This is the recent traffic on the #SPF-council IRC channel on irc.pobox.com. Anyone may join the channel, but only council members can talk.
If you do not have access to IRC, you may view the recent traffic at: http://www.schlitt.net/spf/spf-council/now/irc_log.html.
This log can be can be viewed at: http://www.schlitt.net/spf/spf-council/2004/12/05_irc_log.html.
IRC nicknames:
| csm | Chuck Mead |
| freeside | Meng Weng Wong |
| grumpy | Wayne Schlitt |
| Julian | Julian Mehnle |
| MarkK | Mark Kramer (asarian-host.net) |
| --- Wed Dec 1 17:14:17 UTC 2004 --- | ||
| 17:14 | <MarkK> | hi wayne |
| 17:14 | * | grumpy tries to figure out the "voice" options to IRC |
| 17:15 | <MarkK> | you mean to 'silence' someone? |
| 17:15 | <grumpy> | yeah, so that anyone can watch, but only council members can talk. |
| 17:15 | <grumpy> | try to say something |
| 17:16 | <grumpy> | try to say something now |
| 17:17 | <MarkK> | I did :) It said, 'cannot send to channel' |
| 17:17 | <grumpy> | ok, it appears that if you have ops, you have a voice |
| 17:17 | <grumpy> | if you don't have ops, you can be given a voice. |
| 17:17 | <MarkK> | yes; that is perfect |
| 17:23 | <MarkK> | btw, the Received-SPF header came up again; we might want to do something with that too; like I posted, ever since the MarkL draft, its status has become somewhat unstable/undefined. |
| 17:23 | <MarkK> | Your draft puts it back in, if I recall correctly |
| 17:24 | <grumpy> | Yes, and I need to work on it. |
| 17:27 | <MarkK> | welcome |
| 17:27 | <csm-laptop> | okees |
| 17:27 | <MarkK> | you have now :) |
| 17:27 | <csm-laptop> | csm and csm-laptop are my two ID's if something can be set up to allow both that would be great |
| 17:29 | <grumpy> | join with both |
| 17:29 | <grumpy> | or, I can get a bot to auto-op certain people. |
| 17:31 | <MarkK> | my sentiments exactly |
| 17:51 | <csm-laptop> | well my other client is running at home... that's the regular csm one... this one is... obviously... the laptop |
| 17:53 | <grumpy> | I'm working on getting the auto-op bot working now. |
| 17:53 | <grumpy> | once done, you should be able to come and go as you please |
| 17:53 | <MarkK> | great! |
| 17:53 | <csm-laptop> | cool |
| 18:07 | <csm-laptop> | that's one thing about having a group made up entirely of technical savants... getting things done quickly is not a problem is it's only a technical issue |
| 18:09 | <MarkK> | yes; it is the poltics that usually slow things down |
| 18:11 | <grumpy> | Well, considering that the bot I'm trying to make work is written in Python, and I don't know python, I'm not too sure about getting this done "quickly". ;-) |
| 18:23 | <MarkK> | I am not too fond of python myself; it looks just like Perl, but less readable. ;) Although I'm sure real Python adepts would say the opposite. :) |
| 18:49 | <grumpy> | could someone try leaving and rejoining the channel? |
| 18:50 | * | grumpy grumbles |
| 18:51 | <grumpy> | yay! |
| 18:51 | <grumpy> | could you try again? |
| 18:56 | <MarkK> | yay! |
| 18:56 | <grumpy> | Ugh, you did it right when I took 0pm3 down... could you try again? |
| 18:57 | <MarkK> | it seems you are more proficient in Python than you gave yourself credit for! ) |
| 18:57 | <MarkK> | It says: "* {0pm3} sets mode: +o MarkK" |
| 18:57 | <grumpy> | No, my friend writes perfect perl code |
| 18:57 | <MarkK> | seems to work |
| 18:58 | <MarkK> | works smoothly |
| 18:58 | <grumpy> | ok, now all I need to know is the /whois info for csm (not csm-laptop) and Julian |
| 18:58 | <MarkK> | is it nick-based? |
| 18:58 | <grumpy> | no |
| 18:58 | <grumpy> | I think it is "user" based. |
| 18:59 | <grumpy> | e.g., I trigger off of ~admin@mail.asarian-host.net |
| 18:59 | <grumpy> | (the ~ is important. That was why it didn't work the first time.) |
| 18:59 | <grumpy> | is that secure enough? |
| 19:00 | <grumpy> | the other channel that this was used on didn't need very much security. |
| 19:00 | <MarkK> | yes; think so; the ~ is from the ident server, I think |
| 19:01 | * | MarkK says: it has been a while since I programmed irc stuff; but if I recall correctly, the ~ LHS comes from the local ident server (built into mIRC) |
| 19:02 | <MarkK> | funny name, though, 0pm3 :) |
| 19:02 | <grumpy> | Well, if it ever doesn't have ops, I think it screams OP ME! |
| 19:03 | <MarkK> | LOL, now I get it! |
| 19:10 | <MarkK> | seems to work real well |
| 19:10 | * | grumpy is having a hard time getting the code to set +m working |
| 19:12 | <MarkK> | hello? |
| 19:13 | <grumpy> | ? |
| 19:13 | <MarkK> | just testing if I had a voice :) |
| 19:13 | <grumpy> | oh, you have ops. |
| 19:13 | <MarkK> | Oh yes |
| 19:13 | <grumpy> | but if anyone enters right now, they have a voice |
| 19:13 | <grumpy> | 0pm3 should fix that automatically |
| 19:14 | <grumpy> | s/should/is designed to/ |
| 19:15 | * | grumpy discovers that he is changing the wrong line of code |
| 19:16 | <grumpy> | Duh! |
| 19:30 | <csm-laptop> | okay... callbacks from moongroup are now from <> instead of postmaster |
| 19:31 | <MarkK> | good :) |
| 19:31 | <MarkK> | Then I can send SRS addresses to it again :) |
| 19:33 | * | MarkK reminds himself to be careful not go get into it again with David Woodhouse |
| 19:34 | <csm-laptop> | sometime when I am not teaching I'd like to hear more about this issue... no time for it now... callbacks with postmaster seems reasonable to me... but plz don't get into it now... I have 20 students here in class and cannot focus on it now |
| 19:52 | <MarkK> | hello |
| 20:00 | <MarkK> | hmm, bot keeps shifting in and out a bit :) |
| 20:00 | <grumpy> | JUST ONE MORE BUG!!! |
| 20:02 | <MarkK> | it seems to quit, actually (not disconnect because of timeout and such) |
| 20:03 | <grumpy> | that's a feature. I'm supposed to be able to do a /msg {0pm3} die |
| 20:03 | <grumpy> | but, for some reason, doing a '/msg 0pm3 die' didn't work. Duh. |
| 20:05 | <MarkK> | :) |
| 20:06 | <grumpy> | Yah! |
| 20:06 | <grumpy> | it set the mode! |
| 20:06 | <MarkK> | yes, it did at that! |
| 20:11 | <MarkK> | good work, wayne! |
| 20:40 | <freeside> | what's the email address for the spf-council mailing list? |
| 20:41 | <freeside> | can we move it to listbox to keep everything consistent? |
| 20:43 | <MarkK> | pf-council@moongroup.com |
| 20:43 | <grumpy> | spf even |
| 20:43 | <MarkK> | spf-council@moongroup.com, even |
| 20:43 | <grumpy> | Hey! {0pm3} worked from freeside on the first try! |
| 20:46 | <freeside> | yeah, pretty cool, eh |
| 20:46 | <freeside> | +v would be preferable to +o though |
| 20:47 | <grumpy> | I can do both... |
| 20:47 | <MarkK> | +v? what dies that do again? |
| 20:47 | <MarkK> | does, even |
| 20:47 | <grumpy> | gives voice |
| 20:47 | <MarkK> | duh |
| 20:48 | <MarkK> | :) |
| 20:48 | <freeside> | speaking of giving voice |
| 20:48 | <freeside> | it would be really nice to raise the level of discourse on the list |
| 20:48 | <freeside> | by perhaps censuring certain outrageously inappropriate forms of behaviour |
| 20:49 | <freeside> | saying, for instance, "no. you are clueless." or "you work fo ra large corporation, all large corporations are evil, therefore you are evil" or more simply calling verisign VeriSlime |
| 20:49 | <grumpy> | the reasons why it gives ops is: 1) that's what the bot originally did. 2) if there is a net-split or something that causes the bot to lose ops, someone needs to be around to give it ops again. |
| 20:49 | <grumpy> | freeside: I agree. |
| 20:49 | <MarkK> | or calling long-standing members trolls for merely disagreeing with them |
| 20:49 | <grumpy> | but, I thought that was what greg and you were doing. |
| 20:49 | <freeside> | i mean, we can have a list with kooks, we can have a list with corporate representatives, but i don't think we can have a list with both |
| 20:50 | <grumpy> | you are calling PHB a kook? |
| 20:50 | <freeside> | huh, good point. i didn't think about kooky corporate representatives |
| 20:50 | <csm-laptop> | what about woodshed? |
| 20:50 | <grumpy> | not to mention evil people |
| 20:50 | <csm-laptop> | does he qualify as a kook? |
| 20:50 | <MarkK> | it has deteriorated some, of late |
| 20:50 | <freeside> | PHB may be obnoxious but he's generally right, and he doesn't cross the line when he talks about trolls. |
| 20:50 | <grumpy> | csm-laptop: woodshed is probably not a good term |
| 20:50 | <freeside> | i mea, truth is the best defense. |
| 20:50 | <csm-laptop> | I mean last week we were all wearing underwear on our heads according to him! |
| 20:50 | <freeside> | and people are, in fact, pretty trollish sometims. |
| 20:51 | <freeside> | so, i'm just bringing this up with the council |
| 20:51 | <grumpy> | I don't think Seth was being a troll, and I *do* think PHB crossed the line. |
| 20:52 | <MarkK> | I think he did too; it was very uncalled for |
| 20:52 | <csm-laptop> | grumpy: what's wrong with woodshed as a euphimism for woodhouse? |
| 20:52 | <grumpy> | it isn't his correct name. |
| 20:52 | * | grumpy is very sensitive about dropping the 'l' in schlitt |
| 20:52 | <grumpy> | ;-) |
| 20:52 | <csm-laptop> | yes but it's how I think of him andyou understood me... |
| 20:52 | <csm-laptop> | he-he |
| 20:53 | <grumpy> | seriously, I'm not sensitive at all, but I think not using peoples proper names lowers the level of discourse |
| 20:53 | <MarkK> | reality is, opponenent of SPF will often try their case, ad nauseam almost, in here; and that is perhaps not really a bad thing. I, for one, will from now on be more responsible in not engaging them endless rounds that go nowhere. |
| 20:54 | <csm-laptop> | MarkK: agreed |
| 20:54 | <grumpy> | We want to encourage serious criticisms, just not the repeated ad-nauseam ones. |
| 20:54 | <csm-laptop> | in fact certain users mail simply goes "Pl0nk!" for me now |
| 20:55 | <freeside> | one of my goals for a future reputation system is for "plonk"ing to become visible publicly. |
| 20:55 | <csm-laptop> | okay so here is a question |
| 20:55 | <freeside> | so peopel can subscribe to killfiles in the same way they can subscribe to mailing lists |
| 20:55 | <freeside> | yay for balkanization! |
| 20:55 | <csm-laptop> | do we want to redefine the lists? |
| 20:55 | <csm-laptop> | eg. |
| 20:55 | <freeside> | i suppose i should nto be surprised that in SFO a reasonably well-muscled middle-aged guy is wearing tight black leather pants. |
| 20:56 | <grumpy> | no, you shouldn't be. |
| 20:56 | <grumpy> | you should be surprised that he is wearing any pants at all. ;-) |
| 20:56 | <csm-laptop> | the discuss list is for discussion on how spf works and improving it perhaps... the neagative opinions may only be discussed on ALT+opinion+SPF after the opinion holder implements their own list? |
| 20:56 | <freeside> | i would also like the list to stop bashing DK and alternative technologies |
| 20:57 | <freeside> | promote your own thing, and if somebody else is into their other thing, more power to them. |
| 20:57 | <freeside> | miles libbey didn't win any points with anyone when he startede bashing spf and sender id at recent conferences. |
| 20:57 | <grumpy> | csm-laptop: isn't that waht SPF-help is for? |
| 20:57 | <MarkK> | I think important, at least for me, is to determine motive. If I feel someone is just out there to weaken SPF (with the obvious agenda of promotinhg their own stuff), then I think I should not go hat way anymore. Not that overstate my new role in the council, of course; but I *do* feel that it comes with the responsibility of trying to stay above the fray, and not going in deep in every skirmish. |
| 20:57 | <csm-laptop> | grumpy: what do you mean... the help list is which? |
| 20:58 | <MarkK> | I think I am not even on spf-help. ;) |
| 20:58 | <grumpy> | SPF-help is where you are supposed to post requests about implementing SPF on your site and how it works. |
| 20:59 | <grumpy> | spf-devel is about creating SPF implementations |
| 20:59 | <csm-laptop> | grumpy: okay what I mean is SPF at the protocol definition level... not the implementation level |
| 20:59 | <grumpy> | MarkK: I'm subscribed, but I think I'm over 1000 msg behind on reading it. |
| 20:59 | <MarkK> | I am on devel; I will subscribe to help, too |
| 20:59 | <csm-laptop> | brb |
| 21:00 | <grumpy> | anyway, I agree about raising the level of discourse and I think the council should delegate that to gconnor and freeside. |
| 21:00 | <grumpy> | although having someone else help out might not be a bad idea. Maybe someone in europe. |
| 21:01 | <MarkK> | yes; gconner has already done that job admirably |
| 21:01 | <MarkK> | I am in Europe, too :) |
| 21:02 | <grumpy> | WEll, freeside is also in Europe about 25% of the time. ;-) |
| 21:03 | <MarkK> | I would be perfectly comfortable with letting freeside and gconner take the honors |
| 21:04 | * | grumpy would like to see some of the load being taken off freeside |
| 21:05 | <MarkK> | I would not mind doing it; but I do not want to diss gconner in the process |
| 21:10 | <MarkK> | anyone else from europe? |
| 21:11 | <grumpy> | Uh, gmx, jpinx, julian, and quite a few others |
| 21:11 | <MarkK> | jpinx would be good too |
| 21:23 | <grumpy> | MarkK: could you exit and rejoin? |
| 21:23 | <grumpy> | Hmmm... no voice |
| 21:23 | <MarkK> | Ok; just checking; it sets +o |
| 21:23 | <MarkK> | but +o already has a voice ;) |
| 21:26 | <MarkK> | *pout* |
| 21:27 | <grumpy> | apparently, +ov doesn't work, you have to use two mode commands |
| 21:27 | <MarkK> | shouldn't 0pm3 have done +v on me? |
| 21:28 | <grumpy> | it doesn't constantly rescan. it only checks when someone enters or on startup |
| 21:29 | <grumpy> | try now |
| 21:29 | <grumpy> | oh, wait |
| 21:29 | <MarkK> | yes, that makes sense; channel entries generate a system message to every person on channel |
| 21:29 | <csm-laptop> | I had thought gconnor was doing a good job |
| 21:30 | <MarkK> | I think so too |
| 21:30 | <grumpy> | he doesn't do a quick job when he is a sleep. |
| 21:30 | <grumpy> | that's my only objection, and it isn't a strong one |
| 21:30 | <grumpy> | we should just ask greg if he wants help, and if so, who he would recommend |
| 21:30 | <MarkK> | he is generally very tactful |
| 21:35 | <MarkK> | well, talking about sleep, I need to go to bed. ;) Its been a long day. Tommorow things will be official, and hopefully julian will be here, too. |
| 21:36 | <MarkK> | goodnight |
| 21:36 | <grumpy> | bibi |
| --- Thu Dec 2 15:07:07 UTC 2004 --- | ||
| 15:07 | <freeside> | so i've had some ideas about reinventing governance processes |
| 15:07 | <freeside> | i mean, if we're going to take over the world, we should start by creating a more effective form of decision making and group leadership |
| 15:07 | <freeside> | the primary insight i had was that we shouldn't focus so much on operating according to a system of rules; we should be more interested in creating a sustainable edcology of ideas to which we can mostly subscribe |
| 15:08 | <csm-laptop> | ah there we go |
| 15:08 | <csm-laptop> | it worked yesterday why not today? |
| 15:09 | <grumpy> | because I don't want to hear from you? |
| 15:09 | <grumpy> | ;-) |
| 15:09 | <csm-laptop> | hardee-har-har |
| 15:09 | <grumpy> | different IP address |
| 15:09 | <freeside> | mmm |
| 15:10 | <csm-laptop> | we should do registered nic's for the channel... then we won't have those issues |
| 15:10 | <grumpy> | Yeah, yeah, I'm working on the log posting script. |
| 15:11 | <grumpy> | it should be done Real Soon Now |
| 15:11 | <freeside> | in accordance with robert fritz's ideas, we should focus less on problem-solving thinking, which is tactical, and more on creative thinking, which is strategic. |
| 15:12 | <freeside> | for example, spam is not a problem that can be solved. it can only be outgrown. |
| 15:12 | <freeside> | our job is to help the mail system outgrow spam. |
| 15:12 | <freeside> | jon callas at pgp had a great metaphor for me yesterday. |
| 15:12 | <freeside> | dave anderson ahs for a long time been saying that reengineering email is a lot like trying to fix the engine on a racecar that's zooming down a racetrack. |
| 15:13 | <freeside> | but jon callas did had a better idea: reengineering email is like rewiring an old house. oh, and you're not allowed to turn off the power. and the house has 300,000,000 rooms. |
| 15:14 | <freeside> | i liked that. |
| 15:17 | <grumpy> | yeah, you can't turn off the power for the entire house, but you can for certain rooms/sections. some can only be turned off for a very short period of time, others can go dark forever. |
| 15:17 | <grumpy> | so, your idea is that as the house/city continues to be built, we just outgrow the rooms that have gas-light and tar-paper wrapped post wiring? |
| 15:17 | <grumpy> | (city is probably better than house) |
| 15:18 | <freeside> | the problemw ith turning off the light in a room is that all the residents come out from the woodwork and complain. |
| 15:18 | <grumpy> | it depends on the room/house |
| 15:19 | <grumpy> | In a city, a houses get torn down all the time and new roads are built. |
| 15:19 | <grumpy> | people don't like it, but they accept the short-term inconvience if they can see a long term gain. |
| 15:20 | <grumpy> | Ok, speaking of governance, if this isn't quasi-formal council discussions, I would prefer it take place on #spf. |
| 15:22 | <grumpy> | e.g., this channel would be for officially blessing decisions that have been thrashed out in the open forums. |
| 15:22 | <grumpy> | does that sound reasonable? |
| 15:22 | <freeside> | s/thrashed out/thrashed/ |
| 15:46 | <csm-laptop> | grumpy: once we have all the council members and present and get a chance to thrash out what we're going to do I'd be comfortabloe with that decision... right now we're all equals here but we shouldn't really try to decide much without at least getting some discussion going with all the members |
| 15:47 | <grumpy> | yeah |
| 15:48 | <grumpy> | I view my "council member hat", much like my "root user hat". I've got no problems putting it on, but I only do it when I need to. |
| 17:34 | <csm-laptop> | okay so the elector major has now declared the election official |
| 17:34 | <csm-laptop> | has anyone seen or heard from Julian since the results were made known? |
| 17:35 | <grumpy> | no. he said he would be back today, but who knows. plans change. |
| 17:37 | <csm-laptop> | I sent an email to spf thanking jpinkerton officially for his work with the election... I also let him know that we were discussing other things we might, possibly ask him to do... assistant to the #spf mailmom was mentioned... anything else? |
| 17:38 | <grumpy> | I think we need to ask gconnor about whether he needs help. |
| 17:38 | <csm-laptop> | yes I think that is appropriate |
| 17:38 | <grumpy> | s/we/you/ |
| 17:38 | <grumpy> | ;-) |
| 17:38 | * | grumpy delegates |
| 17:39 | * | csm-laptop smacks grumpy! |
| 17:39 | <grumpy> | ok! |
| 17:39 | <grumpy> | I'll do it! |
| 17:39 | <csm-laptop> | he-he |
| 17:39 | <grumpy> | ;-) |
| 17:39 | <csm-laptop> | hey... I jumped on jpink... you do something now... |
| 17:39 | <csm-laptop> | he-he |
| 17:39 | <csm-laptop> | :-) |
| 17:39 | <csm-laptop> | are we having fun yet? |
| 19:14 | <MarkK> | evening |
| 19:18 | <grumpy> | good afternoon. |
| 19:18 | <grumpy> | would you mind driving down and waking up Julian? ;-) |
| 19:18 | <MarkK> | I had hoped to meet with here, today :) |
| 19:20 | <MarkK> | Noe that things are official, I was wondering whether we should, either 'en group' or personally, issue a short public statement, thanking people and such? |
| 19:20 | <csm-laptop> | *we* thanked jpinkerton already |
| 19:22 | <MarkK> | yes, I saw that; it was good |
| 19:23 | <csm-laptop> | we need to send up a flare for Julian! |
| 19:36 | <grumpy> | fyi; http://www.schlitt.net/spf-council.html contains the current IRC log. |
| 19:36 | <grumpy> | the url will change, and I need to do a better job of formatting |
| 19:43 | <MarkK> | excellent; perhaos you can filter out the '<---' '--->' commands? |
| 19:44 | <MarkK> | there, I wrote something too :) |
| 19:44 | <grumpy> | Yeah, that is a good idea |
| 19:44 | * | grumpy kicks csm |
| 19:44 | <grumpy> | Apparently, I need to do a bunch of converstions from < and > to < and > |
| 19:45 | <MarkK> | your url brings up a good question: was there not talk of ppl wanting an 'official' spf site? Like you, wayne (I think it was you?), I do not mind calling the spf-pobox site the official SPF site. But I am open to other ideas, of course. |
| 19:46 | <MarkK> | It's a live log! cool |
| 19:46 | * | grumpy is just trying to up the hit count on his website.... |
| 19:46 | <grumpy> | ;-) |
| 19:47 | <grumpy> | MarkK: yeah, there has been some discussion of that. I think the goal is so that there could be a team of people who update the content. right now, spf.pobox.com can only be modified by Meng. |
| 19:47 | <grumpy> | Meng would have to be willing to give up some control, and I don't think anyone has asked him to. |
| 19:48 | <grumpy> | (btw, he is travelling today. I think he is currently at earthlink) |
| 19:48 | <MarkK> | the 'official' website has not my greatest priority, though |
| 19:49 | <grumpy> | agreed |
| 19:49 | <grumpy> | although it is something that, once the council gives the blessing, people can work on. |
| 19:50 | <MarkK> | yes |
| 19:51 | <MarkK> | btw, how do youdo that 'live' log? do you just rewrite the .html file? Or is it fancier? |
| 19:52 | <MarkK> | It's cute, though ;) |
| 19:52 | <grumpy> | no, it is uglier than that. |
| 19:52 | <grumpy> | (bash script, sed and cron) |
| 19:52 | <MarkK> | Well, it still works :) |
| 19:52 | * | grumpy is a hacker |
| 20:00 | <MarkK> | the page keeps updating every second, now; can you have it expire, say, every minute (that is the highest cron granularity anyway) |
| 20:01 | <grumpy> | that should be fixed. |
| 20:01 | * | grumpy didn't say he was a *good* hacker. |
| 20:01 | <MarkK> | it's minor :) |
| 20:04 | <MarkK> | Perhaps I should email Julian; maybe he'd like to join? |
| 20:04 | <grumpy> | he usually shows up on #spf |
| 20:05 | <MarkK> | what is his nick again? |
| 20:05 | <grumpy> | Julian |
| 20:05 | <MarkK> | doh :) |
| 20:06 | <MarkK> | Oh, the dereference of '%m' minutes variable seems to not go entirely right yet, either; aren't I annoying? ;) |
| 20:06 | <grumpy> | $#*(&# |
| 20:07 | <grumpy> | I thought I had that fixed |
| 20:07 | * | grumpy wonders what those characters are going to do in the html file |
| 20:07 | * | grumpy writes the script to disk |
| 20:17 | <MarkK> | yep, it's fixed now :) |
| 20:23 | <grumpy> | Yay! new url! |
| 20:25 | <csm-laptop> | I know Julian is not here but I think that what freeside was saying has some merit |
| 20:25 | <csm-laptop> | we were elected to do SPF's business |
| 20:25 | <grumpy> | what did freeside say? |
| 20:25 | * | grumpy probably agrees, but... |
| 20:25 | <csm-laptop> | some of that is competitive in nature and should not be public information |
| 20:25 | <csm-laptop> | we *DO* need the ability to have a private conversation |
| 20:26 | <grumpy> | yes |
| 20:26 | <grumpy> | I just want to keep it to a minimum |
| 20:27 | <csm-laptop> | as it stands we've got gman wanting to arhive the mailing list and this channel to have publicly archived logs... just exactly where would a "private" conversation take place? |
| 20:27 | <grumpy> | spf-council-executive-session? |
| 20:28 | <MarkK> | I agree; we *DO* need a place to discuss sensitive issues in private |
| 20:28 | <csm-laptop> | I would have no objection to that... |
| 20:28 | <csm-laptop> | now what I had in mind was something similar to what LPI does |
| 20:28 | <MarkK> | me neither |
| 20:29 | <csm-laptop> | they have an lpi-staff mailing list which all directors and staff participate in |
| 20:29 | <csm-laptop> | the board of directors have the vast majority of their discussions there. |
| 20:29 | <csm-laptop> | but when they need privacy the have the lpi-board mailing list... and it is not public |
| 20:29 | <grumpy> | sounds reasonable |
| 20:30 | <MarkK> | yes |
| 20:30 | <csm-laptop> | that is why I wanted to create the spf-council mailing list on a private host so it would be our "private" place |
| 20:30 | <grumpy> | Oh. |
| 20:31 | <MarkK> | I see no immediate need to move the list; does anyone else? |
| 20:31 | <grumpy> | I thought this was just a place where our discussions wouldn't clutter up #spf and spf-discuss and where other people's comments wouldn't drown out our discussions. |
| 20:31 | <grumpy> | I see no need to move the list. |
| 20:31 | <csm-laptop> | but then the suggestion was made that we should allow others to subscribe and I acceded to that wish but in retrospect I think we'd be better off if we had at least one place that we could have discussions behind closed doors... |
| 20:32 | <MarkK> | Meng did, I think |
| 20:32 | <csm-laptop> | yeah Meng wanted to move it |
| 20:32 | <csm-laptop> | I wanted it in a private place |
| 20:32 | <csm-laptop> | I dunno listbox does he admin it? |
| 20:32 | <grumpy> | he is one of the admins |
| 20:33 | <MarkK> | so do I; I think there is nothing wrong with keeping at least our private list private |
| 20:33 | <csm-laptop> | okay well moongroup has only one admin |
| 20:33 | <csm-laptop> | so hwo about this |
| 20:33 | <grumpy> | can we trust you? |
| 20:33 | <grumpy> | ;-) |
| 20:33 | <csm-laptop> | we create an spf-staff list |
| 20:33 | <csm-laptop> | on listbox |
| 20:34 | <grumpy> | or spf-politics? |
| 20:35 | <csm-laptop> | and the council and any selected staff use that for their discussions and that would leave the council free to use the spf-council mailing list for private stuff |
| 20:35 | <grumpy> | for all I care, the other list could be on moongroup |
| 20:35 | <grumpy> | Well, since spf-council is already set up, why don't we create an spf-private |
| 20:36 | <csm-laptop> | okay |
| 20:36 | <csm-laptop> | I'm really open for anything here so long as we meet Meng's very reasonable request for a private place |
| 20:37 | <grumpy> | I'm open too, as long as the private place is used only for things that need to be private. |
| 20:37 | <MarkK> | agreed |
| 20:37 | <csm-laptop> | yes... and it works okay because there are those of us who are concerned with openness who will continually point out when we're closing a process that does not need to be |
| 20:38 | <grumpy> | For example, the old spf-oracle list was lightly used, and generally for things that were private, but the "spf-council" list on uh, gmc's box was just SPF-discuss with a smaller group of people. |
| 20:51 | <csm-laptop> | okay... check your email... (all of you) |
| --- Fri Dec 3 01:20:18 UTC 2004 --- | ||
| 01:20 | <csm> | freeside... did you figure out what was up with your in bound mail from the council list? |
| 02:09 | <freeside> | yeah, it was getting saved to some other mailbxo |
| 02:13 | <csm> | thought it might have been on your end |
| 02:22 | <csm> | freeside: did you see my comments about an "executive" list which is not public? |
| 02:50 | <freeside> | yeah |
| 02:58 | <csm> | okay good |
| 02:59 | <csm> | you should have a subscription message from it as well... send "non-public" info there |
| 02:59 | <csm> | the archives for that list are private as it's the distribution... |
| 03:08 | <freeside> | thanks |
| 03:16 | <csm> | you're welcome... I know you wanted it and I knew we needed it so... /me shrugs... :-) |
| 19:18 | <Julian> | Hey! |
| 19:19 | * | Julian adds #spf-council to the auto-join list. |
| 19:19 | <grumpy> | we are trying to set up a time try and get this council thing rolling. |
| 19:19 | <grumpy> | when can you be available? |
| 19:20 | <Julian> | What's a time try? |
| 19:21 | <grumpy> | s/time try/time to try/ |
| 19:21 | * | grumpy can't speak english |
| 19:21 | <Julian> | Oh, ok. |
| 19:21 | <grumpy> | btw, congratulations on your election. |
| 19:21 | <Julian> | I am usually available between 09:00 and 01:00 UTC. |
| 19:22 | <Julian> | Thanks. |
| 19:23 | <Julian> | We had such a good collection of candidates, I was having a hard time choosing myself. Some candidates were an easy choice (you, Meng), but the others... :) |
| 19:23 | <grumpy> | MarkK usually shows up in the evening (UTC), so maybe that would work |
| 19:23 | <grumpy> | agreed. |
| 19:25 | * | Julian gets a snack. |
| 19:25 | * | csm-laptop smacks Julian for that "others" comment! ;-) |
| 19:25 | <Julian> | csm: Hey! ;-) |
| 19:26 | <csm-laptop> | wuzzup bud? |
| 19:26 | <csm-laptop> | how was the "vacation"? |
| 19:26 | <Julian> | Busy it was. |
| 19:26 | <Julian> | I had a conference with some EU Greens. |
| 19:27 | <csm-laptop> | oye |
| 19:27 | <csm-laptop> | so we need to have a meeting |
| 19:27 | <csm-laptop> | get everybody together at the same time |
| 19:28 | <csm-laptop> | for those of us who are UTC impaired what US east coast time fram are you available? |
| 19:28 | <Julian> | Tomorrow evening (UTC) would probably be a good time. |
| 19:28 | <Julian> | Hum. :) |
| 19:30 | <Julian> | What time zone is US east coast? +06? |
| 19:30 | <Julian> | -06, I mean? |
| 19:30 | <grumpy> | yeah, at this time of year. |
| 19:30 | * | grumpy thinks that EU has daylight savings time, but it isn't quite in sync with the US |
| 19:31 | <Julian> | 20:00 UTC = 14:00 +06 |
| 19:31 | <Julian> | Uh... |
| 19:31 | <Julian> | 20:00 UTC = 14:00 -06, that is. |
| 19:31 | <Julian> | (Why is it I keep mixing up - and +?) |
| 19:31 | <grumpy> | I could do that. |
| 19:31 | <csm-laptop> | this is why some of us are UTC impaired |
| 19:32 | <grumpy> | (wayne@backbone$ TZ=UTC date |
| 19:32 | <csm-laptop> | so would 1400 tomorrow work for you? |
| 19:32 | <grumpy> | that's always my solution. ;-) |
| 19:33 | <Julian> | io:~> TZ=UTC date |
| 19:33 | <Julian> | Fri Dec 3 19:33:05 UTC 2004 |
| 19:33 | <Julian> | io:~> date -u |
| 19:33 | <Julian> | Fri Dec 3 19:33:16 UTC 2004 |
| 19:33 | <Julian> | ;-) |
| 19:34 | <csm-laptop> | Julian: would 2000 your time... 1400 our time... tomorrow work for you? |
| 19:34 | <Julian> | csm: Yes. My time is 21:00, though (I'm +01). |
| 19:34 | <csm-laptop> | okay so where in the world is Julian San Diego? |
| 19:35 | <grumpy> | DE, IIRC |
| 19:35 | <Julian> | Right, DE. Munich/Bavaria, to be more precise. |
| 19:36 | <csm-laptop> | Oh I love that part of De |
| 19:36 | <csm-laptop> | beautiful down there |
| 19:36 | <grumpy> | I guess the only council member's city I haven't visited is chucks... |
| 19:37 | <csm-laptop> | Salzburg and Berchtesgaden are so close |
| 19:37 | <csm-laptop> | oh... and Garmisch too |
| 19:38 | <Julian> | Where's Chuck? |
| 19:38 | <csm-laptop> | today I am in Raleigh, NC |
| 19:39 | <Julian> | csm: I mean, where do you live usually? |
| 19:39 | <csm-laptop> | sunday through thursday I will be in NYC |
| 19:39 | <csm-laptop> | I own a home here but am on the road a lot |
| 19:39 | <Julian> | I see. |
| 19:40 | <csm-laptop> | I teach for Red Hat... :-) |
| 19:41 | <Julian> | grumpy: The #spf-council logger is a good idea. Does it keep an archive of older sessions? |
| 19:42 | <csm-laptop> | listen... I have to steop out for a bit... is tomorrow at 1400 my time acceptable for an IRC chat? |
| 19:42 | <grumpy> | they get posted to the spf-council mailing list. |
| 19:42 | <csm-laptop> | I will send email to announce it if you guys agree |
| 19:42 | <grumpy> | fine with me |
| 19:43 | * | Julian is fine with that too. |
| 19:43 | <csm-laptop> | email sent |
| 19:44 | <csm-laptop> | bbiab... prolly headed home but I have to stick my head into the office first... exam is offer... classroom is cleaned up... I'm out of here! |
| 20:34 | <csm> | back |
| --- Sat Dec 4 00:31:16 UTC 2004 --- | ||
| 00:31 | <Julian> | See you at ~10:00 UTC. |
| 00:31 | <Julian> | (...and of course at 20:00 UTC.) |
| 18:43 | <freeside> | moooo |
| 18:44 | <csm> | b0rk |
| 18:52 | <freeside> | what's the agenda for the meeting? |
| 18:52 | <freeside> | i have been working on a HSARPA proposal which i'm ready to show the council. |
| 18:57 | <csm> | we need to have an organizational discussion |
| 18:57 | <csm> | we've been elected... now we have to figure out how we're going to operate |
| 18:57 | <Julian> | I agree. |
| 18:58 | <freeside> | motion has been seconded; it passes. |
| 18:58 | <freeside> | however, the meeting has not been called to order. |
| 18:58 | <Julian> | I think we should first decide whether we are going to set up organizational structures and then re-vote. |
| 18:58 | <freeside> | the motion is therefore void. |
| 18:59 | * | Julian is not a rules freak. |
| 18:59 | <freeside> | i think it's important for us to agree on mission and objective. |
| 18:59 | <Julian> | Yup. |
| 19:00 | <freeside> | we should also review work that's being done and see what's lacking. |
| 19:00 | <freeside> | also raising the level of discourse and reducing the volume on the list would be nice. |
| 19:01 | <csm> | well the meeting needs to wait until the appointed time... |
| 19:01 | <Julian> | You're taking the words out of my mouth. ;-) |
| 19:01 | <csm> | we're early |
| 19:01 | <freeside> | what's the appointed time? |
| 19:01 | * | Julian gets something to eat. bbl |
| 19:01 | <freeside> | i need a few minutes to generate some PDF anyway |
| 19:01 | <Julian> | freeside: 20:00 UTC. |
| 19:01 | <Julian> | It's 19:00 now. |
| 19:02 | <csm> | yay! |
| 19:02 | <csm> | someone call this gaggle to order then |
| 19:02 | <csm> | and somebody send out an APB on Mark |
| 19:02 | <csm> | he said he's be here |
| 19:02 | <freeside> | are you sure? i thoguht we said 2pm eastern |
| 19:03 | <csm> | it *IS* 2pm eastern |
| 19:04 | <csm> | [csm@stealth ~]$ date |
| 19:04 | <csm> | Sat Dec 4 14:04:35 EST 2004 |
| 19:05 | <freeside> | julian seems to think we're an hour away |
| 19:05 | <freeside> | i need to go get a snack. brb |
| 19:05 | <csm> | okees |
| 19:05 | * | csm smacks Julian... |
| 19:05 | <csm> | I told you I was UTC impaired when we discussed this... |
| 19:05 | <csm> | dang it! |
| 19:06 | <Julian> | csm: |
| 19:06 | <Julian> | io:~> date -uIm |
| 19:06 | <Julian> | 2004-12-04T19:05+0000 |
| 19:06 | <Julian> | Typing `date -u` shouldn't be too hard. ;-) |
| 19:07 | <csm> | yes... *BUT* I asked *YOU* about this... essentially what time would it be UTC when it's 2pm eastern in the US! |
| 19:07 | * | csm is blaming *YOU* for this debacle |
| 19:07 | <csm> | LOL! |
| 19:07 | <freeside> | point of order: blame cannot be officially transferred without a simple majority vote of the council. |
| 19:08 | <Julian> | Well, ok, if you want we can start right now, too. |
| 19:09 | <csm> | bwaaaaaaaaahahahahahhaahahaha |
| 19:09 | * | csm thinks this is gonna be fun |
| 19:09 | <freeside> | ok, who's 'here? |
| 19:09 | <csm> | it's not a big deal really... just having a bit of fun |
| 19:09 | * | Julian is not a "US eastern time" expert. :-) |
| 19:10 | <freeside> | show of hands for those present, please |
| 19:10 | * | csm is UTC impaired... Julian is US EST impaired |
| 19:10 | <freeside> | grumpy, shew, MarkK |
| 19:10 | <csm> | hand |
| 19:10 | * | Julian waves with his right hand. |
| 19:11 | * | csm waves with his left hand |
| 19:11 | <freeside> | we have a quorum, but i'd rather not proceed without at least one other person |
| 19:11 | * | csm notes that the right hand was on the coffee cup |
| 19:12 | <Julian> | I think we should not start before 20:00 UTC if not all of us are present. |
| 19:12 | <csm> | aye... |
| 19:12 | <csm> | we have to wait another hour |
| 19:12 | <freeside> | ok |
| 19:12 | * | csm sulks |
| 19:13 | <csm> | grumpy is prolly with his kids |
| 19:13 | <csm> | but... on a completely unrelated topic I am quite pleased at the moment |
| 19:13 | <csm> | found the damnrpm that contains the /lib/modules/%version/build dir on rhel4 |
| 19:21 | <freeside> | hm, i'm going to go outside to forage |
| 19:21 | <freeside> | brb |
| 19:21 | <csm> | :-) |
| 19:22 | * | csm trolled the kitchen an hour ago |
| 19:22 | <csm> | caught some stuff too! |
| 19:38 | <freeside> | mmm. |
| 19:50 | <grumpy> | ugh |
| 19:50 | * | grumpy realizes he mistranslated tz's |
| 19:50 | <grumpy> | sorry guys |
| 19:50 | <csm> | no worries |
| 19:51 | <csm> | we're tied to 2000 UTC (regardless of our 1400 EST declaration) which is not for 10 more minutes |
| 19:51 | <grumpy> | Oh |
| 19:51 | <Julian> | grumpy: :) |
| 19:51 | * | grumpy is saved by the mistranslations of tz's |
| 19:52 | <csm> | [root@stealth ~]# date -u |
| 19:52 | <csm> | Sat Dec 4 19:52:06 UTC 2004 |
| 19:52 | * | csm has been edumacated about UTC by Julian! |
| 19:53 | * | Julian sings: Why can't we all just live in a single timezone? |
| 20:00 | <grumpy> | 20:00 UTC |
| 20:00 | <Julian> | Hrrm. |
| 20:00 | <freeside> | mmm |
| 20:00 | <grumpy> | MarkK was around earlier... |
| 20:00 | <grumpy> | ~5hrs ago. |
| 20:01 | <Julian> | Heh. |
| 20:02 | <freeside> | good, we're all here. |
| 20:02 | <grumpy> | even if MarkK is an hour late. |
| 20:02 | <grumpy> | sorry MarkK, should have noticed that. |
| 20:02 | <MarkK> | what do you mean, an hour late? I am at GMT+1 |
| 20:03 | <grumpy> | just kidding.. |
| 20:03 | <grumpy> | Chuck, Meng and I all got confused, I guess. |
| 20:03 | <MarkK> | pfew :) |
| 20:03 | <grumpy> | Actually, I thought it was supposed to be now, but on my way back from seeing my kids, I realized that csm said 14:00 EST, which was an hour ago. |
| 20:04 | <Julian> | MarkK: You're at +01 too? Where do you live? |
| 20:04 | <grumpy> | NL |
| 20:04 | <MarkK> | The Netherlands |
| 20:04 | <Julian> | ok |
| 20:04 | <grumpy> | just west of where I used to live. (Utrecht) |
| 20:04 | <Julian> | Is there DST (daylight saving time) in EST? |
| 20:04 | <MarkK> | cool :) |
| 20:04 | <grumpy> | yes |
| 20:05 | <grumpy> | but, IIRC, the US and EU don't switch at on the same day |
| 20:05 | <Julian> | Hmm. Isn't EST supposed to be -06? |
| 20:05 | <Julian> | (including DST) |
| 20:05 | * | MarkK 's head hurts :) |
| 20:05 | <grumpy> | ok, shall we get the show on the road? |
| 20:05 | <MarkK> | yes |
| 20:06 | <grumpy> | csm: you here? |
| 20:06 | * | grumpy was last seen trolling for food in the kitchen. |
| 20:06 | <Julian> | io:~> TZ=EST date |
| 20:06 | <Julian> | Sat Dec 4 15:06:08 EST 2004 |
| 20:06 | <Julian> | Hmm. |
| 20:07 | <grumpy> | csm? |
| 20:07 | <MarkK> | what the heck is up with all this djbdns talk, btw? :) |
| 20:08 | <grumpy> | oh, it is just some idiots that don't understand that emacs has the true DNS server built in. |
| 20:09 | <MarkK> | shall we get started? |
| 20:09 | <Julian> | csm: ping |
| 20:09 | <grumpy> | freeside: you here? |
| 20:09 | <freeside> | i'm here. |
| 20:09 | <freeside> | so, let's get started |
| 20:10 | <grumpy> | ok |
| 20:10 | * | freeside looks at the agenda. |
| 20:10 | <csm> | pong |
| 20:10 | * | grumpy looks for an agenda |
| 20:10 | <grumpy> | Whee! |
| 20:10 | <grumpy> | Uh, I think the first thing we need to decide is what what our goals are, and what our organization should be |
| 20:10 | <freeside> | i suggest for now we proceed without adopting robert's rules, and if we get to a point where we need them, we can revisit the issue. |
| 20:11 | <freeside> | so, moving on to the goals and organizational form. |
| 20:11 | <csm> | I agree... keep it simple for now |
| 20:11 | * | grumpy misread "without" as "with" |
| 20:11 | <grumpy> | *wheee* |
| 20:11 | * | grumpy agrees with freeside |
| 20:11 | <Julian> | I also object to using RRO. |
| 20:11 | <MarkK> | yes, abide by the KISS principle; if we need to complicate matters along the way, we can always do so later :) |
| 20:12 | <Julian> | I think it's too complicated, and over-kill in effect. |
| 20:12 | <grumpy> | Shall we adopt the IETF WG process until we need to have other rules? |
| 20:12 | <freeside> | we can, of course, use whatever useful subset of the RRO if we want to. |
| 20:12 | <freeside> | for example, we can call for a vote on something at any time, and try to poll council members to see what they think. |
| 20:12 | <Julian> | Yes |
| 20:12 | <MarkK> | yes |
| 20:12 | <freeside> | yes |
| 20:12 | <grumpy> | yes |
| 20:12 | <csm> | eh? |
| 20:12 | <freeside> | what are we all saying yes to? |
| 20:13 | <grumpy> | that we can call for a vote |
| 20:13 | <Julian> | "for example, we can call for a vote on something at any time, and try to poll council members to see what they think." |
| 20:13 | <grumpy> | if we need to |
| 20:13 | <freeside> | ok, fine. |
| 20:13 | <freeside> | okay, so, let's keep going. |
| 20:13 | <grumpy> | should we define a quorum? |
| 20:13 | <csm> | simple rule |
| 20:13 | <Julian> | How long is this chat supposed to last? |
| 20:13 | <csm> | wait |
| 20:13 | <csm> | simple rule |
| 20:13 | <csm> | no vote without a proposal and a second |
| 20:14 | <grumpy> | I can live with that. |
| 20:14 | <csm> | I propose we adopt that rule |
| 20:14 | <freeside> | okay, sounds good |
| 20:14 | <MarkK> | me too |
| 20:14 | <Julian> | Me too |
| 20:14 | <csm> | so seconded |
| 20:14 | <csm> | votes? |
| 20:14 | <csm> | aye |
| 20:14 | <grumpy> | yes |
| 20:14 | <freeside> | yes |
| 20:14 | <Julian> | yes |
| 20:14 | <MarkK> | yes |
| 20:14 | <csm> | it's anonymous |
| 20:14 | <csm> | :-) |
| 20:14 | <grumpy> | I propose a quorum is 4 members |
| 20:14 | <csm> | I second |
| 20:14 | <csm> | 3 is too few |
| 20:14 | <freeside> | aye |
| 20:15 | <Julian> | yes |
| 20:15 | <MarkK> | yes |
| 20:15 | <csm> | aye |
| 20:15 | <csm> | grumpy proposed so that make it anonymous |
| 20:15 | <csm> | :-) |
| 20:15 | <freeside> | so, next point, i think we can run the chat for 1 hour, and adjourn if somebody has to go after that |
| 20:15 | <csm> | I second |
| 20:15 | <Julian> | Ok. /me has time, but still wanted to know. |
| 20:15 | <grumpy> | I can run longer, but 1hr is fine |
| 20:16 | <freeside> | ok. |
| 20:16 | <freeside> | let's somebody get {0pm3} to handle the anonymous voting and take it from there if that capability shows up |
| 20:16 | <freeside> | meanwhile are we going to meet weekly or what? |
| 20:16 | <csm> | weekly I think should be the minimum |
| 20:16 | <Julian> | I guess {0pm3} is a bot, right? |
| 20:16 | <grumpy> | yes |
| 20:16 | <csm> | Julian: yes |
| 20:16 | <grumpy> | right now, it just knows how to op people |
| 20:17 | <csm> | freeside has proposed weekly meetings |
| 20:17 | <freeside> | ok, i'd be happy to meet weekly on irc |
| 20:17 | <MarkK> | me too |
| 20:17 | <csm> | seconded |
| 20:17 | <grumpy> | I think it should be more often, at least initially |
| 20:17 | <csm> | votes? |
| 20:17 | <Julian> | I propose to meet _at least_ weakly. |
| 20:17 | <csm> | second proposal |
| 20:17 | <MarkK> | I also believe we should be able to call inter-mediate meetings, if the need arises |
| 20:17 | <csm> | I could/do/will second that one too |
| 20:17 | <csm> | hold on a sec |
| 20:18 | <csm> | so if I read this right |
| 20:18 | <freeside> | interim meetings coul dbe called with 24 hours notice on the mailing list |
| 20:18 | <csm> | we have a proposal to meet *at least* weekly |
| 20:18 | <MarkK> | aye to that proposal |
| 20:18 | <Julian> | freeside: seconded |
| 20:18 | <csm> | and additional meetings can be called with 24 hours notice |
| 20:18 | <csm> | so weekly + 24? |
| 20:18 | <grumpy> | yeah, that sounds good to me. |
| 20:18 | <Julian> | seconded |
| 20:18 | <MarkK> | seconded |
| 20:18 | <csm> | votes? |
| 20:18 | <grumpy> | aye |
| 20:18 | <freeside> | ayup |
| 20:18 | <Julian> | yes |
| 20:18 | <csm> | aye |
| 20:19 | <csm> | okay |
| 20:19 | <csm> | the day for the scheduled weekly |
| 20:19 | <csm> | saturday or sunday? |
| 20:19 | <grumpy> | Sundays actually work better for me. |
| 20:19 | <csm> | I will tell you now that I often have to travel on sunday |
| 20:19 | <csm> | this time otmorrow I will be en-route to NYC |
| 20:19 | <grumpy> | I can do saturdays, if I plan ahead |
| 20:20 | <csm> | and that's typical |
| 20:20 | <grumpy> | I can also do weekdays |
| 20:20 | <grumpy> | other opinions? |
| 20:20 | <Julian> | We could choose Sat, and fall back on Sun if necessary. |
| 20:20 | <csm> | weekdays are a problem for me... I am an instructor |
| 20:20 | <grumpy> | true |
| 20:20 | <csm> | and since some of you are in europe that makes it tough |
| 20:21 | <csm> | we'd be late at night for those guys |
| 20:21 | <grumpy> | Well, it is evening for them |
| 20:21 | <Julian> | Well, the time difference between us is about 7h, right? |
| 20:21 | <grumpy> | ok, saturdays, unless moved? |
| 20:21 | <Julian> | grumpy: seconded |
| 20:21 | <MarkK> | seconded |
| 20:21 | <freeside> | at this time, particularly? |
| 20:21 | <csm> | saturdays I just need to know the time |
| 20:22 | <grumpy> | it would be slightly better for me for an hour earlier |
| 20:22 | <Julian> | Anything between 10:00 and 22:00 UTC would be fine for me. |
| 20:22 | <csm> | and for me |
| 20:22 | <freeside> | okay, 2pm eastern then |
| 20:22 | <Julian> | That's 19:00 UTC. |
| 20:22 | <freeside> | with a note to keep julian waiting by an hour when we switch to daylight savings |
| 20:22 | <grumpy> | so, 19:00 UTC Saturdays, until DST takes over, and then it is either 18:00 or 20:00? |
| 20:22 | <Julian> | freeside: Heh. |
| 20:23 | <Julian> | grumpy: UTC doesn't have DST. Why not just keep a constant UTC time? |
| 20:23 | <csm> | we should just express it in UTC |
| 20:23 | <csm> | now that Julian has trained me I can do it |
| 20:23 | <csm> | :-) |
| 20:24 | <grumpy> | Well, I think we can deal with DST when we get to that point. |
| 20:24 | <csm> | okay... well I am fine with 1900 UTC |
| 20:24 | <grumpy> | mostion: meetings at 19:00 UTC saturdays or with 24hr notice |
| 20:24 | <grumpy> | motion even |
| 20:24 | <csm> | seconded |
| 20:24 | <grumpy> | votes? |
| 20:24 | <csm> | aye |
| 20:24 | <MarkK> | seconded |
| 20:24 | <grumpy> | aye |
| 20:24 | <Julian> | yes |
| 20:25 | <freeside> | aye |
| 20:25 | <csm> | anonymous |
| 20:25 | <csm> | :-) |
| 20:25 | <grumpy> | motion: we need a secretary to summarize and report to SPF-discuss |
| 20:25 | <csm> | so... who chairs the gaggle? |
| 20:25 | <csm> | grumpy: chair first then others |
| 20:25 | <grumpy> | ok |
| 20:25 | * | grumpy nominates csm as chair |
| 20:26 | <grumpy> | does anyone have experience being the chair? |
| 20:26 | * | grumpy doesn't |
| 20:26 | <csm> | I do |
| 20:26 | * | Julian neither |
| 20:26 | <csm> | but I won't do it without a second and a vote... :-) |
| 20:26 | <Julian> | csm: Do you accept the nomination? |
| 20:26 | <MarkK> | I second csm |
| 20:26 | <csm> | yes.. |
| 20:26 | * | grumpy also doesn't know RRoO(r)v10 backwards and forwards |
| 20:27 | <Julian> | LOL |
| 20:27 | <grumpy> | other nominations? |
| 20:27 | <Julian> | csm is good. |
| 20:27 | <csm> | I would like to take a moment for some discussion |
| 20:27 | <csm> | I have some thoughts about this |
| 20:27 | <csm> | I had thought that it would likely be freeside or me |
| 20:28 | <csm> | but I *MUCH* prefer that he be free to focus on the technical aspects of what needs to be done |
| 20:28 | <csm> | the *CHAIR* is really an admin position |
| 20:28 | <grumpy> | yes |
| 20:28 | <Julian> | I agree. |
| 20:28 | <grumpy> | in some orgs, the chair can't even vote unless there is a tie |
| 20:28 | <Julian> | Well, I can do the summarizing/reporting part. |
| 20:28 | <csm> | and I want to move some things along without having to get embroiled into technical details... |
| 20:28 | <csm> | Julina: that's the secretary... we have ot get this one done first |
| 20:28 | <grumpy> | freeside: ? MarkK ? |
| 20:29 | <Julian> | (...if the traffic on the council list doesn't get too high.) |
| 20:29 | <csm> | anyway... I think/thought/was hgoping |
| 20:29 | <csm> | hoping |
| 20:29 | <freeside> | ok, as long as i get some kind of title i can use to explain to the world that i'm involved in some way here |
| 20:29 | <csm> | freeside: Exect=utive Director was my choice for you |
| 20:29 | <grumpy> | Julian: an important part is to dig through these logs and properly record what we voted on. |
| 20:30 | <Julian> | grumpy: I know. That's the easy part of reporting, I guess. |
| 20:30 | <freeside> | speaking of voting, i think we should preface vote topics with a unique identifier, and votes should correspond |
| 20:30 | <Julian> | freeside: seconded |
| 20:30 | <csm> | freeside: the ED runs the day to day and makes the operation go... the chair just makes the meetings work |
| 20:30 | <MarkK> | freeside: seconded |
| 20:30 | <freeside> | ok, sounds good |
| 20:31 | <freeside> | i vote csm to chair the meeting |
| 20:31 | <freeside> | er, |
| 20:31 | <freeside> | 2031a: i vote csm to chair the meeting |
| 20:31 | <grumpy> | 2031a: 2nd'ed |
| 20:31 | <csm> | votes? |
| 20:31 | <grumpy> | votes? |
| 20:31 | <Julian> | yes |
| 20:31 | <grumpy> | 2031a: aye |
| 20:31 | <Julian> | 2031a: yes |
| 20:32 | <csm> | MarkK? |
| 20:32 | <MarkK> | 2031a: yes |
| 20:32 | <freeside> | 2031a: yes, though i think if i propose it i don't have to vote again :) |
| 20:32 | <csm> | that being a majority I here by call this first meeting to order! :-) |
| 20:32 | * | grumpy agrees with freeside 1432 |
| 20:32 | <grumpy> | Whee! |
| 20:32 | <freeside> | okay, csm has the conch |
| 20:32 | <csm> | the chair is prepared to entertain motions for secretary |
| 20:32 | * | grumpy nominates Julian |
| 20:32 | * | Julian accepts. |
| 20:32 | * | csm seconds |
| 20:33 | <Julian> | (That was 2032a, I guess.) |
| 20:33 | <csm> | so labeled |
| 20:33 | <csm> | additional votes |
| 20:33 | <freeside> | 2032a: yes |
| 20:33 | <grumpy> | 2032a yes |
| 20:33 | <MarkK> | 2032a: yes |
| 20:33 | <Julian> | 2032a: yes |
| 20:33 | <csm> | so ordered |
| 20:33 | <csm> | the chair is prepared to entertain motions for Executive Director |
| 20:33 | * | grumpy nominates freeside |
| 20:33 | * | freeside observes that people are using robert's rules without knowing it |
| 20:34 | * | csm seconds |
| 20:34 | <MarkK> | is this 2033a? |
| 20:34 | <Julian> | (freeside: I thought that was the point of RRO... :) |
| 20:34 | <csm> | so labeled |
| 20:34 | * | grumpy observes that RRoO(r)v10 isn't the only set of parlmentary rules |
| 20:34 | <csm> | the chair is prepared to vote on 2033a unless there is additional discussion |
| 20:35 | <csm> | without discussion the chair puts 2033a to a vote |
| 20:35 | <grumpy> | 2033a: aye |
| 20:35 | <MarkK> | 2033a: yes |
| 20:35 | <Julian> | 2033a: yes |
| 20:35 | * | grumpy notes that freeside never accepted. |
| 20:35 | * | grumpy doesn't care |
| 20:35 | <freeside> | ok, i accept |
| 20:35 | * | csm notes that freeside asked for it anyway |
| 20:36 | <freeside> | okey dokey |
| 20:36 | <grumpy> | ok, what's up next? |
| 20:36 | <Julian> | Can we use consecutive numbers as vote prefixes instead of UTC time + letter? |
| 20:36 | <csm> | a short definition |
| 20:36 | <freeside> | step 3: profit! |
| 20:36 | <grumpy> | lol |
| 20:36 | <csm> | freeside: the ED position runs the day to day ops and executes the operational will of the council |
| 20:37 | <csm> | it speaks for the council in all things... |
| 20:37 | <csm> | but must adhere ot the will of the council |
| 20:37 | <csm> | we good? |
| 20:37 | <Julian> | So the ED is also the spokesman. |
| 20:37 | <csm> | yes |
| 20:37 | <Julian> | ok |
| 20:37 | <csm> | unless the council issues it's own statement (doubtful) |
| 20:37 | <grumpy> | the ED can say things that aren't the will of the council, if so noted, right? |
| 20:38 | <Julian> | Agreed. |
| 20:38 | <csm> | grumpy: yes... just caveate with an "I think" |
| 20:38 | <Julian> | ...if so _explicitly_ noted... |
| 20:38 | <MarkK> | Yes, let the ED make clear he speaks for himself |
| 20:38 | <grumpy> | freeside: ? |
| 20:38 | <csm> | but in matters of execution the councils will has to be done by the ED... it's what the ED exists to do |
| 20:38 | <freeside> | okey dokey |
| 20:39 | <csm> | and that should give you the formal power, authority, voice that you need |
| 20:39 | <grumpy> | ok, sounds good to me then. |
| 20:39 | <csm> | excellent |
| 20:39 | <MarkK> | sounds good to me |
| 20:39 | <csm> | now... there is another piece of business I'd like to bring up and then pass discus |