1 2010-05-19T01:00:06  <cprofitt> Welcome everyone. Can I get a roll call please.
   2 2010-05-19T01:00:15  <cprofitt> just say here or present
   3 2010-05-19T01:00:22  <slick6661> here!
   4 2010-05-19T01:00:24  <cprofitt> here
   5 2010-05-19T01:00:26  <slick6661> first too
   6 2010-05-19T01:00:30  <slick6661> ;)
   7 2010-05-19T01:01:01  <cprofitt> We have some big topics to discuss tonight... but I want to get some of the smaller ones out of the way first.
   8 2010-05-19T01:01:31  <cprofitt> the first topic is the 10.04 launch party we had in Waterloo on May 1st
   9 2010-05-19T01:01:53  <cprofitt> I would like to thank slick6661, ducky and ausimage for putting together a well organized event
  10 2010-05-19T01:01:58  <Dave123-road> preseny
  11 2010-05-19T01:02:15  <cprofitt> the speakers were good, the install fest / help time was well done and the food was perfect
  12 2010-05-19T01:02:15  <hal14450> i enjoyed it and would like to thank everyone involved in pulling it off
  13 2010-05-19T01:02:28  <cprofitt> the format I thought was good...
  14 2010-05-19T01:02:38  <cprofitt> did anyone else have comments about it?
  15 2010-05-19T01:02:47  <hal14450> we may have sounded a bit preachy in regards to the MS/Apple comments
  16 2010-05-19T01:03:09  * cprofitt nods
  17 2010-05-19T01:03:16  <hal14450> that's my only complaint
  18 2010-05-19T01:03:26  <cprofitt> I agree we were a bit harsh on them... given that it was a public information event
  19 2010-05-19T01:03:33  <cprofitt> thanks for making that point hal14450
  20 2010-05-19T01:03:37  <slick6661> I think we could have improved our outreach
  21 2010-05-19T01:03:48  <slick6661> attendance was lower this time than in past events
  22 2010-05-19T01:03:50  <cprofitt> outreach - meaning advertising?
  23 2010-05-19T01:03:56  <hal14450> attendance was low
  24 2010-05-19T01:03:57  <slick6661> yea
  25 2010-05-19T01:04:04  *** AutumnAi has quit IRC
  26 2010-05-19T01:04:08  <cprofitt> Yes, I think attendance was low...
  27 2010-05-19T01:04:29  <Dave123-road> i think it may be better to hold it closer to either roc or syr or both
  28 2010-05-19T01:04:34  <cprofitt> I think location may have impacted that... this was the 3rd event in Waterloo in a row
  29 2010-05-19T01:04:46  <cprofitt> with no major launch events in Syracuse or Rochester
  30 2010-05-19T01:05:03  <cprofitt> we pretty much saw the 'usual suspects' and less of them than normal
  31 2010-05-19T01:05:08  * cprofitt nods to Dave123-road 
  32 2010-05-19T01:05:12  <hal14450> agreed
  33 2010-05-19T01:05:29  <cprofitt> I agree I think if we want to grow the 'reach' we need to do some stuff in local areas
  34 2010-05-19T01:05:44  <cprofitt> slipping in to the next topic...
  35 2010-05-19T01:05:54  <cprofitt> I have already reserved a date for a 10.10 launch in Rochester
  36 2010-05-19T01:06:03  <cprofitt> November 6th - at Barnes and Noble
  37 2010-05-19T01:06:19  <cprofitt> slick6661: I believe is planning for an event in Syracuse for 10.10 as well
  38 2010-05-19T01:07:01  <slick6661> is it the opinoin of the group that we should have simulanous events?
  39 2010-05-19T01:07:09  <cprofitt> same day?
  40 2010-05-19T01:07:15  <cprofitt> I waiver on that...
  41 2010-05-19T01:07:23  <hal14450> fair enough to have more local rls parties we've given the 'central' approach a shot
  42 2010-05-19T01:07:28  <cprofitt> we have a very small core group who can pull these things off
  43 2010-05-19T01:07:54  <Dave123-road> the venue in waterloo is fine just its in no mans land
  44 2010-05-19T01:08:14  <cprofitt> but I think we are likely to have more people being willing and able to support the effort if we are closer to the two major population centers we have
  45 2010-05-19T01:08:35  <hal14450> Dave123-road, yes it's just too far to draw a crowd and hasn't drawn much other than the choir to preach to
  46 2010-05-19T01:08:42  <cprofitt> As we can discuss when the bylaws come up I think it might be best for local groups to pick a date that works for them
  47 2010-05-19T01:08:59  <cprofitt> and not worry about other areas -- but it will impact where people can be
  48 2010-05-19T01:09:19  <cprofitt> I try to support Syracuse, but if Syracuse and Rochester have events on the same day I can't do both...
  49 2010-05-19T01:09:26  <cprofitt> the same goes for everyone
  50 2010-05-19T01:09:38  <Dave123-road> cprofitt, we can help out where we can
  51 2010-05-19T01:09:51  <cprofitt> in the end I think local 'leaders' need to figure out what is best for their area
  52 2010-05-19T01:09:55  <cprofitt> Dave123-road: thanks
  53 2010-05-19T01:10:16  <cprofitt> I think Rochester has a good pool of talent that simply has not made the trip to Waterloo
  54 2010-05-19T01:10:25  <cprofitt> and I know Syracuse has a good pool as well
  55 2010-05-19T01:10:37  <cprofitt> slick6661: have you thought about a date for Syracuse yet?
  56 2010-05-19T01:10:51  <slick6661> weekends have worked out well for us in the past
  57 2010-05-19T01:11:05  <cprofitt> yeah -- November 6th is the first Saturday I believe
  58 2010-05-19T01:11:11  <slick6661> depending on the final realease date it will ikely be the next Saturday
  59 2010-05-19T01:11:14  <hal14450> central might be good for a special event but not for every rls imho
  60 2010-05-19T01:11:21  <Dave123-road> Saturdays are better in the fall
  61 2010-05-19T01:11:38  <cprofitt> yeah -- I like the idea of doing a centralized or statewide event for each RTS
  62 2010-05-19T01:12:05  <cprofitt> cool... well we can keep working on that...
  63 2010-05-19T01:12:16  <cprofitt> but Rochester is set for November 6th
  64 2010-05-19T01:12:31  <cprofitt> I had Barnes and Noble @ RIT reserve the room for 4 hours
  65 2010-05-19T01:12:31  <slick6661> cool
  66 2010-05-19T01:12:42  * deejoe_ looks around
  67 2010-05-19T01:12:47  <hal14450> works for me
  68 2010-05-19T01:12:48  *** deejoe_ is now known as deejoe
  69 2010-05-19T01:12:49  <cprofitt> it was great to be able to get a Saturday from them
  70 2010-05-19T01:12:51  <cprofitt> hey deejoe
  71 2010-05-19T01:12:54  <hal14450> lo deejoe
  72 2010-05-19T01:12:58  <cprofitt> alright... install fest in Ithace
  73 2010-05-19T01:13:09  <deejoe> oh?
  74 2010-05-19T01:13:16  <cprofitt> the IFSA has expressed an interest in holding a co-branded install fest with us
  75 2010-05-19T01:13:27  <cprofitt> but we have not had time to get that planned with the LTS release
  76 2010-05-19T01:13:32  <hal14450> they have a date in mind?
  77 2010-05-19T01:13:37  <cprofitt> how many would be able to assist with such a venture
  78 2010-05-19T01:13:44  <cprofitt> no, no date in mind at this time
  79 2010-05-19T01:13:54  <Dave123-road> id be willing depending on date/time
  80 2010-05-19T01:13:57  <cprofitt> I wanted to gauge general interest and then start working on it with those guys
  81 2010-05-19T01:14:01  <hal14450> if we get a carpool i'm willing to venture down there
  82 2010-05-19T01:14:04  <slick6661> I'm too close to miss that one
  83 2010-05-19T01:14:12  <slick6661> I think you can count on Ducky too
  84 2010-05-19T01:14:17  <cprofitt> alright... so we have good strong interest
  85 2010-05-19T01:14:31  <cprofitt> slick6661: if the timing was right could you guys do your normal local repo setup?
  86 2010-05-19T01:15:11  <slick6661> I think so
  87 2010-05-19T01:15:13  <cprofitt> I will start with those guys on trying to get a good location for such an event -- Ithaca College, Cornell -- something like that...
  88 2010-05-19T01:15:19  <cprofitt> thanks guys
  89 2010-05-19T01:15:23  <cprofitt> I will keep you all posted
  90 2010-05-19T01:15:29  <cprofitt> all right...
  91 2010-05-19T01:15:47  <hal14450> i think cornell or ithaca college have repos but i'm not positive on that
  92 2010-05-19T01:15:49  <deejoe> I wonder if storefronts on the Ithaca Commons might be available
  93 2010-05-19T01:15:57  <deejoe> there's often some churn in their occupancy
  94 2010-05-19T01:16:19  <cprofitt> I wanted to let folks know that the monthly events in Rochester have been converted to Saturdays and are now a Workshop once a month for four hours
  95 2010-05-19T01:16:23  <hal14450> deejoe, that's an interesting idea
  96 2010-05-19T01:16:25  <cprofitt> the idea is to have a more hands on session
  97 2010-05-19T01:16:33  * cprofitt nods to deejoe about the storefront idea
  98 2010-05-19T01:16:40  <cprofitt> its just the tubes we would need to worry about
  99 2010-05-19T01:16:55  <deejoe> up in triphammer mall they have a computer recycling place that was supposed to have opened in the last month
 100 2010-05-19T01:17:07  <deejoe> at least some of the involved folk are linux-savvy/friendly
 101 2010-05-19T01:17:17  <hal14450> good to know
 102 2010-05-19T01:17:18  <cprofitt> I also have been to the UCF in Syracuse and think its the perfect place for such workshops too.
 103 2010-05-19T01:17:27  <cprofitt> deejoe: nice -- do you have any contact information?
 104 2010-05-19T01:18:16  <deejoe> http://fingerlakesreuse.org/ecenter.shtml
 105 2010-05-19T01:18:20  <deejoe> had to look it up
 106 2010-05-19T01:18:29  <cprofitt> bookmarked
 107 2010-05-19T01:18:53  <cprofitt> will look at that after the meetings
 108 2010-05-19T01:19:05  <deejoe> ok
 109 2010-05-19T01:19:24  <cprofitt> slick6661: will syracuse be holding any events in the next few months?
 110 2010-05-19T01:20:33  <slick6661> the next event that has been discussed in another jam type session
 111 2010-05-19T01:20:42  <slick6661> no dates set yet
 112 2010-05-19T01:21:05  <cprofitt> cool... any thoughts about doing some hands-on or training type things?
 113 2010-05-19T01:22:03  <slick6661> not much developement in that area but I'll bring it up
 114 2010-05-19T01:22:12  <cprofitt> the last thing before we get to some of our larger topics is just an FYI -- due to a discussion with one of the LoCo Council we took down the page that had 'location' information for many of our members
 115 2010-05-19T01:22:19  * cprofitt nods to slick
 116 2010-05-19T01:22:25  <cprofitt> alright...
 117 2010-05-19T01:22:35  <cprofitt> I would really like to hear from everyone on this next subject
 118 2010-05-19T01:22:47  <cprofitt> it is an important topic
 119 2010-05-19T01:23:09  <cprofitt> I hope you all got a chance to look at our current bylaws
 120 2010-05-19T01:23:10  <cprofitt> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NewYorkTeam/ByLaws
 121 2010-05-19T01:23:28  <cprofitt> and some suggestions for ammendments or changes
 122 2010-05-19T01:23:29  <cprofitt> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NewYorkTeam/ByLawsAmendments
 123 2010-05-19T01:24:12  <cprofitt> the reason for considering this is that the original bylaws were crafted with the intent of the LoCo being a not for profit corporation
 124 2010-05-19T01:24:24  <cprofitt> hence the need for formal bylaws and officers, etc
 125 2010-05-19T01:24:42  <cprofitt> this is not something that, at least with the name Ubuntu attached, is possible
 126 2010-05-19T01:25:03  *** Zeike has quit IRC
 127 2010-05-19T01:25:06  <cprofitt> I also looked at all the other state LoCos and unless I missed it none of them have bylaws
 128 2010-05-19T01:25:18  <cprofitt> they have a more informal doocracy style and strucutre
 129 2010-05-19T01:25:27  <cprofitt> which I think truly is how we function
 130 2010-05-19T01:25:39  <cprofitt> our current bylaws require meetings that we have not held...
 131 2010-05-19T01:25:49  <cprofitt> and other formalities that I think are intimidating to some
 132 2010-05-19T01:26:06  <cprofitt> they mention dues... and fees
 133 2010-05-19T01:26:11  *** Zeike has joined #ubuntu-us-ny
 134 2010-05-19T01:26:25  <cprofitt> quarterly meetings
 135 2010-05-19T01:26:35  <cprofitt> there are also some inconsistencies
 136 2010-05-19T01:26:48  <cprofitt> with a mention of annual election meetings, but two year terms
 137 2010-05-19T01:27:13  <cprofitt> to this end, as you know, I sent out notice that we are considering changing or eliminating the bylaws
 138 2010-05-19T01:27:29  * deejoe has seen the ReLoCo structure when hanging out in #ubuntu-us-oh
 139 2010-05-19T01:27:46  <cprofitt> yes, that is what I think we are aiming for... what we kind of already are
 140 2010-05-19T01:27:47  <hal14450> i think, originally some of them did have bylaws but have since relaxed the structure, and i see no point in trying to maintain something we can't achieve while using the ubuntu name so there really isn't much point in a formal structure unless someone else has a reason i haven't thought of
 141 2010-05-19T01:28:09  <cprofitt> I would like to ask for everyone to voice any opinions that they have
 142 2010-05-19T01:28:31  <deejoe> I'm fine with a less formal structure
 143 2010-05-19T01:28:42  <deejoe> I think it matches our resources and demonstrated abilities
 144 2010-05-19T01:29:24  <hal14450> it does
 145 2010-05-19T01:29:51  <cprofitt> JamesAdams: jMyles_ Zeike asymptote ausimage DavidLevin IamReck do any of you have thoughts?
 146 2010-05-19T01:30:30  <hal14450> pick up the ball and trun w/ it in your area is an attitiude that promotes people getting involved in whatever capacity they feel is appropriate
 147 2010-05-19T01:30:42  <cprofitt> Looking at the proposed ammendments -- really a total re-write and a elimiation of them
 148 2010-05-19T01:30:53  <cprofitt> does anyone have a preference to which change would be adopted
 149 2010-05-19T01:31:21  <deejoe> option 2 looks better to me, admittedly on a quick read through
 150 2010-05-19T01:31:45  <cprofitt> also, drawing your attention to Article VIII -- Amendments -- I believe we are following the current bylaws
 151 2010-05-19T01:31:49  <deejoe> not sure what option 1 would result in
 152 2010-05-19T01:32:04  <cprofitt> deejoe: it would result in no formal document called bylaws
 153 2010-05-19T01:32:07  <slick6661> I'm inclined to agree
 154 2010-05-19T01:32:09  <cprofitt> but the same basic structure...
 155 2010-05-19T01:32:12  <cprofitt> just not formalized
 156 2010-05-19T01:32:29  <cprofitt> we would likely make a structure page and put the same stuff down
 157 2010-05-19T01:32:38  <cprofitt> for option 1
 158 2010-05-19T01:33:12  <deejoe> so, does option 2 only replace the indicated articles, and leave the other numbered articles intact?
 159 2010-05-19T01:33:22  <cprofitt> no, option 2 is the total document
 160 2010-05-19T01:33:28  <hal14450> it encourages and empowers more members to get involved on their own terms if we dissolve the formal structure via either means
 161 2010-05-19T01:34:06  <cprofitt> I think I lean towards no official bylaws -- go with a structure page
 162 2010-05-19T01:34:14  <cprofitt> and that lets us be more adaptable
 163 2010-05-19T01:34:55  <deejoe> yeah, option 2 isn't probably structured enough to be bylaws as such
 164 2010-05-19T01:35:01  <deejoe> so maybe option 1 would be better
 165 2010-05-19T01:35:26  * cprofitt nods
 166 2010-05-19T01:35:41  <cprofitt> I did not see a single other US LoCo with bylaws...
 167 2010-05-19T01:35:50  <hal14450> i'm happy with either choice so long as we wind up w/ the same results as in encouraging people to become more active on their own terms and not worry about what the leadership thinks is appropriate
 168 2010-05-19T01:35:52  <cprofitt> and really do not see the sense in having formal bylaws
 169 2010-05-19T01:36:19  <cprofitt> to advert your attention back to our current bylaws
 170 2010-05-19T01:36:27  <cprofitt> Article VIII Section 1
 171 2010-05-19T01:37:16  <deejoe> hal14450 & cprofitt, does that cover the 2/3rds?
 172 2010-05-19T01:37:21  <cprofitt> I sent the proposed changes - both options to slick6661 (our secretary) and because he was out of town I sent both the general meeting announcement and the special leadership meeting announcement out
 173 2010-05-19T01:37:41  <cprofitt> I want to ensure that meets the requirements
 174 2010-05-19T01:37:42  <hal14450> deejoe, good question
 175 2010-05-19T01:37:53  <hal14450> i think it should
 176 2010-05-19T01:37:56  <cprofitt> we have four leaders currently
 177 2010-05-19T01:38:02  <hal14450> ausimage, you there?
 178 2010-05-19T01:38:05  <cprofitt> ausimage, hal14450, slick6661 and myself
 179 2010-05-19T01:38:10  <deejoe> ah
 180 2010-05-19T01:38:18  <deejoe> well, then
 181 2010-05-19T01:38:34  <cprofitt> if, at the leadership meeting, hal14450 - slick6661 - and myself agree we would have enough despite ausimage being absent
 182 2010-05-19T01:38:39  <deejoe> hard to get exactly two thirds, but if hal14450 slick6661 and cprofitt agree, it's done, I'd say
 183 2010-05-19T01:38:42  <deejoe> yeah
 184 2010-05-19T01:38:49  <cprofitt> well... 3/4 > 2/3
 185 2010-05-19T01:38:57  <deejoe> yup
 186 2010-05-19T01:39:10  <slick6661> agreed
 187 2010-05-19T01:39:26  <cprofitt> ok...
 188 2010-05-19T01:39:38  <cprofitt> so the leaders will meet after this meeting and take a vote on that...
 189 2010-05-19T01:39:42  <cprofitt> for formality sake
 190 2010-05-19T01:39:47  <cprofitt> perhaps the last formallity sake
 191 2010-05-19T01:39:49  <cprofitt> :-)
 192 2010-05-19T01:40:22  <cprofitt> alright... website (the wiki maintained outside the Ubuntu sphere) and the wiki (wiki.ubuntu.com/NewYorkTeam)
 193 2010-05-19T01:40:38  <cprofitt> I would like to get feedback again on this issue
 194 2010-05-19T01:41:30  <cprofitt> My concern is the out-of-date information on main.newyork-ubuntu.com
 195 2010-05-19T01:41:35  <cprofitt> and the duplication of information
 196 2010-05-19T01:41:40  <slick6661> agreed
 197 2010-05-19T01:41:47  <cprofitt> does anyone have any thoughts on this?
 198 2010-05-19T01:41:48  <hal14450> i've expressed my opinion that the team website should probably remain static as it's become difficult to insure it being up to date which can leave prospective members with the impression we're not very active
 199 2010-05-19T01:42:18  <slick6661> what is the purpose of the main website?
 200 2010-05-19T01:42:24  <cprofitt> keep in mind that ausimage maintains this site... it is his baby
 201 2010-05-19T01:42:36  <cprofitt> slick6661: not sure... what the original purpose is
 202 2010-05-19T01:42:38  <Dave123-road> is ausimage even here?
 203 2010-05-19T01:42:56  <cprofitt> most LoCos seem to use it as a public facing portal to their team
 204 2010-05-19T01:43:01  <hal14450> i think the site itself is well done and ausimage has put a lot of effort into it but it's not up to date last i checked
 205 2010-05-19T01:43:25  <cprofitt> and the wiki.ubuntu.com site as their on going organizational keeping track of things site
 206 2010-05-19T01:43:41  <cprofitt> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PennsylvaniaTeam
 207 2010-05-19T01:43:51  <cprofitt> http://ubuntupennsylvania.org/
 208 2010-05-19T01:44:03  <cprofitt> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MassachusettsTeam
 209 2010-05-19T01:44:09  <cprofitt> http://www.ubuntu-massachusetts.com/
 210 2010-05-19T01:44:40  <cprofitt> I personally am cool with any use -- as long as we do not duplicate data (effort) and that it is maintained and not out of date
 211 2010-05-19T01:44:53  <deejoe> statename-ubuntu vs ubuntu-statename always drives me to distraction
 212 2010-05-19T01:45:05  <hal14450> everyone can easily edit the official canonical site provided they sign up where as the team site isn't editable by everyone so being that we're leaning towards more locally active groups it makes even more sense to have the team webby static
 213 2010-05-19T01:45:25  <cprofitt> http://main.newyork-ubuntu.com/Activities/HomePage
 214 2010-05-19T01:45:38  <cprofitt> that page has one event listed since December of 2009
 215 2010-05-19T01:46:21  <slick6661> love what the MA team has done
 216 2010-05-19T01:46:22  <cprofitt> we have had 22
 217 2010-05-19T01:46:30  <cprofitt> yeah -- I like the MA team too
 218 2010-05-19T01:46:36  <cprofitt> doctormo does good work
 219 2010-05-19T01:47:17  <hal14450> seems like a valid and sensible option to have the team site become a static page then
 220 2010-05-19T01:47:37  <cprofitt> so I will take the opinion of the group and ask ausimage to act on it...
 221 2010-05-19T01:47:56  <cprofitt> do we feel a more startic public facing presence is what we want out of our website?
 222 2010-05-19T01:48:01  <cprofitt> or...
 223 2010-05-19T01:48:33  *** paultag_ has joined #ubuntu-us-ny
 224 2010-05-19T01:48:36  <hal14450> from talking w/ jag recently i think he wants the donate button removed as it defaults to his paypal
 225 2010-05-19T01:48:47  <cprofitt> we can do that regardless then hal14450
 226 2010-05-19T01:48:52  <deejoe> these seem like reasonable changes
 227 2010-05-19T01:48:59  <hal14450> he's been hosting it for us for free for years now
 228 2010-05-19T01:49:22  <cprofitt> ok... I would like to take a vote
 229 2010-05-19T01:49:32  <cprofitt> does your bot do votes slick6661 ?
 230 2010-05-19T01:49:56  <slick6661> hmmmm
 231 2010-05-19T01:49:59  <slick6661> 1 sec
 232 2010-05-19T01:50:04  <hal14450> lol
 233 2010-05-19T01:50:09  <cprofitt> no worries... if not we can do it the old fashioned way
 234 2010-05-19T01:50:29  <cprofitt> +1 = yes, 0 = abstain, -1 = no
 235 2010-05-19T01:51:04  <cprofitt> we would like to convert our website to a static presentation similar to the MA page
 236 2010-05-19T01:51:08  <cprofitt> +1
 237 2010-05-19T01:51:11  <hal14450> +1
 238 2010-05-19T01:51:14  <slick6661> +1
 239 2010-05-19T01:51:27  <cprofitt> deejoe: Dave123-road
 240 2010-05-19T01:51:40  <deejoe> +1
 241 2010-05-19T01:51:44  <cprofitt> any other votes?
 242 2010-05-19T01:51:57  <cprofitt> last call for votes
 243 2010-05-19T01:52:10  <cprofitt> ok we have unanimously decided to make that change
 244 2010-05-19T01:52:39  <cprofitt> I will send an email to ausimage and let him know... if anyone would like to offer assistance -- be it coding, text bits, layout, or art please let me know
 245 2010-05-19T01:53:01  <cprofitt> I hope that this reduces the burden that ausimage has been carrying
 246 2010-05-19T01:53:21  <cprofitt> the last topic was ausimage's topic
 247 2010-05-19T01:53:25  <slick6661> I do have an account on the site
 248 2010-05-19T01:53:27  <slick6661> FYI
 249 2010-05-19T01:53:37  <cprofitt> does anyone wish to discuss the membership process?
 250 2010-05-19T01:54:19  <cprofitt> ok... meeting adjourned
 251 2010-05-19T01:54:22  <hal14450> i think the site looks good the way it is but we just need to make sure it's static and we should possibly keep the calendar feature but not rely on it for events and be certain to point people to the canonical wiki for up to date info
 252 2010-05-19T01:54:22  <cprofitt> thanks everyone
 253 2010-05-19T01:54:53  <cprofitt> leaders if you can meet in the leadership channel we can hold our conversation and vote about the bylaws
 254 2010-05-19T01:55:42  <cprofitt> all other members are welcome to come and watch the meeting
 255 2010-05-19T01:55:56  <cprofitt> it is a public meeting, but I did not want to tie this channel down with more meeting time
 256 2010-05-19T01:56:12  <cprofitt> ##ubuntu-us-ny-leaders
 257 2010-05-19T01:56:19  <cprofitt> please feel free to join us there

   1 2010-05-19T02:01:41  <cprofitt> I would like to call this special leadership meeting to order
   2 2010-05-19T02:01:47  <cprofitt> can all leaders say here
   3 2010-05-19T02:01:48  <cprofitt> here
   4 2010-05-19T02:01:58  <hal14450> here
   5 2010-05-19T02:02:43  <slick6661> here
   6 2010-05-19T02:02:58  <cprofitt> please note that ausimage is not present
   7 2010-05-19T02:03:04  <slick6661> noted
   8 2010-05-19T02:03:16  <cprofitt> would anyone like to discuss this issue?
   9 2010-05-19T02:03:38  <cprofitt> I did not see any objection from the general members present at the meeting
  10 2010-05-19T02:03:45  <hal14450> from previous discussions with ausimage i can safely say that he's probably considering resigning at this point since he's disagreed with the positions that we take on just about every topic we've discussed tonight so it's no surprise he's absent
  11 2010-05-19T02:04:09  <hal14450> and i find that sad to be honest
  12 2010-05-19T02:04:31  <cprofitt> I certainly hope that he will not. His contribution to the team has been tremendous
  13 2010-05-19T02:04:39  <hal14450> i agree
  14 2010-05-19T02:05:10  <cprofitt> which option do you both prefer?
  15 2010-05-19T02:05:24  <hal14450> regarding the bylaws?
  16 2010-05-19T02:05:43  <cprofitt> yes
  17 2010-05-19T02:06:01  <hal14450> i'd say we should rewrite them to reflect the decentralized nature which has been successful in other teams
  18 2010-05-19T02:06:17  <slick6661> to me it doesn't really matter what form they are in so long as they do what we need
  19 2010-05-19T02:06:20  <cprofitt> re-write them as bylaws -- or as a structure document?
  20 2010-05-19T02:06:34  <slick6661> if a functional document fits the bill best lets go with that
  21 2010-05-19T02:06:37  <cprofitt> slick6661: I agree...
  22 2010-05-19T02:06:52  <cprofitt> I would prefer to just work out the specifics moving forward and put them on the wiki
  23 2010-05-19T02:06:54  <hal14450> we have no hope of becoming a non-profit while retaining the ubuntu name so there really is no reason to keep such a formal structure
  24 2010-05-19T02:07:02  <cprofitt> k
  25 2010-05-19T02:07:09  <cprofitt> shall we vote on option 1 then...
  26 2010-05-19T02:07:43  <cprofitt> we will have some stuff to discuss after the vote... so please stick around...
  27 2010-05-19T02:07:49  <hal14450> i feel the same as slick does but i think option 1 shows respect to the initial efforts
  28 2010-05-19T02:08:31  <cprofitt> option 1 being the replacment of the bylaws with an informal structure document?
  29 2010-05-19T02:08:37  <cprofitt> just to make sure hal14450
  30 2010-05-19T02:08:43  <cprofitt> I want to make sure we are all on the same page
  31 2010-05-19T02:08:52  <hal14450> sorry i though option 1 was a rewrite
  32 2010-05-19T02:09:13  <cprofitt> option 2 is a re-write with keeping an official bylaws document
  33 2010-05-19T02:09:19  <hal14450> Review inconsistencies in the By-Laws -- cprofitt 2010-04-02 11:42:24
  34 2010-05-19T02:09:19  <hal14450>     * options:
  35 2010-05-19T02:09:19  <hal14450>           o revise by-laws
  36 2010-05-19T02:09:19  <hal14450>           o remove by-laws
  37 2010-05-19T02:09:20  <slick6661> nope option one is the new structure document, option 2 is a rewrite of the current doc
  38 2010-05-19T02:09:53  <cprofitt> hal14450: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NewYorkTeam/ByLawsAmendments
  39 2010-05-19T02:10:07  <cprofitt> sorry reversed the options on the meeting page
  40 2010-05-19T02:10:19  <cprofitt> the ammendments page is the Option 1 vs Option 2
  41 2010-05-19T02:10:25  <hal14450> ahh
  42 2010-05-19T02:10:28  <hal14450> my bad
  43 2010-05-19T02:10:37  <cprofitt> basically Option 1 takes the stuff in Option 2 but will not call it bylaws
  44 2010-05-19T02:10:44  <cprofitt> it will just be on a structure page
  45 2010-05-19T02:10:53  <cprofitt> no need for the formality of bylaws
  46 2010-05-19T02:11:02  <hal14450> 2 seems the best choice to me
  47 2010-05-19T02:11:16  <cprofitt> as deejoe pointed out I am not even sure that Option 2 would qualify as a bylaw
  48 2010-05-19T02:11:22  <hal14450> shows respect for the previous efforts and all
  49 2010-05-19T02:11:31  * cprofitt nods
  50 2010-05-19T02:11:43  <slick6661> hal14450 why does option 2 look more appealing?
  51 2010-05-19T02:11:58  <hal14450> well if it can't be done like that then we'll have to kill them i suppose
  52 2010-05-19T02:13:14  <hal14450> there was a lot of (wasted) effort we put into trying to get the team to become a non-profit and i'd like to respect that effort by revising instead of trashing
  53 2010-05-19T02:13:19  <cprofitt> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bylaw
  54 2010-05-19T02:13:35  <slick6661> I'm inclined to go with option 1 because I feel it gives us a little more flexibility (maybe) and I think it marks a clear change in direction
  55 2010-05-19T02:13:53  <cprofitt> I certainly want to respect what was done...
  56 2010-05-19T02:14:07  <cprofitt> but I am concerned with calling them bylaws because of the conotation that holds
  57 2010-05-19T02:14:29  <cprofitt> just using the word bylaws with the LoCo council member I spoke to caused a 'raised eyebrow'
  58 2010-05-19T02:14:32  <hal14450> i think either marks a clear change in direction but we clearly don't want formalities getting in the way any more so i'm okay with option 1 if need be
  59 2010-05-19T02:15:13  <cprofitt> http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:9tvuRqzuBgEJ:tomstreeter.com/Minimum%2520Standard%2520Bylaws.pdf+bylaws+requirements&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgDNSnyBUc8GvoJpDyr1IwGSmgcTmVg2YgfEnBuZLZN4-XPJUXdtAxX7I9ZHWgQwTKERBhYq4Pvkniq5DdFUxtHpH_nhpDNQPA3-FwBqW6DMTBATMx33bNCFqM987lYtGU59FRN&sig=AHIEtbQUu6mUd8-jsW0ZpQEWipsUDvQkcA
  60 2010-05-19T02:15:19  <cprofitt> gah -- sorry for that
  61 2010-05-19T02:15:35  <hal14450> damn google docs
  62 2010-05-19T02:15:41  <cprofitt> those are supposeduly the minimum standards for bylaws
  63 2010-05-19T02:15:51  * hal14450 doesn't trust google enough to let them run scripts
  64 2010-05-19T02:15:52  <slick6661> lol
  65 2010-05-19T02:15:54  <cprofitt> for mensa chapters
  66 2010-05-19T02:16:10  <cprofitt> I dunno...
  67 2010-05-19T02:16:20  <cprofitt> any objections to voting?
  68 2010-05-19T02:16:44  <hal14450> no objections
  69 2010-05-19T02:16:59  <slick6661> nope
  70 2010-05-19T02:17:01  <cprofitt> +1/0/-1 again
  71 2010-05-19T02:17:22  <hal14450> for which option?
  72 2010-05-19T02:17:25  <slick6661> yea
  73 2010-05-19T02:17:27  <cprofitt> Option 1 -- removal of bylaws replaced by a structure document with the details listed as in option 2
  74 2010-05-19T02:18:07  <slick6661> +1
  75 2010-05-19T02:18:45  <hal14450> gah this is tough
  76 2010-05-19T02:18:57  <hal14450> what if we get hung?
  77 2010-05-19T02:19:05  <hal14450> revote?
  78 2010-05-19T02:19:12  <cprofitt> we can always vote on option 2 if this fails or revote
  79 2010-05-19T02:19:16  <cprofitt> or they stay as is
  80 2010-05-19T02:19:22  <hal14450> 0 for now
  81 2010-05-19T02:19:26  <cprofitt> +1
  82 2010-05-19T02:19:30  <hal14450> i know you hate me
  83 2010-05-19T02:19:31  <cprofitt> so Option 1 fails
  84 2010-05-19T02:19:47  <slick6661> Option 2
  85 2010-05-19T02:19:51  <hal14450> +1
  86 2010-05-19T02:20:00  <slick6661> -1
  87 2010-05-19T02:20:05  <cprofitt> Option 2 - revise the bylaws as detailed -- with the understanding we may need to add additional language for them to be bylaws
  88 2010-05-19T02:20:09  <hal14450> lol
  89 2010-05-19T02:20:11  <cprofitt> 0
  90 2010-05-19T02:20:15  <slick6661> lol
  91 2010-05-19T02:20:16  <cprofitt> option 2 fails
  92 2010-05-19T02:20:28  <slick6661> oh man
  93 2010-05-19T02:20:32  <cprofitt> option 3 - leave them as is
  94 2010-05-19T02:20:35  <cprofitt> -1
  95 2010-05-19T02:20:37  <hal14450> -1
  96 2010-05-19T02:20:38  <slick6661> -1
  97 2010-05-19T02:20:40  <slick6661> lol
  98 2010-05-19T02:20:46  <hal14450> well we want change
  99 2010-05-19T02:20:48  <cprofitt> would anyone like to make any other suggestions?
 100 2010-05-19T02:20:57  <hal14450> just not sure which i guess
 101 2010-05-19T02:21:06  <cprofitt> hence the difficulty with having 'bylaws' and formality
 102 2010-05-19T02:21:34  <slick6661> ok well since hal and I disagree the most I suggest we open up for discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of options 1 and 2
 103 2010-05-19T02:21:47  <cprofitt> k
 104 2010-05-19T02:21:50  <hal14450> honestly i'm willing to give them up if it means the team is going to benefit from it
 105 2010-05-19T02:22:28  <hal14450> i just wanted to respect the previous efforts
 106 2010-05-19T02:22:58  <slick6661> I think we could do that
 107 2010-05-19T02:23:01  <slick6661> I think we could archive the bylaws as they stand
 108 2010-05-19T02:23:55  <cprofitt> I do plan on archiving them... it is important
 109 2010-05-19T02:24:08  <slick6661> I agree we should respect the efforts of past members
 110 2010-05-19T02:24:14  <hal14450> there was a lot of effort that went into exploring the non-profit option and i just think changing the bylaws to the proposed new set respects that
 111 2010-05-19T02:24:52  <cprofitt> I agree with that notion hal14450 -- I am just not comfortable with the fact that bylaws carry with them a 'conotation'
 112 2010-05-19T02:25:00  <slick6661> I don't want to restrict us when typing up the new "rules" by using a format that was intended for other purposes
 113 2010-05-19T02:25:02  <hal14450> i'm not keen on keeping the command structure however
 114 2010-05-19T02:25:08  <cprofitt> all bylaws I have seen are very formal
 115 2010-05-19T02:25:42  <cprofitt> yes... and we need to deal with the 'command structure' after this vote -- assuming a change is made
 116 2010-05-19T02:26:37  <hal14450> i'd prefer a complete rewrite of the bylaws to reflect a decentralized command structure as in removal of certain parts instead of amending
 117 2010-05-19T02:27:08  <hal14450> but if that's not possible i say +1 to option 1
 118 2010-05-19T02:27:21  <cprofitt> well... we can not replace the current set then
 119 2010-05-19T02:27:30  <cprofitt> and we can spend some more time revising them
 120 2010-05-19T02:27:31  <slick6661> I think we're talking basically the same thing
 121 2010-05-19T02:27:41  <hal14450> i want to put this behind us and focus on the future
 122 2010-05-19T02:27:49  <cprofitt> we need to make sure that the new bylaws have all the necessary components of bylaws
 123 2010-05-19T02:27:53  <slick6661> all I see thats different with iption 1 is llsing the current format and creating a new format
 124 2010-05-19T02:28:06  <cprofitt> slick6661: basically...
 125 2010-05-19T02:28:10  <cprofitt> one is called strucutre
 126 2010-05-19T02:28:14  <cprofitt> the other is bylaws
 127 2010-05-19T02:28:28  <hal14450> let's vote again
 128 2010-05-19T02:28:28  <cprofitt> except using the word bylaws carried a conotation to some
 129 2010-05-19T02:28:52  <cprofitt> option 2 - revised bylaws
 130 2010-05-19T02:28:56  <cprofitt> +1/0/-1
 131 2010-05-19T02:28:59  <hal14450> bylaws has a bad connotation in some peoples eyes agreed
 132 2010-05-19T02:29:03  <cprofitt> 0
 133 2010-05-19T02:29:07  <hal14450> 0
 134 2010-05-19T02:29:43  <cprofitt> any more votes
 135 2010-05-19T02:29:45  <cprofitt> slick6661:
 136 2010-05-19T02:29:53  <slick6661> I'm sorry guys I'm lost on exactly what we're voting on
 137 2010-05-19T02:29:58  <cprofitt> option 2
 138 2010-05-19T02:29:59  <slick6661> option 1 or two
 139 2010-05-19T02:29:59  <hal14450> option 2
 140 2010-05-19T02:30:05  <slick6661> -1
 141 2010-05-19T02:30:07  <cprofitt> option 2 failed
 142 2010-05-19T02:30:15  <cprofitt> Option 1 +1/0/-1
 143 2010-05-19T02:30:16  <cprofitt> +1
 144 2010-05-19T02:30:19  <hal14450> +1
 145 2010-05-19T02:30:25  <slick6661> +1
 146 2010-05-19T02:30:33  <cprofitt> Option one has been adopted
 147 2010-05-19T02:30:38  <slick6661> Noted
 148 2010-05-19T02:30:45  <hal14450> thanks guys
 149 2010-05-19T02:30:50  <cprofitt> please refelect that the bylaws will be replaced by a structure document
 150 2010-05-19T02:30:54  <cprofitt> you are welcome hal
 151 2010-05-19T02:31:07  <cprofitt> the bylaws will be archived
 152 2010-05-19T02:31:13  <cprofitt> now...
 153 2010-05-19T02:31:24  <hal14450> brb bathroom
 154 2010-05-19T02:31:43  <cprofitt> I would like to discuss how to transition to the two contacts...
 155 2010-05-19T02:31:46  <cprofitt> any ideas?
 156 2010-05-19T02:32:10  <slick6661> well since we're at this point i would like to propose an adjournment
 157 2010-05-19T02:32:22  <slick6661> I have to get up at 4:30 tomorrow
 158 2010-05-19T02:32:22  <cprofitt> err... ok
 159 2010-05-19T02:32:32  <cprofitt> we can adjourn
 160 2010-05-19T02:32:41  <cprofitt> and discuss the transition
 161 2010-05-19T02:32:43  * hal14450 back
 162 2010-05-19T02:32:53  <cprofitt> I will try to post the structure tonight
 163 2010-05-19T02:33:00  <cprofitt> and archive the bylaws
 164 2010-05-19T02:33:03  <hal14450> ahh adjournment
 165 2010-05-19T02:33:07  <slick6661> yea
 166 2010-05-19T02:33:11  <slick6661> got to get up early tomorrow
 167 2010-05-19T02:33:18  <hal14450> okay np 4:30 is wicked early
 168 2010-05-19T02:33:21  <cprofitt> we do need to decide if we are going to hold an election for the two contacts or how to handle that
 169 2010-05-19T02:33:29  <slick6661> before we adjourn can we agree on another date to meet?
 170 2010-05-19T02:33:48  <cprofitt> slick6661: perhaps we need to bring in all the members anyway
 171 2010-05-19T02:33:55  <cprofitt> now that we are officially not 'officers'
 172 2010-05-19T02:34:02  <hal14450> i'm easy, just ping me on irc w/ a proposed date or email me
 173 2010-05-19T02:34:14  <cprofitt> can you post these minutes before getting to sleep though?
 174 2010-05-19T02:34:22  <cprofitt> if not morning is fine...
 175 2010-05-19T02:34:26  <slick6661> almost done
 176 2010-05-19T02:34:30  <hal14450> lol yeah we dissolved our ability to accomplish anything anymore lol
 177 2010-05-19T02:34:40  <cprofitt> pretty much...
 178 2010-05-19T02:34:45  <hal14450> haha
 179 2010-05-19T02:34:50  <hal14450> footbullet
 180 2010-05-19T02:34:51  <cprofitt> hence why I thought we needed to talk abou it...
 181 2010-05-19T02:35:03  <cprofitt> for now... I think it leaves aus and myself as contacts
 182 2010-05-19T02:35:14  <cprofitt> but we can cross that bridge when we get there
 183 2010-05-19T02:35:35  <hal14450> i think we'll do fine honestly
 184 2010-05-19T02:35:36  <slick6661> cool
 185 2010-05-19T02:35:54  <slick6661> well cprofitt do you want to call this meeting?
 186 2010-05-19T02:36:06  <cprofitt> adjourned