Meeting log for 2009-12-09

I missed this meeting because the announcement was late (again -
please can someone install an at job for a week ahead or something
similar?), I overlooked the day change discussed last month and had
promised to go to someone else's house off-net at meeting time.

I have noticed that the 14 Jan 2010 meeting is also at a different
time (2100 UTC), though!

Anyway, here's the log, mostly cleaned of netsplitting:

HIGHLIGHTS

20:05:47 <Ganneff> [item 1, Opening] Welcome to today's Software in
the Public I nterest board of directors meeting, which is now called
to order. To nding resol utions can be found on the web at:
http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2009/2009-12-09.html

[item 2, Roll Call]
20:05:56 <schultmc> Michael Schultheiss
20:06:01 <Ganneff> Joerg Jaspert
20:06:07 <Hydroxide> Jimmy Kaplowitz
20:06:09 <Noodles> Jonathan McDowell
20:06:11 <zobel> Martin Zobel-Helas
20:11:21 <luk__> Luk Claes

[item 3, President's Report]
<Ganneff> Bdale not here, but he gave me this: <bdale> I'm
investigating a mechanism by which SPI could purchase HP servers on
behalf of our associated projects at a discount. I hope to have more
details to report on this in January.

[item 4, Treasurer's Report]
<schultmc> routine report was just added to the agenda. I apologize
for the delay - I mistakingly thought I had an extra week to prepare
the report. no typo [on the interest income] - apparently the bank
lowered the interest rate. statement says APY is 0.05%. I'll call the
bank and see what's changed.

[item 5, Secretaries Report]
<Noodles> I believe secretary stuff is now up to date; I have all
outst anding minutes (the 2 Martin did I'll get on the agenda for next
month). The 2 pending applications for associated membership are both
on today's agenda.

Voting results for "November 2009 minutes": Yes: 5, Abstain: 1

[item 6, Items up for discussion]
<Ganneff> I think we have YafaRay and sidux here. Again the floor for
Noodles.

<Noodles> I have no association with either project. Both seem suited
to our aims and have been messed around a bit in terms of a delay in
getting these resolutions drafted. I found both liasions responsive
when I was sorting out the details.

Voting results for "2009-11-27.jmd.1 - YafaRay as associated project": Yes: 6

Voting results for "2009-11-27.jmd.2 - sidux as associated project": Yes: 6

[item 8, Next board meeting]
<Ganneff> If I am right this will be the 14th January, 2100 utc

20:40:36 <Ganneff> *GAVEL*

TIMED LOG

20:05:46 <Ganneff> *GAVEL*
20:05:47 <Ganneff> [item 1, Opening] Welcome to today's Software in the Public Interest board of directors meeting, which is now called to order. To nding resolutions can be found on the web at: http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/agenda/2009/2009-12-09.html
20:05:47 <Ganneff> [item 2, Roll Call]
20:05:47 <Ganneff> Board members, please state your name for the record. As we have nine board members, quorum for today's meeting is six. Guests (including board advisors), please /msg your names to noodles if you wish your attendance to be recorded in the minutes of this meeting
20:05:50 <Ganneff> so lets see
20:05:55 <Ganneff> if he turns up
20:05:56 <schultmc> Michael Schultheiss
20:05:58 <Ganneff> if not its a short one
20:06:01 <Ganneff> Joerg Jaspert
20:06:07 <Hydroxide> Jimmy Kaplowitz
20:06:09 <Noodles> Jonathan McDowell
20:06:11 <zobel> Martin Zobel-Helas
20:06:44 <zobel> i will give luk a call
20:08:17 <zobel> phone busy
20:09:42 <Ganneff> one more try in a minute?!
20:10:28 <zobel> i will come.
20:10:32 <zobel> s/i/he/
20:10:37 <Hydroxide> yay
20:10:48 <Ganneff> when? :)
20:11:15 <zobel> he just said: he will come. the phone call lasted a few seconds....
20:11:21 <luk__> Luk Claes
20:11:42 <Ganneff> yay, i think we have it?!
20:11:46 <zobel> yes.
20:12:04 <Ganneff> [item 3, President's Report]
20:12:18 <luk__> sorry for being late
20:12:18 <luk__> zobel: tnx for the reminder
20:12:30 <Ganneff> Bdale not here, but he gave me this: <bdale> I'm investigating a mechanism by which SPI could purchase HP servers on behalf of our associated projects at a discount. I hope to have more details to report on this in January.
20:12:30 <Ganneff> [item 4, Treasurer's Report]
20:12:30 <Ganneff> Michael, have fun.
20:12:43 <schultmc> routine report was just added to the agenda
20:12:58 <Hydroxide> Ganneff / bdale: neat, thanks!
20:13:05 <schultmc> I apologize for the delay - I mistakingly thought I had an extra week to prepare the report
20:13:25 <Ganneff> schultmc: your turn
20:13:30 <schultmc> nothing else from me unless there are questions
20:13:32 <Hydroxide> schultmc: same deal about the helios project, as usual?
20:13:36 <schultmc> Hydroxide: yes
20:13:42 <Hydroxide> k
20:14:14 <Ganneff> uah. im lagged?!
20:15:24 <zobel> Warning, no response from solenoid.oftc.net
20:15:38 * Hydroxide still here, for the record
20:15:56 * schultmc is also still here
20:16:00 * zobel as well
20:16:02 <Ganneff> oh very helpful that the net falls down right now
20:16:14 <zobel> we might see a netsplit shortly...
20:16:22 * Noodles too (though my ssh is a bit lagged).
20:16:22 <luk__> Luk Claes
20:16:46 <Ganneff> schultmc: did you deliver your treasurers report?
20:16:46 * Ganneff never saw any
20:16:50 <Hydroxide> I think we're all on this side of the netsplit
20:16:52 <schultmc> Ganneff: yes
20:16:56 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: it is in the agenda
20:17:14 <Hydroxide> I think we can go on... it'll become apparent very shortly if someone's not here as a vote is next
20:17:20 <schultmc> [15:12] < schultmc> | routine report was just added to the agenda
20:17:20 <schultmc> [15:13] < schultmc> | I apologize for the delay - I mistakingly thought I had an extra week to prepare the report
20:17:23 <schultmc> [15:13] < schultmc> | nothing else from me unless there are questions
20:18:16 <zobel> Ganneff: go on?
20:18:22 * Hydroxide agrees
20:18:48 <Hydroxide> heh...if ganneff is effectively not here due to technical issues then we no longer have quorum
20:19:15 <zobel> maybe he splitted away? :)
20:19:32 <Hydroxide> he's still on this side of the netsplit
20:21:03 <jello> schultmc: is there a typo on the interest income? why so low?
20:21:29 <schultmc> no typo - apparently the bank lowered the interest rate
20:21:39 <jello> hrmph
20:21:56 <jello> i currently get 1.5%, what are we getting from key?
20:22:18 <Hydroxide> schultmc: that's 0.004% ish ... really?
20:22:18 <Ganneff> and lag is going up again for me. how not helpful
20:22:40 <Hydroxide> schultmc: even for a routine bank savings account that's low
20:22:48 <Ganneff> Hydroxide: it wont help to go on if i have a lag of two minutes and dont even see what people wrote.
20:22:48 <Ganneff> now, lets try a question i got from a guest:
20:22:48 <Ganneff> <jello> Why is the interest so low for $100k?
20:22:48 <Ganneff> as i said, i experience lots of lag...
20:22:48 <luk__> I reconnected once I saw I had a way too big lag
20:22:48 <luk__> and that apparently has improved things
20:22:48 <Noodles> I understand there have been problems at LINX today, but I thought it was sorted.
20:22:48 <Ganneff> anyone got my stuff, including jellos question?
20:22:48 <Noodles> Ganneff: Yes, I saw it.
20:23:03 <schultmc> statement says APY is 0.05%
20:23:12 <Ganneff> oh yay, i just saw my earlier msgs
20:23:25 <schultmc> I'll call the bank and see what's changed
20:23:52 <Ganneff> lets try going on
20:23:58 <Ganneff> [item 5, Secretaries Report]
20:23:59 <jello> schultmc: thanks!
20:24:00 <Ganneff> And this is for Noodles.
20:24:45 <zobel> Noodles: ^
20:26:11 <luk__> hmm
20:26:22 <zobel> Martin Zobel-Helas
20:26:26 <Noodles> This isn't really working, is it?
20:26:30 <Hydroxide> heh
20:26:35 <luk__> maybe now it is? :-)
20:26:46 <Ganneff> bad timing
20:26:48 * Hydroxide is here - was briefly distracted by $paidjob, but only briefly
20:27:05 * schultmc is still here
20:27:08 <Ganneff> i am here, but lag is not going down.
20:27:16 <schultmc> hopefuly this client and my backup client are on different servers
20:27:24 <Ganneff> if anyone has seen my paste, its noodles task right now
20:27:30 <Noodles> I didn't see it.
20:27:35 <Hydroxide> Noodles: secretary's report bit
20:27:53 <Ganneff> [item 5, Secretaries Report]
20:27:53 <Ganneff> And this is for Noodles.
20:27:56 <Noodles> I also didn't see any reply to the "only 0.004%?"
20:28:00 <Ganneff> there, for those that missed it
20:28:15 <luk__> tnx
20:28:28 <schultmc> Noodles: [15:23] < schultmc> | statement says APY is 0.05%
20:28:28 <schultmc> [15:23] < Ganneff> | oh yay, i just saw my earlier msgs
20:28:29 <schultmc> [15:23] < schultmc> | I'll call the bank and see what's changed
20:28:30 <Hydroxide> schultmc said the bank gave us an APY of 0.05% ... but, I forgot to take into account that that's annual and this is a monthly report
20:28:36 <Hydroxide> so it probably makes sense if I were to do the math
20:28:39 <Hydroxide> still crap though
20:28:47 <Hydroxide> (but common)
20:29:11 <Ganneff> (i do not envy those that try to make this log into meeting minutes or blog posts or mailing list mails)
20:29:16 * Hydroxide will discuss higher-yield alternatives with schultmc as part of opening the account we agreed in September
20:29:16 <zobel> Noodles: can you go on with secretary report?
20:29:33 <Noodles> I believe secretary stuff is now up to date; I have all outstanding minutes (the 2 Martin did I'll get on the agenda for next month).
20:29:48 <Noodles> The 2 pending applications for associated membership are both on today's agenda.
20:30:17 <luk__> time to vote on the minutes of Nov I guess?
20:30:19 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: go ahead and move onto the next item - the November minutes. then noodles can call a vote.
20:30:20 <Ganneff> they are in next point. we have minutes to vote on, i think?
20:30:20 <zobel> done?
20:30:31 <Ganneff> Hydroxide: thats in the secretary part anyways.
20:30:39 <Noodles> I'm done with secretary stuff, yes. Minute voting time?
20:30:42 <Ganneff> yes
20:30:47 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: usually been a separate item in the past but I don't really care
20:31:01 * Hydroxide readies his !vote yes
20:31:02 <Ganneff> oh. hrm. would be. well, whatever. lets vote :)
20:31:39 <Ganneff> Noodles?
20:31:41 <Hydroxide> Noodles: ready to start the vote?
20:32:01 <Noodles> Voting started, 6 people (ganneff,noodles,hydroxide,zobel,luk__,schultmc) allowed to vote on November 2009 minutes. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:32:09 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:32:09 <schultmc> !vote yes
20:32:11 <luk__> !vote yes
20:32:11 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:32:13 <Noodles> (Yes, once I a) get over lag and b) type the command correctly)
20:32:16 <Noodles> !vote yes
20:32:21 <zobel> !vote abstain
20:32:26 <Noodles> Current voting results for "November 2009 minutes": Yes: 5, No: 0, Abstain: 1, Missing: 0 ()
20:32:30 <Noodles> Voting for "November 2009 minutes" closed.
20:32:35 <Ganneff> yay
20:32:40 <Ganneff> [item 6, Items up for discussion]
20:32:40 <Ganneff> I think we have YafaRay and sidux here. Again the floor for Noodles.
20:33:15 <Noodles> I have no association with either project. Both seem suited to our aims and have been messed around a bit in terms of a delay in getting these resolutions drafted.
20:33:25 <Noodles> I found both liasions responsive when I was sorting out the details.
20:33:55 <Ganneff> anyone having trouble with one of em? if not, ready to vote?
20:34:02 <zobel> Noodles: very diplomatic, thx :)
20:34:42 <luk__> I'm ready to vote
20:34:49 <Noodles> Voting started, 6 people (ganneff,noodles,hydroxide,zobel,luk__,schultmc) allowed to vote on 2009-11-27.jmd.1 - YafaRay as associated project. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:34:55 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:34:57 <schultmc> !vote yes
20:34:58 <Noodles> !vote yes
20:34:59 <luk__> !vote yes
20:35:01 <zobel> !vote yes
20:35:26 <Noodles> Hydroxide?
20:35:28 <luk__> Hydroxide: ?
20:35:29 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:35:34 <Noodles> Current voting results for "2009-11-27.jmd.1 - YafaRay as associated project": Yes: 6, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
20:35:37 <Noodles> Voting for "2009-11-27.jmd.1 - YafaRay as associated project" closed.
20:35:40 <Noodles> Sweet.
20:35:50 <Noodles> Voting started, 6 people (ganneff,noodles,hydroxide,zobel,luk__,schultmc) allowed to vote on 2009-11-27.jmd.2 - sidux as associated project. - You may vote yes/no/abstain only, type !vote $yourchoice now.
20:35:54 <Ganneff> !vote yes
20:35:55 <schultmc> !vote yes
20:35:55 <zobel> !vote yes
20:35:55 <Noodles> !vote yes
20:35:56 <luk__> !vote yes
20:36:24 <luk__> Hydroxide: ?
20:36:30 <Hydroxide> !vote yes
20:36:37 <Noodles> Current voting results for "2009-11-27.jmd.2 - sidux as associated project": Yes: 6, No: 0, Abstain: 0, Missing: 0 ()
20:36:40 <Noodles> Voting for "2009-11-27.jmd.2 - sidux as associated project" closed.
20:36:47 <Ganneff> so this is done, i think. thanks, lets go on.
20:36:48 <Ganneff> [item 7, Any other business]
20:36:48 <Ganneff> Anyone with a topic?
20:36:54 * Hydroxide has had multiple more brief $paidjob interruptions - sorry for the delays
20:36:56 <zobel> congrats to both projects.
20:37:16 <zobel> none?
20:37:18 * Hydroxide reminds Noodles that someone still needs to email them and get an acceptance response with 60 days - likely trivial but still important
20:37:30 <Ganneff> going once
20:37:37 <Noodles> Hydroxide: Yup, I think I've seen bdale do that in the past but I can do it.
20:37:37 <zobel> Ganneff: status DOT?
20:37:45 <Ganneff> discussion
20:37:48 <Ganneff> discussion
20:37:50 <Ganneff> and more of it.
20:38:02 <Ganneff> but only ever briefly, then silence. then... :)
20:38:14 <Ganneff> going twice
20:38:18 <Hydroxide> Noodles: great. when a project rep is present in-meeting we can do it during the meeting on IRC for the record, but that's not true here. there's no more to it than you think.
20:38:32 <Hydroxide> Ganneff: move on to 'next meeting' :)
20:38:35 <Noodles> I'd like to push back the meeting next month by an hour if possible. I'm going to be in Sydney so 20:00 UTC is 07:00 I think.
20:38:37 <devil> Hydroxide: i am here
20:38:43 <Ganneff> impatient lot
20:38:47 <Ganneff> [item 8, Next board meeting]
20:38:47 <Ganneff> If I am right this will be the 14th January, again 20:00 UTC
20:38:48 <Ganneff> ok
20:38:53 <Ganneff> with noodles that would be 2100 utc
20:38:57 <Ganneff> anyone trouble with that?
20:39:04 <schultmc> fine with me
20:39:09 * Hydroxide doesn't mind but suggest that we allow devil to accept on behalf of sidux before we close
20:39:13 <luk__> nope, just have to remember :-)
20:39:21 <zobel> noe, even better for me... my daughter in bed then... :)
20:39:41 <Ganneff> lets take it for 2100 then, and if needed people complain on list
20:40:07 <Ganneff> devil: do you want to accept sidux right now in this meeting? or want a mail?
20:40:25 <devil> i accept for project sidux, thanks
20:40:29 <Noodles> Welcome aboard.
20:40:33 <Ganneff> great. welcome.
20:40:36 <Ganneff> *GAVEL*

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

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 03:16:37PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> I missed this meeting because the announcement was late (again -
> please can someone install an at job for a week ahead or something
> similar?),

There seems to be plenty of disagreement over when the meeting
announcement should be sent out. I had been planning to try and send
them on the Sunday evening before the meeting, which seems like plenty
of time to me (3 full days). I've had a complaint that a reminder closer
to the event is better so people have it in their mind, you're now
saying it's not enough.

I can't win, so I'm going to stick with aiming for the Sunday before,
which hopefully at least makes everybody equally unhappy. I note that
the topic in #spi is also being updated to indicate the next meeting at
the end of each meeting.

> I have noticed that the 14 Jan 2010 meeting is also at a different
> time (2100 UTC), though!

Of more concern is the fact that the Wednesday is actually the 13th; I
think this is my fault and I typoed in the agenda and everyone else
didn't do any checking. :)

The later time for the meeting was discussed and is included in your
log.

J.

--
101 things you can't have too much of : 35 - Noodles.
This .sig brought to you by the letter Y and the number 5
Product of the Republic of HuggieTag

Jonathan McDowell wrote: [...]
> There seems to be plenty of disagreement over when the meeting
> announcement should be sent out. I had been planning to try and send
> them on the Sunday evening before the meeting, which seems like plenty
> of time to me (3 full days). I've had a complaint that a reminder closer
> to the event is better so people have it in their mind, you're now
> saying it's not enough.

I'm not sure there's much disagreement here: the Sunday evening before
is fine for a reminder, but the actual announcement should be sent
about a week before that.

See http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/resolutions/2007-01-16-iwj.5.html
(although it still sucks that it had to be resolved instead of
common sense prevailing).

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