Meeting log for 2009-09-16

Wasn't at the meeting, so didn't notice this hadn't been sent yet.
Good to get it out this meeting, though:

HIGHLIGHTS

21:00:14 <bdale> [item 1, Opening] Welcome to today's Software in the
Public Interest board of directors meeting, which is now called to
order. Today's agenda and details of pending resolutions can be found
on the web at:
http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2009/2009-09-16.html

[item 2, Roll Call]

21:00:19 <Hydroxide> Jimmy Kaplowitz
21:00:20 <cdlu> David Graham
21:00:23 <bdale> Bdale Garbee
21:00:29 <Noodles> Hydroxide: No, I don't have it.
21:00:39 <Noodles> Jonathan McDowell
21:00:39 <schultmc> Michael Schultheiss
21:01:10 <linuxpoet> Joshua Drake
21:04:48 <zobel> Martin Zobel-Heleas
21:10:05 <Hydroxide> <Ganneff> Joerg Jaspert

[item 3, President's Report]

<bdale> Nothing particularly exciting to report this month. Next week
I'll be in Portland for LinuxCon and Columbus for the Ohio LinuxFest.

[item 4, Treasurer's Report]

<schultmc> A routine treasurer's report is in the agenda. I'm again
happy to see projects spending funds rather than continuing to hoard
them.

[item 5, Secretary's report]

<bdale> In Martin's absence, I'll note the one item in the agenda.. a
lapsed invite.

[item 6, Outstanding minutes]

<Hydroxide> sorry ... yeah I have been busy preparing a NYLUG
presentation for tonight

[item 7, Items up for discussion]

[item 7.1, SPI resolution 2009-09-16.mcs.1 (Establishing an additional SPI bank account)]

<Hydroxide> linuxpoet: banks like to see a resolution authorizing bank
account openings

voting results for "bank account resolution": Yes: 8

[item 7.2, SPI Resolution 2009-09-08.jrk.1 (Path64 as associated project)]

voting results for "Path64 resolution": Yes: 8

[item 7.3, SPI Resolution 2009-09-08.jrk.2 (OSUNIX as associated project)]

voting results for "OSUNIX resolution": Yes: 8

[item 7.4, SPI Resolution 2009-09-08.dbg.1 (Contributing membership expiry)]

<Noodles> I would want to see a ping-people-after-no-vote or a
2-missed-vote-requirement. I didn't propose an amendment because
there seemed to be a feeling amongst the members that they didn't want
it voted on this meeting but wanted more of a heads up.

<cdlu> I'd like to defer the resolution now that it's out for all to
see and discuss :)

[item 8, Any other business]

<cdlu> brief note, doesn't need to go on the record. OFTC will be
approaching SPI about our next election soon.

<Ganneff> i have on emore thing, just informational: down in .tw next
week, discussion of .tw and spi and whatever they want down there.

[item 9, Next board meeting]
<bdale> 14 October at 20:00 UTC

21:19:54 <bdale> *GAVEL*

TIMED LOG

21:00:12 <bdale> *GAVEL*
21:00:14 <bdale> [item 1, Opening] Welcome to today's Software in the Public Interest board of directors meeting, which is now called to order.
21:00:14 <bdale> Today's agenda and details of pending resolutions can be found on the web at: http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2009/2009-09-16.html
21:00:14 <bdale> [item 2, Roll Call]
21:00:14 <bdale> Board members, please state your name for the record. As we have nine board members, quorum for today's meeting is six.
21:00:16 <bdale> Guests (including board advisors), please /msg your names to zobel if you wish your attendance to be recorded in the minutes of this meeting.
21:00:19 <Hydroxide> Jimmy Kaplowitz
21:00:20 <cdlu> David Graham
21:00:23 <bdale> Bdale Garbee
21:00:29 <Noodles> Hydroxide: No, I don't have it.
21:00:39 <Noodles> Jonathan McDowell
21:00:39 <schultmc> Michael Schultheiss
21:00:45 <Hydroxide> Noodles: in a few seconds you will - it's pretty easy to use if you're willing
21:01:05 <bdale> linuxpoet: ?
21:01:10 <linuxpoet> Joshua Drake
21:01:11 <linuxpoet> sorry
21:01:14 <Noodles> I think it's probably better if I have time to look at it *before* the first meeting I use it in. ;)
21:01:15 <bdale> cool, quorum
21:01:30 <Hydroxide> Noodles: ok :)
21:01:30 <bdale> anyone else we're expecting? I know Martin sent tentative regrets.
21:01:37 <schultmc> luk?
21:01:47 <Hydroxide> luk_:
21:01:58 <bdale> Ganneff: ?
21:02:37 <bdale> given that we have quorum, I'm inclined to proceed, we'll not others if they join us later
21:02:49 <bdale> [item 3, President's Report]
21:02:50 <bdale> Nothing particularly exciting to report this month.
21:02:50 <bdale> Next week I'll be in Portland for LinuxCon and Columbus for the Ohio LinuxFest.
21:03:02 <bdale> [item 4, Treasurer's Report]
21:03:02 <bdale> Michael?
21:03:36 <schultmc> A routine treasurer's report is in the agenda. I'm again happy to see projects spending funds rather than continuing to hoard them.
21:03:45 <bdale> agreed
21:04:03 <bdale> any questions from the board?
21:04:21 <Noodles> Not from me.
21:04:27 <cdlu> not from me
21:04:30 <bdale> [item 5, Secretary's report]
21:04:47 <cdlu> in absentia
21:04:48 <bdale> In Martin's absence, I'll note the one item in the agenda.. a lapsed invite.
21:04:48 <zobel> Martin Zobel-Heleas
21:04:58 <zobel> sorry for being late.
21:05:01 <bdale> zobel: welcome! to the meeting and to your new role!
21:05:10 <bdale> zobel: anything to add to your report?
21:05:15 <zobel> no.
21:05:28 <bdale> ok
21:05:34 <bdale> [item 6, Outstanding minutes]
21:05:34 <bdale> Martin?
21:05:58 <zobel> Hydroxide: did you finish yours?
21:06:17 <bdale> we appear to have one set to vote on, from last month
21:06:43 <bdale> or not?
21:06:44 <zobel> i havend seen any from Hydroxide send to secretary, so we don't have the one from last month
21:06:59 <bdale> ok, I see, it's on the agenda but without a link to the draft ... never mind
21:07:00 <Noodles> Yeah, they haven't been sent that I've seen either so I don't think there's anything to vote on.
21:07:16 <bdale> hopefully we can have those ready by our next meeting
21:07:25 <Hydroxide> sorry ... yeah I have been busy preparing a NYLUG presentation for tonight
21:07:35 <bdale> [item 7, Items up for discussion]
21:07:36 <bdale> [item 7.1, SPI resolution 2009-09-16.mcs.1 (Establishing an additional SPI bank account)]
21:07:36 <bdale> This seems straight-forward to me. Michael?
21:07:38 <Hydroxide> I'll have it by October.
21:07:49 <linuxpoet> Why do we need a resolution for this?
21:08:02 <bdale> linuxpoet: not clear to me either, really
21:08:05 <linuxpoet> This is purely operational and falls directly under treasurer duties (I would think)
21:08:06 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: banks like to see a resolution authorizing bank account openings
21:08:11 <linuxpoet> Oh
21:08:12 <Hydroxide> linuxpoet: that's purely it
21:08:12 <linuxpoet> o.k.
21:08:12 <bdale> oh, right
21:08:13 <linuxpoet> :)
21:08:22 <Hydroxide> zobel: do you have the vote script?
21:08:22 * cdlu moves the motion
21:08:23 <bdale> ok, fair enough. any dicussion, or can we vote?
21:08:26 <schultmc> linuxpoet: banks tend to require resolutions for corporate accounts
21:08:29 <zobel> Hydroxide: no
21:08:33 <Hydroxide> zobel: will set you up late
21:08:34 <Hydroxide> +r
21:08:49 <bdale> Hydroxide: will you run the votes today, then, please?
21:09:06 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 7 people (zobel,hydroxide,bdale,linuxpoet,schultmc,cdlu,noodles) allowed to vote on bank account resolution. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
21:09:10 <Hydroxide> yes
21:09:13 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
21:09:13 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
21:09:14 <schultmc> !vote yes
21:09:14 <bdale> !vote yes
21:09:18 <zobel> !vote yes
21:09:18 <Noodles> !vote yes
21:09:18 <cdlu> !vote yes
21:09:22 <Ganneff> ooooh. totally missed this. :(
21:09:29 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: did you sign in?
21:09:36 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: this is the first vote
21:09:44 <bdale> Ganneff: sign in and vote ... and we won't count you late. ;-)
21:09:45 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: I can note your vote even if I didn't tell the voting script
21:09:52 <Hydroxide> or zobel can
21:09:52 <Hydroxide> :)
21:09:58 <Ganneff> !vote yes
21:10:04 <cdlu> :)
21:10:05 <Hydroxide> <Ganneff> Joerg Jaspert
21:10:10 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "bank account resolution": Yes: 7, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
21:10:13 <Hydroxide> Voting for "bank account resolution" closed.
21:10:17 <bdale> thanks
21:10:19 <Hydroxide> CORRECTION: 8 yes, 0 abstain, 0 missing
21:10:35 <Hydroxide> np
21:10:40 <bdale> [item 7.2, SPI Resolution 2009-09-08.jrk.1 (Path64 as associated project)]
21:10:47 <bdale> as I don't see Christopher here, Jimmy?
21:10:51 <Hydroxide> any questions from people who haven't been reading email? :)
21:11:02 <bdale> this one seems ok to me
21:11:06 <Hydroxide> to me too
21:11:14 <bdale> any discussion?
21:11:30 * Hydroxide ready to vote unless there are questions
21:11:43 <cdlu> it (and the next one) seem to have generated no controversy whatsoever
21:11:46 <Hydroxide> ok
21:11:51 <cdlu> and people have had time to complain, so I think it's fine :)
21:11:51 <bdale> I agree, let's vote on them
21:12:02 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 8 people (zobel,hydroxide,bdale,linuxpoet,schultmc,cdlu,noodles,ganneff) allowed to vote on Path64 resolution. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
21:12:07 <Noodles> !vote yes
21:12:08 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
21:12:09 <schultmc> !vote yes
21:12:11 <bdale> !vote yes
21:12:12 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
21:12:15 <cdlu> !vote yes
21:12:16 <Ganneff> !vote yes
21:12:17 <zobel> !vote yes
21:12:23 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "Path64 resolution": Yes: 8, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
21:12:26 <Hydroxide> Voting for "Path64 resolution" closed.
21:12:30 <Hydroxide> unanimously passes.
21:12:38 <bdale> [item 7.3, SPI Resolution 2009-09-08.jrk.2 (OSUNIX as associated project)]
21:12:46 <bdale> any discussion on this one? I'm satisfied by the SFLC response.
21:12:50 <Hydroxide> as am I.
21:13:03 <Noodles> Yeah, I read some of the old archives and the letter and I'm happy with SFLC response.
21:13:15 <Hydroxide> ok... ready to vote?
21:13:19 <bdale> I am
21:13:25 <Hydroxide> Voting started, 8 people (zobel,hydroxide,bdale,linuxpoet,schultmc,cdlu,noodles,ganneff) allowed to vote on OSUNIX resolution. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
21:13:29 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
21:13:30 <schultmc> !vote yes
21:13:30 <bdale> !vote yes
21:13:31 <Noodles> !vote yes
21:13:33 <linuxpoet> !vote yes
21:13:39 <zobel> !vote yes
21:13:40 <Ganneff> !vote yes
21:13:48 <cdlu> !vote yes
21:13:51 <Hydroxide> Current voting results for "OSUNIX resolution": Yes: 8, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
21:13:54 <Hydroxide> unanimously passes
21:13:57 <Hydroxide> Voting for "OSUNIX resolution" closed.
21:14:04 <bdale> [item 7.4, SPI Resolution 2009-09-08.dbg.1 (Contributing membership expiry)]
21:14:04 <bdale> There was a bunch of discussion about this on-channel but I gather no formal amendments were proposed?
21:14:04 <bdale> I generally support this resolution, but personally would prefer a ping-those-who-don't-vote alternative to the current paragraph 5.
21:14:04 <bdale> David, want to add anything?
21:14:23 <Hydroxide> who wants to do the honor of emailing codestr0m (CCing board@ and optionally secretary@) to notify him and request acceptance?
21:14:24 <cdlu> it's generated a lot of discussion but no amendments or counter-proposals
21:14:29 <Noodles> I would want to see a ping-people-after-no-vote or a 2-missed-vote-requirement.
21:14:42 <bdale> Hydroxide: zobel can do that... ;-)
21:14:47 <Hydroxide> bdale: ok :)
21:14:51 <Noodles> I didn't propose an amendment because there seemed to be a feeling amongst the members that they didn't want it voted on this meeting but wanted more of a heads up.
21:14:55 <zobel> will do, but not now.
21:14:55 <bdale> zobel: I'll help if you like
21:15:02 <cdlu> noodles, I'd be good with something like that, although I don't want to add any workload to membership ctte
21:15:02 <bdale> sure, no huge rush
21:15:08 <Hydroxide> zobel: ok. I don't think we're going to have a lapsed invitation this time :)
21:15:09 <cdlu> idea is something that's easy clear and largely automated
21:15:11 <jberkus> bdale, cdlu: amendments were proposeld
21:15:17 <Noodles> cdlu: I think the "auto-ping" thing if it /can/ be automated is best?
21:15:19 <cdlu> jberkus, changes were suggested
21:15:23 <Hydroxide> jberkus: general ideas were proposed - no particular wording
21:15:27 <cdlu> Noodles, likely yes
21:15:29 * bdale is behind on email, as usual
21:15:40 <schultmc> cdlu: if we can fix the membership app, the workload wouldn't be overwhelming
21:15:51 <linuxpoet> That's on me
21:15:58 * Hydroxide moves that we all try to work together and with the members to come up with an amended/alternative resolution to vote on in October, and not vote on cdlu's today
21:16:00 <cdlu> schultmc, ok, well I defer to your judgement on implementation
21:16:02 <linuxpoet> We have a volunteer I just to be honest have been slacking
21:16:10 <cdlu> how would membership ctte like to do this? (answer on list)
21:16:12 - MrBeige!~richard(at)c-76-30-67-89(dot)hsd1(dot)tx(dot)comcast(dot)net has joined #spi
21:16:17 <bdale> cdlu: are you ok with Hydroxide's suggestion?
21:16:19 <cdlu> I'd like to defer the resolution now that it's out for all to see and discuss :)
21:16:27 <schultmc> cdlu: luk or I can follow up on list
21:16:29 <cdlu> ya, that's fine
21:16:32 <bdale> ok
21:16:33 <cdlu> schultmc, great, thanks
21:16:36 <schultmc> or Maulkin if he's still on the ctte
21:16:46 <cdlu> I think Maulkin's busy trying to save the world
21:16:50 <bdale> then we'll defer this to next month. if folks have time to stay on channel and discuss after the meeting closes, that might be productive.
21:16:59 <bdale> [item 8, Any other business]
21:16:59 <bdale> Do any board members have other items for discussion they would like to address briefly?
21:17:13 <zobel> no
21:17:16 <Noodles> We mentioned moving the day for meetings last month.
21:17:26 <Ganneff> ay
21:17:29 <Noodles> I think Ganneff prefered a week earlier?
21:17:35 <Maulkin> Hrm?
21:17:37 <cdlu> brief note, doesn't need to go on the record. OFTC will be approaching SPI about our next election soon.
21:17:40 <Maulkin> What what?
21:17:41 <Ganneff> or later.
21:17:44 <schultmc> Not Monday or Not 1st Wednesday are fine with me
21:17:53 <Noodles> I didn't like last Wednesday of the month. :)
21:17:59 <Noodles> 2nd Wednesday didn't seem to upset anyone?
21:18:02 <Ganneff> right. so one week earlier
21:18:10 <bdale> next month, I'll be in Tokyo on the 21st, so a move to a week earlier would be good for me ... a week later and I'd still be in Japan
21:18:29 <bdale> so we're talking about 14 October at 20:00 UTC?
21:18:30 <Ganneff> i have on emore thing, just informational: down in .tw next week, discussion of .tw and spi and whatever they want down there.
21:18:32 * cdlu is wide open
21:18:32 <Noodles> I'm in California for both the 14th and 21st next month.
21:18:41 <bdale> Ganneff: we'll look forward to a report
21:18:46 <Noodles> Working, so I might have to miss the meeting, but I'll do my best to clear time for it.
21:18:49 * Hydroxide moves to move our default meeting time, starting next month, to 2nd wednesday of the month at 20:00 UTC
21:19:03 <Hydroxide> Noodles: welcome to how all of us in the US cope with the meeting time :)
21:19:05 <bdale> [item 9, Next board meeting]
21:19:21 <bdale> 14 October at 20:00 UTC
21:19:23 <bdale> any objections?
21:19:29 <linuxpoet> not here
21:19:30 <schultmc> fine with me
21:19:32 <Hydroxide> yay
21:19:34 <Hydroxide> do it
21:19:35 <Ganneff> all for it
21:19:36 <cdlu> works for me
21:19:41 <bdale> ok, is done
21:19:42 <zobel> works for me.
21:19:44 <Hydroxide> !vote unanimous
21:19:46 <Ganneff> yay
21:19:54 <bdale> Ok, thank you to everyone present for participating today.
21:19:54 <bdale> *GAVEL*

Hope that helps,
--
MJ Ray (slef) LMS developer and webmaster at | software
www.software.coop http://mjr.towers.org.uk | .... co
IMO only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html | .... op