[Members] board meeting logs for 2009-10-07

Jack Moffitt jack at collecta.com
Wed Oct 7 17:34:32 CDT 2009


The logs from today's meeting are below.

jack.

=== board meeting log for 2009-10-07 ===
10:35:48 AM Jack Moffitt: peter: you adding florian to the member list?
10:36:13 AM stpeter: yes
10:37:09 AM Will: hello
10:37:13 AM Florian: hi
10:37:23 AM stpeter: I'm replying to this long thread
10:37:26 AM stpeter: just reading it now
10:37:34 AM Will: looooong thread
10:37:43 AM Florian: :)
10:37:58 AM Jack Moffitt: oh dear
10:38:15 AM Jack Moffitt: whenever someone says "long thread" and i
have no idea what they are talking about, that is always a bad sign :(
10:38:23 AM Will: i guess you're just catching up jack
10:38:38 AM Jack Moffitt: i've gotten very little sleep lately. jasper
is teething :(
10:39:14 AM stpeter: jack: yes
10:40:34 AM Jack Moffitt: reading the thread now
10:41:30 AM Will: summary: we have a 3 person Board. We like odd
numbers. Two candidates for Board have now left. Nyco should be on the
Board
10:41:52 AM Florian: right
10:42:31 AM Jack Moffitt: now left?
10:42:52 AM Florian: taken back their application
10:43:00 AM Will: David and Mickael have both indicated that they no
longer wish to be considered for Board - at least that's my reading
10:43:01 AM Florian: on the members mailinglist
10:43:08 AM Florian: Will: right
10:43:21 AM stpeter: I just sent a message
10:43:22 AM Jack Moffitt: wow, the drama continued
10:43:24 AM stpeter: to the list
10:43:25 AM stpeter: brb
10:43:37 AM Jack Moffitt: i am +1 for nyco, he has done great work the last year
10:44:29 AM Will: so "solving the current problem" - do we need to
propose possible solutions to the membership?
10:44:35 AM Will: also +1 for nyco
10:44:50 AM Florian: I'm +1 for nyco
10:45:08 AM Florian: But I think that some members might dislike the
idea of having a board of 4
10:45:35 AM Florian: I see it as a plus, as it would encourage
discussions and actual decisions
10:45:48 AM Will: getting Nyco on the Board (as the membership voted
for him) means a 4 person Board yes? We have no other candidates
10:46:27 AM Will: if either David or Mickael had withdrawn it'd be
simple - but both is a bit of a problem/surprise
10:47:27 AM Jack Moffitt: on another note, i agree with kurt's
suggestion of virtual coin flip for the future
10:47:27 AM Florian: well, I'd say, let's run with a board of 4
10:47:37 AM stpeter: I don't see why there is a major concern about
having a 4-person board
10:47:55 AM Jack Moffitt: stpeter: one of those premature optimizations i guess
10:48:05 AM Jack Moffitt: there are situations in which even numbers are bad
10:48:07 AM Jack Moffitt: ah
10:48:10 AM Jack Moffitt: i have an idea!
10:48:13 AM Will: so lets propose to the membership that this temp
Board be increased to 4
10:48:29 AM Jack Moffitt: If we have an even number of board members,
let the ED have the decisive vote in a ite?
10:48:46 AM stpeter: oh you don't trust the Executive Director, do you?
10:48:53 AM stpeter: but yes, that is one approach
10:49:01 AM Jack Moffitt: so we'd propose to lock the board at between
3 and 5, and in the case of a 4 person board that is tied in a ote,
the ED can vote to break the tie.
10:49:15 AM Florian: jack: that would be possible. Especially he's
better than the Chairman, as he's independent
10:49:26 AM Will: agree with jack's idea - i think the situation woul
darise rarely though
10:49:30 AM Jack Moffitt: practically it means nothing, there has
never been and probably wn't be many ties
10:49:39 AM Jack Moffitt: but it does put into place a safeguard if
there is a tie
10:49:46 AM Will: jack: yes
10:49:55 AM stpeter: true, we try to reach consensus or even unanimity
10:50:26 AM Jack Moffitt: i think people's issues with 4 is the
thought of unforeseen problems.  putting in the tie breaker vote
eiminates that concern
10:50:39 AM Jack Moffitt: it also means that we have some flexibility
in staffing the board
10:50:59 AM Jack Moffitt: since we don't have to hit an odd number
10:51:00 AM Will: plus we continue to tie stpeter in - you thought you
could get away! hahaha
10:51:17 AM Florian: hehe
10:51:24 AM Jack Moffitt: so i propose:
10:51:33 AM Jack Moffitt: 1) take Nyco for the board
10:51:47 AM Jack Moffitt: 2) wish David and Mickael well
10:51:57 AM Jack Moffitt: 3) change byloaws to allow from 3 to 5 board members
10:52:12 AM Jack Moffitt: 4) change bylaws to allow ED to tiebreak a
deadlocked board
10:52:39 AM Will: we still need a byelaw change to decide how to break
a tied election (as in this case)
10:52:50 AM Jack Moffitt: yes, but that is separate issue :)
10:52:52 AM Will: but that needs discussion
10:52:55 AM Will: indeed
10:53:09 AM Jack Moffitt: so is everyone good with that proposal for
the board stuff?
10:53:15 AM Florian: +1
10:53:20 AM Will: +1
10:53:23 AM Jack Moffitt: +1 from me of course
10:53:24 AM Jack Moffitt: ok
10:53:33 AM Will: do you want to send it jack?
10:53:37 AM Jack Moffitt: so now for normal voting tiebreaks, we need
to decide on an amendment
10:53:47 AM Jack Moffitt: will: yeah, i can send to the list.
10:53:56 AM stpeter: yes, for normal tiebreaks we also need a
solution, but that is less immediate
10:54:04 AM Jack Moffitt: i propose we accept Kurt's solution
10:54:18 AM Jack Moffitt: we follow the IETF in many areas, so it
makes sense to continue that fine tradition
10:54:24 AM Florian: Same, I like the coin-flip
10:54:24 AM Will: jack: which was? i've lost it
10:54:31 AM Will: coin-flip - ah
10:55:00 AM Jack Moffitt: * must noticed David suggested the ED tiebreak :)*
10:55:10 AM Jack Moffitt: just even
10:55:36 AM Jack Moffitt: will: you like the coin flip?
10:55:37 AM stpeter: some RFC for coin-toss
10:55:47 AM Jack Moffitt: RFC 3757
10:55:54 AM stpeter: yes
10:56:02 AM Will: jack: it's as far as anything - though fritzy's
fight suggestion is also cool
10:56:06 AM Will: fair
10:56:23 AM Florian: which was that?
10:56:40 AM Jack Moffitt: 3757 does not look like the riht RFC :)
10:56:48 AM stpeter: it's not :)
10:56:59 AM Jack Moffitt: it is what he referenced though
10:57:13 AM stpeter: 3797
10:57:31 AM stpeter: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3797
10:57:36 AM Jack Moffitt: thank you peter
10:57:55 AM Jack Moffitt: btw, this is probably a silly question. but
what does NomCom mean? :)
10:58:21 AM stpeter: Nominating Committee
10:59:51 AM Will: ok - we're proposing a solution to the membership -
does there need to be a vote on accepting (formal) ?
11:00:39 AM Florian: maybe a 24 hour memberbot session?
11:01:07 AM stpeter: 24 hours is short
11:01:12 AM stpeter: maybe 48 or 72
11:01:24 AM Florian: right
11:01:25 AM Jack Moffitt: well, do we have authority to appoint nyco
to the board?
11:01:29 AM Will: 24 is too short for quorum i suspect
11:01:30 AM stpeter: really there is not a huge hurry, but it would be
good to do this soon
11:01:30 AM Jack Moffitt: he was properly elected :)
11:01:44 AM Jack Moffitt: i think that is the only thing pressing
11:01:55 AM Florian: right, I think it's quite pressing too
11:02:03 AM Florian: in order to formalize the board
11:02:10 AM Jack Moffitt: the bylaw amendments will have to be voted
on, and since there is no hurry there, we can throw it into the next
membership election vote
11:02:11 AM Florian: the final one
11:02:15 AM Will: jack: don't know. we have the power to co-opt people
into vacant positions - but did the meeting leave us with a vacancy?
11:02:39 AM Florian: Will: don't think so
11:02:39 AM Will: or did it leave us with a 3 man board until the
membership decides otherwise?
11:02:46 AM Florian: as the members limited it to 3 yesterday
11:02:48 AM Jack Moffitt: oh man, i'm going to have to read the bylaws :)
11:02:55 AM Will: its not fun
11:03:17 AM Florian: this is why we have to propose this change to the members
11:03:21 AM Florian: and they vote on it
11:03:34 AM Will: http://xmpp.org/xsf/docs/bylaws.shtml - section 4.7
11:03:51 AM stpeter: my understanding of the meeting is that the
members decided to temporarily limit the Board number to 3 for the
express purpose of seating a Board
11:04:25 AM Jack Moffitt: yeah, so we have no vacancy
11:04:35 AM Florian: right, so we would need to ask the members to
extend the size to 4 and fill it with Nyco
11:04:42 AM Jack Moffitt: here's what we can do
11:04:43 AM Will: so we need to propose the 4 man change asap
11:04:59 AM Jack Moffitt: we invite nyco to participate for now, but
his vote isn't official
11:04:59 AM Florian: right
11:05:13 AM Jack Moffitt: and then we conscript him once the members
have voted to change bylaws
11:05:35 AM Jack Moffitt: (or in the odd case that the membership does
not vote to do so, we'll have to stop inviting him i guess)
11:05:44 AM Florian: right
11:05:46 AM Will: do you think we'll have a meeting for him to
participate in before the members vote?
11:05:58 AM Jack Moffitt: so that solves the immediate problems but
still puts us on a legal path forward
11:06:12 AM Jack Moffitt: will: when is the member vote?
11:06:23 AM Will: no idea - as soon as we can arrange it
11:06:28 AM Jack Moffitt: i assume w'ell meet to elect a chairmain and
all say hi within a week or so right? :)
11:06:32 AM Jack Moffitt: also, we're meeting right now :)
11:06:36 AM Florian: Wouldn't it be easier to just have a short
membervote for 48 hours and see if we achieve quorum until then
11:07:06 AM Florian: it's not that difficult to vote on the topic,
i.e. doesn't require too long for the members to research
11:07:29 AM Jack Moffitt: florian: it's an option. i'm not convinced
we need to vote so quickly since the only practical matter at present
is to rsolve Nyco's situation in some way
11:08:00 AM Florian: hmm ok
11:08:11 AM Will: jack: we also need to elect board positions, i'd
prefer nyco was involved in that  - so there is some urgency
11:08:17 AM Jack Moffitt: peter: how long do we normally allow members
to announce candidacy? two weeks?
11:08:38 AM stpeter: typically two, yes
11:08:48 AM Jack Moffitt: will: i'm fine with living wihout board
positions for a few weeks :)
11:08:54 AM Will: cool
11:09:20 AM Jack Moffitt: so if we start he membervote in the next few
days, all will be resolved in two weeks with pretty much no disruption
11:09:49 AM Jack Moffitt: any objections?
11:10:07 AM Florian: none from me
11:10:13 AM Will: noe here
11:10:14 AM Will: none
11:10:27 AM stpeter: jack: yes that sounds reasonable
11:10:29 AM Jack Moffitt: ok. i'll writ eup an email to the list and
send to you guys to read over this afternoon
11:10:57 AM Florian: sounds good.
11:10:59 AM Jack Moffitt: any other business?
11:11:16 AM Will: none here mr. popular :-)
11:11:24 AM Jack Moffitt: ha!
11:11:25 AM Florian: I'm good :)
11:11:30 AM Jack Moffitt: did you see my council votes? :)
11:11:40 AM Jack Moffitt: the membership clearly wants me over on this side :)
11:12:00 AM Will: ... where you can't do any harm ;-)
11:12:15 AM Florian: :p
11:12:20 AM Florian: oh ... maybe one thing
11:12:25 AM Jack Moffitt: it really was a spectacular election for us :)
11:12:38 AM Will: great fun - nice to see the interest
11:12:42 AM Jack Moffitt: The Great XSF Election of 2009
11:12:46 AM Will: posters and election badges next year!
11:12:47 AM Florian: how do you guys feel about public logs of this room?
11:12:56 AM Will: public +1
11:13:22 AM Florian: I'm +1, but with an option for us, to decide
after each meeting if we want to do this or not
11:13:36 AM Will: we might need to edit
11:13:39 AM Florian: right
11:13:47 AM Will: for spelling mistakes :-)
11:13:50 AM Florian: :p
11:13:52 AM Jack Moffitt: ok, so anyone opposed to publishing these
logs along with the minutes?
11:14:03 AM Florian: nay
11:14:08 AM Jack Moffitt: nay
11:14:15 AM Will: nay
11:14:23 AM Will: neigh
11:14:47 AM Jack Moffitt: alright, that about does it i think. I
motion to adjourn :)
11:14:53 AM Florian: seconded
11:15:29 AM Jack Moffitt: ok then, see you guys on the mailing list
and elsewhere :)
11:15:38 AM Florian: :)
11:15:39 AM stpeter: thank you, gentlemen
11:15:45 AM Florian: thanks guys
11:15:52 AM Will: bye for now - i'm going home


More information about the Members mailing list