41) egal: yep ... i plan to send out another mail as soon as the 271 nominations-deadline passed ... with the latest updates 272 (15:16:56) katzazi: thank you egal 273 (15:17:20) iang: ok … DRO - who wishes to summarise? 274 (15:17:27) egal: board got an email from arbitration about DRO ... (that's 275 why this was added to the agenda ... ;-) ) 276 (15:18:46) iang: just one? ;-) is this about proposing Iang as DRO? 277 (15:18:58) egal: yep ... ;-) 278 (15:19:02) iang: I’d also add that there is now a new Arbitration about DRO - 279 as board - as conflict of interest. 280 (15:19:16) iang: which substantially criticises the choice of Iang as DRO ;-) 281 (15:19:17) egal: (most others were private and/or to DRO ... ;-) ) 282 (15:19:38) katzazi: I am iCM of that case and don't see that critic 283 (15:19:38) egal: @iang as long as you are in board ... ;-) 284 (15:20:29) katzazi: the CoI that was mentioned in that case was about board as 285 such not about board-members as all board-members were exchanged in between 286 (uhm maybe not Ben, did not look that up) 287 (15:21:06) egal: @iang ... you plan to be nominated as a committee member for 288 the next AGM? ;-) 289 (15:21:53) dops1: probably ... but do you plan to accept it? 290 (15:22:04) iang: @egal I won’t accept board this AGM 291 (15:23:13) dops1: ok, so soon there won't be a CoI for Ian :-) 292 (15:23:35) egal: @dops1: yep ... but you was typing faster ... ;-) 293 (15:24:12) iang: Ah - well. I actually have other CoIs to report… 294 (15:24:18) iang: important ones, not makeup ones :) 295 (15:26:05) iang: The important conflict I might have is that I might be 296 building a DR system for commercial purposes … so will likely have strong 297 interests in certain things which may spill over into CAcert. 298 (15:27:08) katzazi: "might" means "currently doing"? 299 (15:27:27) katzazi: and is "strong interests" conflicting? 300 (15:27:31) katzazi: or improving? 301 (15:27:35) iang: As in, it might be part of $day job to do DRO-like activities. 302 And it would involve writing new equivalents to DRP, CCA, etc. 303 (15:27:56) iang: Currently doing but informally. There is a move to make it a 304 formal deliverable. 305 (15:28:32) katzazi: how would that be a conflict with CAcert? 306 (15:28:35) iang: that move might or might not happen. In practice, I’ve been 307 “selling” the process for a year and a half now. Things are starting to move. 308 (15:29:07) iang: Because, I might find changes and benefits and ways .. that I 309 would then seek to export into CAcert. 310 (15:29:29) katzazi: via PolG? 311 (15:29:55) iang: To say more, I would have to request a private board meeting. 312 Another conflict is that work requires NDAs over everything including 313 permission to go to the bathroom… 314 (15:29:56) dops1: IMO it is up to the community to judge about the impact of 315 the CoI. 316 (15:30:09) iang: via PolG, yes. 317 (15:30:23) katzazi: PolG is no conflict with executive, there is a ruling 318 (15:30:44) dops1: Personally I cant't imagine right now how to try to make a 319 bug business within CAcert, and I absolutely trust you to not trying to ruin 320 CAcert. 321 (15:31:18) iang: Thank you for that - but please note that others don’t think 322 that way. It is too easy to see demons under the bed. 323 (15:31:22) dops1: But still it is a conflict where one have to decide whether 324 soing the same work for $ or for honor. 325 (15:32:01) iang: And to an extent people are right to scrutinise. I myself had 326 to kill three commercial attempts to “help” CAcert. 327 (15:32:07) dops1: I meant "big business" of course, not the other ;-) 328 (15:32:20) katzazi: so the conflict is not there at the moment and unknown if 329 it would happen, Ian probably would be responsible to name it if it comes up - 330 in PolG it is required! - he could be removed from the post, then 331 (15:32:58) iang: Well the benefit there is that if something is good and is 332 copied 3 times, only the first pays. CAcert can benefit if new work can be 333 copied easily, and BigCorp can benefit from prior work that CAcert has done 334 already. 335 (15:33:17) katzazi: uhm can it be copied with NDAs? 336 (15:33:59) iang: nothing is easy under NDAs ;-) no I mean that the documents 337 would need to be broadly published anyway. 338 (15:34:16) iang: So that isn’t an issue. 339 (15:36:39) iang: Some of you may have seen my work in the past with social 340 savings groups - this is similar work related to payments for diaspora and 341 remittances. In need of DR to make the same fabric as CAcert. Based out of the 342 Caribbean, which has large numbers of expatriate workers doing lots of tiny 343 remittances. 344 (15:37:49) iang: So anyway. The point is that I’m doing similar work. This 345 could lead to conflict. We’ll have to watch that. 346 (15:38:32) katzazi: you would be watched by arbitrators 347 (15:39:05) iang: of course. 348 (15:39:26) iang: anyway. I’d also like to talk about the new case. 349 (15:41:06) egal: the agenda-item is "DRO", not "DRO-issues" ... ;-) 350 (15:41:48) iang: well this case speaks directly to DRO ;-) it is a conflict of 351 interest case against board as DRO … so hard to see how it doesn’t fit in 352 (15:41:52) egal: an ... i'm slowly running out of time for today ... 353 around 45 minutes left ... ;-) 354 (15:44:39) iang: OK. As chair, being mindful of the time, should we push on? 355 (15:44:53) iang: I’m happy to defer the discussion abotu the case. 356 (15:45:28) egal: we still have 45 minutes ... ;-) 357 (15:46:09) iang: OK, I’ll add it at end if we don’t get to it. 358 (15:46:21) iang: 4. Resignations in Arbtiration by Dirk, who isn’t in 359 Arbitration... 360 (15:46:41) iang: This presumably is about Eva’s resignation. Who has tendered 361 and deserves a response from board. 362 (15:46:59) iang: Now, I’ve said a lot. Eva has said a LOT … can we hear from 363 @dops1 and @egal? 364 (15:47:08) egal: it was added by me ... ;-) 365 (15:47:20) egal: and we still have magu ... 366 (15:47:30) egal: (released as CM, but not as A up to now) 367 (15:48:05) iang: ok - let’s order them. Who first? 368 (15:48:31) egal: i suggest: magu ... it's faster ... ;-) 369 (15:49:02) iang: Ha ok. Now, are we talking about (a ) resignation from running 370 active cases, or (b ) resignation as an arbitrator on the list? Or both... 371 (15:49:22) egal: eva summarized the pending cases from him ... and as far as i 372 understand her mail we can now accept his resignation as A ... 373 (15:49:41) iang: @katzazi is that a fair summary? 374 (15:50:15) egal: (we did not release him from A due to the amout of cases he 375 had in summer ... now the number of cases, where he is A is lower ...) 376 (15:50:16) katzazi: well I don't believe that we will get some more work 377 from his side, at least if things don't change a lot 378 (15:50:29) egal: (please correct me, if i'm, wrong) 379 (15:50:40) katzazi: by 2 cases. But PD already hinted to me that he could move 380 one where he is CM to another A as well 381 (15:51:02) katzazi: and I believe at least one other case seems to be executed 382 according to the documentation 383 (15:51:11) iang: Sure, I understand the part about work. However, have we 384 identified new As for each active / running case? 385 (15:51:27) katzazi: no, that would be task for CM of that case if there is a CM 386 (15:51:49) katzazi: not board not DRO 387 (15:51:52) iang: Hmmm… you’re saying that … if the A resigns, it is up to the 388 CM to find a new A? 389 (15:52:19) egal: isn't it the job of the CM to select A? ... ;-) 390 (15:52:24) katzazi: well only hint we have in policies is that CM selcts A 391 (15:52:35) katzazi: and I believe it was done like this before 392 (15:52:57) iang: Currently yes. But that is only for the first A. The policy 393 never anticipated that an A would resign mid-course. 394 (15:53:35) egal: i would read it as "if there is no A the CM select an A" ... 395 (15:53:38) katzazi: I remember at least 3 times where CM selected new A in such 396 situations, probably more 397 (15:53:44) iang: So we could say, yes, the CM selects a replacement A. But I’d 398 like to hear the Arbitrators say as a group that this is how they are going to 399 handle it. 400 (15:54:07) iang: OK - so you are saying that this custom already exists. That 401 helps. 402 (15:54:22) egal: so CM is not able to kick out an A out of a running case ... ; 403 -) 404 (15:54:44) iang: Caution is required here because Board should not interfere 405 with cases. So we need a fairly clear mandate to do anything. 406 (15:54:44) katzazi: then ask them ... I believe there is a lesson somewhat in 407 that direction - involving DRO but not quite specific and possibly it was 408 overruled by PDs ruling, anyway 409 (15:54:50) egal: (if A resigns, then there is no A anymore ... especially, if A 410 does not answer anything) 411 (15:55:35) iang: @egal yes, that too :) 412 (15:55:35) katzazi: but major point is you already removed Uli and Sebastian 413 and Uli without such a discussion and Uli had much more cases (it was the 414 bigger "damage") 415 (15:55:56) iang: Ah ok. SO we are working to stronger/bigger custom. Good. 416 (15:56:16) egal: sebastian and uli were before ... magu did not resign until 417 then ... 418 (15:56:41) egal: ... so he should have changed CM and A in his cases ... 419 (15:56:45) katzazi: ok, bad phrased, every case has same value for me - but 420 those from Magu are probably easier to distribute as they are not as many and 421 probably in a much further state 422 (15:56:50) iang: This is where having a DRO would be nice … who isn’t us. 423 (15:57:05) dops1: @egal: I second, not have resigned could make a differemce. 424 (15:57:10) katzazi: yeah it is - that's why I tried to get another DRO 425 (15:57:20) katzazi: ... one of the reasons that is 426 (15:57:20) iang: OK. So Magu has formally resigned? 427 (15:57:22) egal: releasing magu as A would have resulted in cases, which have 428 to be restarted from the beginning ... 429 (15:57:37) katzazi: shortly after SGM he resigned but you did not accept 430 (15:58:12) iang: Ah. OK. Is he still minded to resign? Is his activity at zero? 431 (15:58:24) katzazi: his mails bounces 432 (15:58:34) katzazi: primary email that is 433 (15:58:52) iang: has he resigned from CAcert Inc association? 434 (15:58:55) katzazi: activity is zero 435 (15:58:57) katzazi: yes 436 (15:59:03) katzazi: as far as I remember 437 (15:59:05) iang: has he resigned from community? 438 (15:59:11) egal: no 439 (15:59:15) katzazi: no - cannot is involved in cases 440 (15:59:20) katzazi: obviously 441 (15:59:21) dops1: aha, right, from our motion m20160702.3: "Note that the 442 arbitration area is deferred, pending advice from the arbitrators." 443 (16:00:16) iang: well spotted. OK - Eva has done the work to clarify where his 444 cases stand. As I understand it, Eva is saying that the cases can be 445 re-assigned. And to do so would be better than the alternate. 446 (16:00:46) iang: (The alternate being more zero activity and more bounced 447 emails… ) 448 (16:01:03) katzazi: well I cannot say for sure and maybe some would require 449 restarting, but I don't see an alternative as he is not answering to 450 arbitration requests 451 (16:01:40) iang: Yes. Understood. And we’re not in a good position to establish 452 “formal” advice from the arbitrators. We have to do best with the information 453 to hand. 454 (16:02:14) iang: OK. shall we put it to the vote? 455 (16:02:48) dops1: Could we accept the resignation on a "defacto base", stating 456 the the obligations are not satisfied? 457 (16:04:07) iang: That is rather tricky to interpret. 458 (16:04:40) iang: We can write anything … but how will people interpret it? It 459 could be seen as sort of retrograde sacking. Which is not what is intended. 460 (16:04:48) katzazi: do you mean that he continues to be obliged to help with 461 handover? 462 (16:05:10) iang: We can certainly ask him to continue with his obligations to 463 handover. 464 (16:05:43) dops1: Resolved, that we accept the resignation of Martin G. given 465 the fact that he didn't respond and was not reachable for CAcert for over 6 466 months, and that we can't expect any further action from him regarding 467 requested hand-overs. 468 (16:06:11) dops1: Too offensive? 469 (16:06:23) katzazi: uhm I'm not sure if you can forbid arbitrators to ask 470 for hand-overs from a member 471 (16:06:24) iang: But citing a failure of obligation is … a dispute… which 472 leaves us in a tricky position … not only from the point of view of not 473 interfering with DR, but also in that we’d have to take on the consequences. 474 (16:06:51) iang: Resolved, that we accept the resignation of Magu as 475 Arbitrator, thank him for his many years of service, ask him to help us with 476 obligations on handover, and ask the arbitrators to reassign his current cases. 477 (16:07:24) katzazi: (arbitrator team instead of arbitrators? it's mostly 478 CM role) 479 (16:07:37) iang: yes, good point. 480 (16:09:21) dops1: I second your proposal with the team clarification. Well 481 said. 482 (16:09:32) egal: second and aye ... (in case of "arbitrator team" instead of 483 "arbitrators" ... ;-) ) 484 (16:09:38) iang: and,should be Martin G. 485 (16:09:47) egal: yep 486 (16:09:57) iang: Aye. 487 (16:10:20) iang: Resolved, that we accept the resignation of Martin G. as 488 Arbitrator, thank him for his many years of service, and ask the arbitration 489 team to reassign his current cases. 490 (16:10:34) dops1: aye 491 (16:10:41) iang: assuming an Aye from @dops1 I declare the motion carried! 492 (16:10:45) iang: ah thanks. 493 (16:10:58) iang: OK! That was the fast one ;-) 494 (16:11:34) iang: Now, this is the hard one. Eva wishes to resign. For reasons 495 that are probably pretty good. 496 (16:12:13) iang: I admit I haven’t read all the emails on this thread. But the 497 general sense is that if there are too many cases against an Arbitrator, naming 498 that person for or in relation to the work of arbitration, it becomes hard to 499 continue. 500 (16:12:40) iang: We as board and arbitration as a body have to take this into 501 consideration. And policy group too. This is … a weakness? 502 (16:12:40) katzazi: I disagree with that summary 503 (16:12:52) iang: Ah. OK. How would you put it? 504 (16:13:09) katzazi: I would prefer to not discuss publicly 505 (16:13:42) iang: Hmmm…. Fair enough. Would you prefer a private meeting? Or not 506 discuss? Or discuss on private list? 507 (16:13:51) iang: Or discuss one on one? 508 (16:13:59) katzazi: some points are easy to discuss in public, but the whole 509 depth of the issue involves points that I believe don't need to be public 510 (16:14:27) iang: I think given the circumstances we as board need to bend over 511 backwards to deal with this … so happy to do it anyway you desire. 512 (16:14:49) iang: @egal how’s your time looking? 513 (16:15:16) katzazi: well, I wrote in one mail that you probably did not read a 514 proposal to continue as arb if it is possible to discuss it with a DRO as 515 person - but I asked board to NOT press anybody in that role just for that 516 option 517 (16:15:29) egal: around 16 minutes left ... ;-( ... (i'll be online 518 longer, but have to move ...) 519 (16:15:58) iang: does that mean you’ll come back after moving? 520 (16:16:00) egal: which means: around 30 minutes later i have some minutes to 521 re-read everything ...) 522 (16:16:05) katzazi: uhm continue until both DRO and me would have concluded on 523 something - and if it remains resignation that board would accept that 524 (16:16:58) egal: i'll not have much time later to continue the discussion) 525 (16:17:02) iang: oh. ok. 526 (16:17:27) katzazi: not sure if that answers your question - 1o1 would probably 527 good, but would leave rest of board out 528 (16:17:43) iang: So, we’re going to run out of time to talk about it. I’d 529 rather not start a discussion of such gravity only to cut it short. Seems 530 highly unfair. 531 (16:17:51) iang: OTOH, leaving the issue dangling is also unfair. 532 (16:17:59) dops1: To order the dependencies: If I understand it right it's 533 this: 1. Find DRO 2. DRO and Eva discuss issues 3. Board decides about 534 resignation. 535 (16:18:03) katzazi: anyway my last mail on that topic, that was only send to 536 private addresses probably sums it up - and it is the last that I intended to 537 send 538 (16:18:31) dops1: 2a. Eva finally decides about holding the resignation 539 (16:19:06) katzazi: @dops1 that would have been the case if there is a 540 perspective of having DRO quickly - and without pressing someone in that role - 541 I don't think that this is the case at the moment 542 (16:19:47) iang: Well, it’s hard to press anyone from Board into that role. 543 Especially me. 544 (16:20:00) katzazi: I believe my reasons why I don't want keep up that 545 proposal if DRO=board are valid, one is that discussion of such things is not 546 something that really should be public as I believe 547 (16:20:23) iang: Might be another story after AGM. But even then I wonder why 548 people want me in as DRO as I tend to … make decisions fast and furious :) 549 (16:20:44) katzazi: easy to answer: you make decision 550 (16:21:06) katzazi: and you try to listen and would be up to correct a decision 551 if necessary 552 (16:21:40) iang: DRO=board is a stopgap measure as is board= any other team 553 leader or etc. 554 (16:22:44) iang: Anyway. I feel that we’re going to have to take this out of 555 the meeting :) and keep discussing. Just because time is almost over. 556 (16:22:48) grendl: rehu 557 (16:23:46) iang: So as Chair I feel impelled to defer the discussion. MOve on. 558 Apologies to eva for harsh treatment. 559 (16:23:53) katzazi: uhm "keep discussing" is a "nice" way to phrase it ... 560 (16:24:18) iang: 5. Old board - report - already covered in previous, up and on 561 wiki as a start https://wiki.cacert.org/CAcertInc/SpecialReport2016 562 (16:24:22) dops1: @grendl: Hi. Feel free to step in and comment if you like. 563 (16:24:23) iang: Please contribute… 564 (16:25:00) iang: 6. Status of move - there is an email from Etienne to respond 565 to. I haven’t had the time. 566 (16:25:18) iang: But I should make time. There are substantive points. 567 (16:25:27) iang: anything else there? 568 (16:25:44) iang: if not I’d like to move on to question time… and in parallel 569 agree on next meeting. 570 (16:26:15) grendl: dops1: inthe moment im to tired to do anything well 571 (16:26:15) iang: @egal I think we need one more meeting to clarify / finish / 572 agree on the financial numbers and get stuff done. 573 (16:26:47) dops1: The last time I'll be available for a meeting is Thursday 574 evening, starting at 18 UTC. 575 (16:27:12) iang: The AGM is 2016-12-18 20:30 UTC 576 (16:27:23) iang: I can make myself available then. @dops1 ? 577 (16:29:11) egal: thursday evening should fit ... ;-) 578 (16:29:23) egal: (if earlier, it whould be better ... ;-) ) 579 (16:29:24) dops1: ok, fine 580 (16:29:28) iang: Super - can you call the meeting? And remind me of the minute 581 to turn up ;) 582 (16:29:37) egal: sure ... 583 (16:29:43) iang: great. 584 (16:29:44) dops1: Tue/Wed is also possible for me 585 (16:30:30) iang: For me too, depending on what times. 586 (16:31:22) iang: OK that’s over to @egal to finesse. I don’t see any questions 587 coming in. If no more, let’s declare the meeting closed in a formal setting at 588 least.
Attached FilesTo refer to attachments on a page, use attachment:filename, as shown below in the list of files. Do NOT use the URL of the [get] link, since this is subject to change and can break easily.
You are not allowed to attach a file to this page.