Web   ·   Wiki   ·   Activities   ·   Blog   ·   Lists   ·   Chat   ·   Meeting   ·   Bugs   ·   Git   ·   Translate   ·   Archive   ·   People   ·   Donate

#sugar-meeting meeting, 2016-07-01 19:00:23

Minutes | Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
19:00 meeting Meeting started Fri Jul  1 19:00:23 2016 UTC. The chair is walterbender. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:00 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #endmeeting
19:00 walterbender Thanks everyone for joining us today
19:00 The agenda is here: https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/[…]oard#Agenda_items
19:01 I will go a little out of order since not everyone is here yet.
19:01 #topic GSoC
19:01 Just wanted to give an update. Good progress on all fronts.
19:01 You can follow along with the intern's blogs.
19:02 https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Summer_of_Code/2016
19:02 Claudia_ <Claudia_!~webchat@rev-18-85-44-69.sugarlabs.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:02 walterbender We have had good support by our mentors as well.
19:03 We'll have some important contributions by the end of the summer.
19:03 Claudia_ hello
19:03 walterbender hi Claudia_
19:03 Claudia_ walterbender: long time no see
19:03 walterbender #topic Turtle Art Days
19:03 Ibiam has quit IRC
19:03 Claudia_ yes.. TA days
19:03 walterbender Claudia_, yes...
19:03 Claudia_ I just received the invoice for the hosting
19:04 walterbender Claudia_, I am out of town most of July :P
19:04 Claudia_ walterbender: me too
19:04 walterbender So... we have two Turtle Art Days in the pipeline
19:04 In August, we hope to do one in Nigeria
19:04 (most likely in Abuja)
19:04 Claudia_ nice.. would you be there?
19:05 walterbender I plan to go and have been recruiting some of the former OLPC people to attend
19:05 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> We are thinking to arm one in Uruguay also...
19:05 walterbender Claudia_, would be good to access your rolodex :)
19:05 samsongoddy hi Claudia_, it would have been nice to see you there
19:05 walterbender samsongoddy is taking the lead on organizing
19:05 GrannieB <GrannieB!d1b508ee@gateway/web/freenode/ip.> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:06 walterbender he has a friend (MIT grad) who is helping as well
19:06 Ibiam <Ibiam!294f0706@gateway/web/freenode/ip.> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:06 walterbender Ibiam is also helping
19:06 Claudia_ nice....
19:06 Ibiam yeah, sorry i logged out
19:06 walterbender the plan is also to coordinate with the Yoruba i18n effort
19:07 to show the connection and hopefully generate renewed interest
19:07 llaske Nice idea
19:07 Ibiam would the Yoruba i18n commence before or after the event
19:07 walterbender we are putting together a budget... it would be funded from Trio Advisor $$s
19:07 samsongoddy Yeah walter i was thinking if i should start posting about the event on social media?
19:07 walterbender samsongoddy, yes
19:07 Ibiam that would be nice\
19:08 walterbender we need to finalize the calendar and budget ASAP
19:08 Ibiam I'll do so too
19:08 Claudia_ are you around the week of the 11th?
19:08 July 11 th?
19:08 walterbender Claudia_, nope.
19:08 adborden <adborden!~adborden@a14n.net> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:08 walterbender not back until the 17thj
19:08 Claudia_ the 28, 29 and 30?
19:09 walterbender the 28th-30, yes, I think
19:09 CanoeBerry2 Hi again (sorry my connection dropped)
19:09 Ibiam walterbender, regarding the budget, still yet to update the doc on the hotel management issue
19:09 Claudia_ ok... offline to find the time to meet
19:09 samsongoddy Hi CanoeBerry2
19:09 walterbender We will circulate the budget and details re Nigeria TA Day in the next week or so.
19:09 Ibiam I'll do that as soon as i confirm the cost of the hotel
19:10 walterbender We also have a meeting planned for Caacupe in Paraguay in late October
19:10 Educa Paraguay will be hosting the event
19:10 and also hosting some Sugar meetings with the education community in Asuncion before the event in Caacupe
19:10 Claudia_ let me know how I can help... I will be on email
19:10 walterbender I think Brian Silverman and Artemis Papert will join us.
19:11 Ibiam in Nigeria?
19:11 walterbender Claudia_, will keep you in the loop :)
19:11 Ibiam, NIgeria in August, Paraguay in October.
19:11 We had a great event in Chile last month :)
19:12 JM_, when were you thinking for UY?
19:12 Ibiam i mean Brian Silverman and Artemis Papert
19:12 samsongoddy wow that will be nice
19:12 walterbender Maybe we can coordinate with PY???
19:12 Ibiam, I can ask about their availabilty
19:12 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> October also...
19:12 Ibiam cool
19:12 walterbender JM_, let's talk offline to coordinate... would be efficient
19:13 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> I looked for the date of *PY to see to coordinate...
19:13 <Jose_Miguel-es> *Ok.
19:13 walterbender JM_, Pacita is coordinating
19:13 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> *OK
19:14 Claudia_ nice.. PA cono sur
19:14 walterbender Now that everyone is here, lets move on to the motions
19:14 samsongoddy sure
19:14 walterbender #topic Finance Manager motion
19:14 We have two slightly different versions circulating.
19:14 tony37 I move the motion offered by Caryl Bigenho
19:14 CanoeBerry2 Are Tony, Caryl and Dave here?
19:15 walterbender Not Caryl
19:15 CanoeBerry2 Caryl & I refined this one today: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/arc[…]-July/018902.html
19:15 GrannieB Yes! I'm "GrannieB"
19:15 walterbender I didn't understand some of the language in the final wording
19:15 GrannieB I thought everyone knew that by now
19:15 davelab6 i am here
19:16 CanoeBerry2 walterbender: questions?
19:16 walterbender oh... I did... but didn't notice you were here
19:16 CanoeBerry2, yes
19:16 tony37 Yes, could we have the text to be voted on?
19:16 walterbender one sec
19:16 GrannieB Look at the version Adam shared about an hour ago. It is very clear
19:16 llaske What about appointment ?
19:16 CanoeBerry2 GrannieB: Link above.
19:17 tony37 The link seems to restore much of the text from previous versions plus includes documentation on financial transactions.
19:17 walterbender I found the wording of #3 confusing
19:17 Ibiam who are the nominees?
19:17 walterbender Ibiam, none that I am aware of
19:17 GrannieB2 <GrannieB2!d1b508ee@gateway/web/freenode/ip.> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:17 CanoeBerry2 walterbender: which part is confusing, if possible?
19:18 walterbender the second sentence
19:18 tony37 I am sorry. I withdraw the motion.
19:18 This is a lot of change with no chance to review.
19:19 CanoeBerry2 Second sentence can be shortened if nec, if something's confusing?
19:19 walterbender It is hard to parse. But what I think you are saying is that if the FM approved the request, some magic will happen?
19:19 CanoeBerry2 Second sentence serves to explain who SFC is more than anything else.
19:19 walterbender and if the FM doesn't approve, the request can be submitted to the oversight board
19:19 CanoeBerry2 And their role is managing SL's bank account.
19:20 Since many people aren't aware of those base facts.
19:20 2nd sentence was meant as little more than a reminder that SFC pays about 30 days after things are filed with them.
19:20 walterbender CanoeBerry2, I would just say that the request would be made for payment... and let the details, which are outside of our control and could change without out input be assumed
19:20 Claudia_ I get the point
19:21 but too much info
19:21 walterbender In anycase, I'll post the motion here and if someone seconds it, we can vote.
19:21 Motion: The Sugar Labs Oversight Board shall appoint a Finance Manager by majority vote from among the members of Sugar Labs Oversight Board. The Finance Manager serves at the will of the board. The Finance Manager may be paid a stipend at the discretion of the board.
19:21 Duties of the Finance Manager will be to:
19:21 1. Serve as Sugar Lab's central coordinator on all financial matters.
19:21 2. Report quarterly at a scheduled Oversight Board meeting the following:
19:21 - Confirmation of the accuracy of the previous quarter's report according to the Software Freedom Conservancy
19:21 - Balance at the beginning of the quarter preceding the meeting
19:21 - Expenses during the quarter
19:21 - Income received during the quarter
19:22 - Balance at the end of the quarter
19:22 3. The Finance Manager has discretion to approve petty cash amounts up to $200 to pay for miscellaneous expenditures critical for the functioning of Sugar Labs. If approved and everything is in order, these will often be paid within (about) 30 days of when they are submitted to the Software Freedom Conservancy, who control Sugar Labs' banking. If not approved, the applicant is free to ask for a vote at a future Ove
19:22 rsight Board meeting.
19:22 4. All motions for funding of larger projects will be presented first to the Finance Manager who will review them to be sure the funds are being used in a way that appears fiscally sound. If everything is in order, the Finance Manager will place the motion on the agenda for consideration at the next possible Oversight Board meeting, and circulate on the IAEP mailing list for public discussion.
19:22 5. At the meeting, after a finance motion has been moved and seconded, discussion should be confined to the motion.
19:22 does any SLOB member want to second this motion?
19:22 CanoeBerry2 Yes.  Background: 2nd sentence idea. Idea was ETA to helps members and the public: if only an ETA, so that the Financial Manager's limitations to produce immediate funds (not possible!) are bracketed & clear.
19:22 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> +1 for my
19:22 ElVerma <ElVerma!~sverma@> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:23 CanoeBerry2 ElVerma: welcome~
19:23 ElVerma I'll second it.
19:23 CanoeBerry2 +1
19:23 tony37 What is ETA?
19:23 walterbender estimated time of arrival???
19:23 GrannieB2 of the $$$
19:23 CanoeBerry2 Estimated Time of Arrival of funds...being (around) 30 days after filed with SFConservancy.
19:24 tony37 How does that relate to the motion?
19:24 walterbender Again, I think it is bad form to include that in the motion, but I think perfection is the enemy of the good here
19:24 CanoeBerry2 So members & the public don't have an inflated idea of the FM's role to deliver funds overnight.
19:25 walterbender CanoeBerry2, presumably our FM can explain that...
19:25 GrannieB2 +1
19:25 CanoeBerry2 Expectation setting being critical IMHO.
19:25 tony37 I felt the purpose of petty cash is that the Finance Manager would have the funds in hand so that payments would be immediate
19:25 walterbender tony37, no idea how to implement that
19:25 iamutkarshtiwari has quit IRC
19:25 CanoeBerry2 walterbender: Agreed.
19:25 walterbender but if we can find a way within the SFC rules, +1
19:26 sverma has quit IRC
19:26 tony37 A request is made to the Finance Manager to buy a box of screws. The money is paid by PayPal or some other quick means.
19:26 davelab6 walterbender: i think the sentence "If approved and
19:26                      everything is in order, these will often be paid within (about) 30 days of when they are submitted to the Software Freedom Conservancy, who control Sugar Labs' banking." is good
19:27 walterbender davelab6, and I find it confusing... but so be it
19:27 shall we vote?
19:27 ElVerma Yes
19:27 CanoeBerry2 +1
19:27 tony37 disapprove
19:27 davelab6 because it sets expectations up front, and if the reality is different, thats fine
19:28 tony37: isn't current practice that the money is spent out of pocket, and then reimbursed?
19:28 CanoeBerry2 Yes, expectation setting is critical IMHO.
19:28 Claudia_ (everything is in order has to be clear for the process to really help
19:28 walterbender any other votes?
19:28 Claudia_ +1
19:28 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> +1
19:29 ElVerma Approve
19:29 llaske Disapprove without mention of appointment amount
19:29 walterbender personally I have real reservations about this which I have expressed many times, but since the community is seeming for it, +1
19:29 iamutkarshtiwari <iamutkarshtiwari!0e8bee62@gateway/web/freenode/ip.> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:30 walterbender llaske, I think we decide separately if we want to pay a stipend
19:30 llaske, frankly, I think the volume is so low, it is not necessary
19:30 but I am often wrong in my assumptions it seems
19:30 kaametza hi all! just as a side note, might be  good idea to include annual budget process, periodic forecasting, and periodic analysis of operations performance in the job dcription
19:31 llaske Yes it's why 0 should be mentioned
19:31 GrannieB2 That can be added if and when a stipend is decided on
19:31 walterbender In any case, the motion passes
19:31 llaske, it says at the discretion
19:32 I think that is enough
19:32 GrannieB2 (big sigh of relief!)
19:32 walterbender We need someone(s) to sort out recruiting a FM
19:32 and making a proposal re $$
19:32 kaametza, good point
19:33 next up
19:33 CanoeBerry2 In the short term, I am willing to do the job for free if appointed.  Longer-term I believe we need a paid professional.
19:33 walterbender #topic membership donation
19:34 Motion: To request a membership donation from each currently active Sugar Labs Member to be allocated to the General Fund for the calendar year of 2016, and a public statement about how they use Sugar and why they are involved in Sugar Labs to post on the website; there is no penalty for not paying a membership or not providing a statement; by default members who donate will be kept private, and requested to opt-in
19:34 to be recognised. The donation requested will be $12 USD from members who self-identify as low-income (such as students); $36 USD from general members; $120 from members who can opt-in to be placed prominently on the website; and $600 from members who can (privately if they wish) submit a release codename, subject to SLOB approval.
19:34 Ibiam iamutkarshtiwari was talking about donating some of his money from GSOC
19:34 walterbender anyone interested in seconding this motion?
19:35 CanoeBerry2 tony37: did you have feedback above?
19:35 tony37 Feedback about what above?
19:35 CanoeBerry2 self-identifying as low-income etc..
19:36 tony37 I have stated that I am opposed to this wording.
19:36 llaske I think it's a good idea
19:36 CanoeBerry2 tony37: Is there cleaner/better wording somewhere?
19:36 llaske But the notion of membership is complex
19:36 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> Can say  Donation Suggested, without need of statement.
19:36 tony37 I offered a version but was apparently not accepted.
19:37 llaske Is it only subscriber to the list ?
19:37 CanoeBerry2 tony37: got a link to your wording for comparison?
19:37 satellit trisquel just lets amount be up to the individual but lists the current donors and amounts
19:37 davelab6 walterbender: i tought jose miguel seconded this via email and it lapsed?
19:37 walterbender davelab6, I guess he did.
19:37 so we can just vote
19:37 davelab6 http://www.mail-archive.com/ia[…]org/msg16767.html
19:37 llaske Good idea satellit
19:38 satellit the list scrolls with the latest donor on top
19:38 Claudia_ I wonder if we have identify the members of SL and the potential income from membership...
19:38 walterbender I think being a bit more formal with soliciting donations is fine. And we can have some subcommittee work out the details
19:38 GrannieB2 I am against any required "donation" (dues). Like many other volunteers, I spend hundreds of $$$ annually supporting Sugar and Sugar Lans. I find having to pay something else very distasteful.
19:39 walterbender as long as we don't stigmatize people in the process
19:39 pikurasa <pikurasa!~Thunderbi@240.sub-97-44-128.myvzw.com> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:39 CanoeBerry2 Seems we're close to final wording? Unless Tony has a link to alternative wording we should be considering?
19:39 Claudia_ I created a non-profit with friends from colombia and we have a low membership
19:40 walterbender GrannieB, I think it should be up to each person to use their own sense of what and how to give
19:40 but some suggestions would be helpful to some
19:40 tony37 I'll have to look but the essence was that the fund-raising should have a goal and the recommended donation should be commensurate with the goal. The donation should be a request.
19:40 Claudia_ we all work as volunteers...  but we all understand that the money from membership helps fund some basic stuff
19:41 meeting * Jose_Miguel has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
19:41 Claudia_ i like the idea of membership, but perhaps two tiers that have nothing to do with low income, but preference...
19:41 walterbender I think the current wording allows for adequate discretion... no need to explain opting out and no public listing without opting in.
19:41 ElVerma Dues vs donations. Two different things
19:41 davelab6 tony's draft is here
19:41 http://www.mail-archive.com/ia[…]org/msg16725.html
19:41 Claudia_ people who want and can give more, should be free to do so
19:41 meeting * Jose_Miguel-es has joined
19:41 tony37 Thanks Dave
19:41 reubencaron_ <reubencaron_!~reubencar@download.laptop.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:42 GrannieB2 But not all volunteers are equal. Some, like myself, are self funded. Others take advantage of the Sugar Labs funding. I do not care to make a "donation" beyond that unless I am going to get reembursed for the  many, many things I do .
19:42 reubencaron has quit IRC
19:43 satellit https://trisquel.info/en/donate
19:43 davelab6 the conclusion of the thread is by ElVerma at http://www.mail-archive.com/ia[…]org/msg16736.html where he suggests funding should not be solicited from members until there is a value chain of vision, mission, goals, objectives, tasks in place that shows what the funds will contribute towards in the next 3-5 years
19:43 Ibiam has quit IRC
19:43 GrannieB2 Sameer is correct
19:43 ElVerma I would say that keep the dues out of this and stick with the donations only.
19:44 davelab6 ElVerma: there are no dues in the motion
19:44 walterbender Hard to argue with having a clear goal for soliciting funds... but
19:44 GrannieB2 face it, as described the "donation" amounts to dues
19:45 walterbender GrannieB, I don't read it as "dues"
19:45 GrannieB2 when you set specific amounts, that is "dues" in my book
19:45 CanoeBerry2 Suggested donations are very popular today, online and offline, but whether it's desired here (no matter how humbly) there are clearly differences of opinion.  ElVerma got suggestions?
19:45 walterbender but I don't think it matters
19:45 pikurasa has quit IRC
19:46 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> The donations can be anonymous, and are not compulsory.
19:46 davelab6 walterbender: well, as you know, i think raising general funds without a clear goal is good, because then the goals can be considered in the context of the funds available. if SL has $10,000 or $1,000 makes a big difference in what kinds of things it can fund :)
19:46 walterbender if someone wants to solicit money for SL through this mechanism, so be it.
19:47 GrannieB2 I think we need to be looking for funding via grants
19:47 walterbender I don't see a downside to the motion as written
19:47 it does not inhibit other efforts
19:47 Ibiam <Ibiam!294f0706@gateway/web/freenode/ip.> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:47 Claudia_ agree, walterbender
19:47 walterbender and it does not inhibit developing clear goals
19:47 davelab6 ElVerma: so i think general fund raising in teh context of a 10 year old project is fine, even if the value chain hasn't been refreshed, because the org has momentum.... rather like the british 'constitution' which isn't written down in a single place
19:47 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> In accordance with walterbender
19:47 walterbender it is just one mechanism of many
19:47 shall we vote?
19:48 +1
19:48 davelab6 GrannieB2 and kaametza are we meeting in a few hours to discuss grant applications?
19:48 ElVerma Take the low income language out and make it suggested donations ($1 a month, $3 a month etc)
19:48 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> +1
19:48 GrannieB2 And, if we don't wish to pay, could our expenses on SL behalf be counted as our "donation?"
19:48 walterbender GrannieB, why does it matter?
19:48 GrannieB2 Call it an "in kind donation"
19:48 kaametza davelab6, sure
19:49 walterbender call it whatever you want
19:49 davelab6 GrannieB2: sounds good to me
19:49 walterbender and if you want to make a deduction for tax purposes, you need to document your "in kind donation" with the SFC
19:49 Claudia_ +1, with low income out of the language (it should be as playful as Sugar)
19:49 walterbender nothing magic about it
19:50 satellit can there be an allocated donation ie: new Hard drive?
19:50 GrannieB2 +1
19:50 walterbender satellit, any thing you want...
19:50 davelab6 regarding why i put the self identifying as low income clause in there, members do not need to donate, and they do not need to identify themselves as low income to anyone else
19:50 satellit +1
19:50 tony37 If we have 100 members and each member donates $50, we raise $5000. If our goal is $4000, then a recommended donation of $50 seems appropriate.
19:50 davelab6 their donation is anonymous
19:51 unless they wish to be recognised; and they could ask to be recognised without stating the amount
19:51 walterbender any other SLOB members want to vote?
19:51 tony37 Then remove the wordage since it is unnecessary.
19:51 ElVerma has quit IRC
19:51 sverma <sverma!~sverma@2607:fb90:a634:e013:3bfd:3576:ec9e:ee89> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:52 walterbender tony37, as with the last motion, perfection seems to be the enemy of the good
19:52 +1 from me
19:52 ElVerma <ElVerma!~sverma@> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:52 ElVerma Sorry, network trouble
19:53 GrannieB2 tempus fugit
19:53 walterbender any more votes? or please tell me you are abstaining, please say so so we can move on
19:53 ElVerma +1 provided take low income language out and call it suggested donations
19:53 tony37 Disapprove
19:53 samsongoddy has quit IRC
19:53 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> +1
19:54 tony37 ElVerma - I would agree under those circumstances
19:54 CanoeBerry2 I'm with Walter here.. perfect is the enemy of done +1 even if this isn't perfect.
19:54 walterbender OK... motion passes... 4-1-??
19:54 one more motion before we run out of time...
19:55 Claudia_ tony37 and ElVerma: +1
19:55 davelab6 ElVerma tony37 Claudia_ GrannieB2 i will work with the board to ensure that despite the wording of the motion, the solitication that goes out to members will address your concerns
19:55 walterbender davelab6, thx
19:55 tony37 tony37 disapprove unless motion is amended
19:55 Ibiam has quit IRC
19:55 CanoeBerry2 Low-income language doesn't bother me (this is the norm in many open-source / free culture events I attend) but clearly it bothers others, for whatever reasons.
19:55 ElVerma Low income is a social stigma in many cases. We should avoid such language.
19:56 walterbender tony37, I think davelab6 will address your concerns in the solicitaiton
19:56 davelab6 ElVerma: how do you think it should be phrased? or should the issue be ignored?
19:56 walterbender #topic motion about making motions
19:56 tony37 I wish it had been addressed in the motion.
19:56 sverma has quit IRC
19:56 ElVerma has quit IRC
19:56 sverma <sverma!~sverma@> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:57 walterbender tony37, I agree... but I think we have consensus about the solicitation
19:57 sverma has quit IRC
19:57 sverma <sverma!~sverma@> has joined #sugar-meeting
19:57 CanoeBerry2 Personally I don't see social stigma when payment is anonymous.  Possibly even pride that even poor people can participate in open/free culture movements~
19:58 walterbender motion: While suggestions for motions can come from anyone in the community, motions should be made by Sugar Labs oversight board members.
19:58 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> In accordance with *CanoeBerry
19:58 walterbender the motion about motions was raised by sverma in an email and reiterated by tony37 recently
19:59 it is procedural just to make it easier to track what motions are active
19:59 any comments?
19:59 icarito i have not seen that motion posted publicly before, has it?
19:59 CanoeBerry2 I don't know Robert's Rules of Order, but this seems very similar.
20:00 sverma It helps to have one person on the board to be in the loop on the motion (say, the sponsor) and at least one more to second it
20:00 walterbender icarito, sverma posted it only to SLOB (but I thought it was to the public list). tony37 posted it to iaep or marketing... I forget which
20:00 tony37 You have made motions and stated their text. I consider that having moved the motion. The next step is a second. Having been moved and seconded, it can be voted on. I don't see this motion as a clarification of standard rules of order.
20:00 davelab6 im supportive of this motion; it would have saved me and tony a lot of jibba jabba if this was clarified the first time i attempted to present a motion to the board :)
20:00 elih has quit IRC
20:00 icarito i humbly disagree, SLOBs are community servers not authorities
20:00 walterbender, see that's why I agree with davelab6 on motions HAVING to be public
20:01 it's a bit outrageous that such a motion will pass without public comment
20:01 davelab6 icarito: see my reply to tony today; back in early 2010 then the wiki was clear that to present a motion a member has to get an individual slob to agree to present it, and this was then relaxed
20:01 icarito: explicitly
20:01 tony37 We need to agree that any member may propose an action to be taken by the Board. The decision is made at a Board meeting as described.
20:01 walterbender icarito, as I said, Tony made it on a public list
20:01 that said, I don't feel strongly about it
20:02 icarito still, it's obvious to me after all these years that despite the board's best efforts, some important discussions end up happening in private
20:02 walterbender but we do need more structure to our process, as things keep falling between the cracks
20:02 icarito yes thru the cracks of opacity...
20:02 walterbender icarito, there I disagree
20:03 I think most of the things that fall through the cracks are in the public lsits
20:03 icarito i'm not saying there is bad intention, just unintentional lack of transparency which is not to say lack of trust
20:03 walterbender it is hard to follow all the threads
20:03 davelab6 icarito: since almost all members motions are not seconded, it seems fine to me to clarify the board's processes
20:03 icarito yes well being a slobs is supposed to be hard
20:03 sverma I will reiterate that SLOB is Sugar Labs, not Sugar. SL is a legal entity, not a FOSS project. Please be mindful of that distinction.
20:03 Claudia_ agree with walterbender
20:03 CanoeBerry2 Decision & decisionmaking & scribing it has improved @ https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/[…]t_Board/Decisions but sponsored/seconded motions helps clarify where we should all be investing our efforts and where not.
20:04 icarito sverma, Sugar is an implementation, Sugar Labs is a project, Conservancy is a legal entity
20:04 davelab6 icarito: no i think thats unwise; it should be easy to be a slob - part of my motivation to present process improvement motions after last month's meeting
20:04 walterbender easier or hard, we should have clarity in our processes
20:04 CanoeBerry2 +1
20:04 walterbender and consistency
20:04 icarito davelab6, ok, what I mean is that slobs should expect to do some work in their roles
20:04 adborden +1, I think this motion is about clarifying process and avoiding losing time discussing motions which have not been sponsored by SLOB
20:05 CanoeBerry2 +1
20:05 GrannieB2 +1
20:05 Claudia_ +1
20:06 davelab6 i am personally suprised this is only coming up now, after many many members motions have been presented, but im happy that there is now clarity on this point
20:06 walterbender did someone second the motion about motions?
20:06 Claudia_ and be respectful...  we try too hard to make things difficult... how good is that for any member of the community and our mission
20:06 CanoeBerry2 Seconded.  While clarifying that proposed motions should be encouraged and welcomed from all.
20:07 walterbender CanoeBerry2, perhaps I was too terse in my preamble...
20:07 davelab6 does anyone have any requests for changes to https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/[…]t_Board/Decisions ?
20:07 walterbender +1 from me
20:07 sverma Approve
20:07 tony37 Could we have the text of the motion?
20:07 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> +1
20:07 kaametza sorry but I don't understand
20:08 walterbender tony37,  motion: While suggestions for motions can come from anyone in the community, motions should be made by Sugar Labs oversight board members.
20:08 kaametza if am not a SLOB and would like a vote on a motion what shall i do?
20:08 llaske +1
20:08 CanoeBerry2 +1
20:08 tony37 Walter. Thanks
20:08 davelab6 kaametza: you can not vote on motions if you are not a SLOB
20:08 Claudia_ +1
20:08 walterbender motion passes.
20:08 tony37 kaametza - try to persuade a member of the Board
20:09 +1
20:09 davelab6 kaametza: you can indicate how you would vote to inform the board, since their duty is to serve the community
20:09 kaametza i know davelab6 i mean if i want to propose a motion
20:09 GrannieB2 <kaametza> just contact a SLOB member and get them to present your motion
20:09 walterbender I have a comment/suggestion in relation to transparency
20:09 davelab6 kaametza: but the way representative democracy works is that only the elected members of the board can vote :)
20:09 kaametza what would be the procedure?
20:10 tony37 Kaametza - you are welcome to propose an action by the Board at any time.
20:10 walterbender kaametza, make suggestions on the list and work with your elected officials to get your proposals before the board for a vote
20:10 davelab6 kaametza: oh i see. from what i can observe, you need to propose it to a SLOB who will arrange to put it on the agenda for the next meeting, and if there isn't time to vote on it at the meeting, the chair (walter) will solicit votes via email to be counted 7 days later
20:11 and i believe there is a "rolling email SLOB meeting", where motions can be posted via email on any day, and then a 7 day window opens to second and vote on it.
20:11 tony37 Kaametza - there are many avenues - IAEP, an email to one or all Board members.
20:11 GrannieB2 it hasn't been working that way. Things have been held over until the mext meeting on several recent motions
20:11 kaametza ok so it is basically the same we have now
20:11 tony37 davelab6 - an action can be proposed at any time. It is a motion when made by a Board member.
20:11 CanoeBerry2 My understanding of "seconding" is that 2 board members need to speak in favor (asking for voting to begin) and then voting starts.
20:11 davelab6 tony37: right
20:12 CanoeBerry2: isnt the presentation of the motion the first unit of speech in favor?
20:12 CanoeBerry2: and the seconding is the 2nd unit?
20:12 GrannieB2 +1
20:12 sverma It helps to have at least two board members be favorable before something becomes a motion
20:12 walterbender anyway, my suggestion re transparency is that unless it is explicitly stated as private, I will forward all email to SLOB list to IAEP (using some judgment as well)
20:13 CanoeBerry2 Amending takes serious time, so an abstract sentiment of approval doesn't mean you want voting to start!
20:13 tony37 Walter +1
20:13 walterbender sverma, or two who think it is worth bringing to a vote
20:13 davelab6 walterbender: i think that makes sense for board members; conservancy lawyers dont want their emails to become public (or distributed outside the SLOB i guess but not sure on that) since they then lose attorney-client privilege
20:14 walterbender davelab6, this is where my "judgment" will come in
20:14 davelab6 walterbender: i agree :)
20:14 walterbender I won't forward email from Tony (SFC lawyer) without his prior approval
20:14 sverma I have to leave. Off to another meeting
20:14 Claudia_ I have to leave soon
20:14 walterbender me too...
20:14 thanks everyone
20:14 CanoeBerry2 Ciao!
20:14 sverma Until next time :-)
20:14 adborden waves
20:15 walterbender some progress today :)
20:15 GrannieB2 bye
20:15 sverma +1
20:15 adborden yay
20:15 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> *Chau.
20:15 tony37 bye
20:15 walterbender #end-meeting
20:15 llaske Bye
20:15 meeting Meeting ended Fri Jul  1 20:15:12 2016 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. (v 0.1.4)
20:15 Minutes: http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]-01T19:00:23.html
20:15 llaske has quit IRC
20:15 meeting Log:     http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]16-07-01T19:00:23

Minutes | Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

Powered by ilbot/Modified.