14:03:01 <potty> #startmeeting famsco
14:03:01 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Nov  9 14:03:01 2016 UTC.  The chair is potty. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:03:01 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:03:01 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco'
14:03:06 <potty> #topic Roll Call
14:03:14 <potty> .hello potty
14:03:15 <zodbot> potty: potty 'Abdel G. Martínez L.' <abdel.g.martinez.l@gmail.com>
14:04:14 <mailga> .hello mailga
14:04:16 <zodbot> mailga: mailga 'Gabriele Trombini' <g.trombini@gmail.com>
14:04:26 * potty waves at mailga
14:04:42 * mailga waves back to potty
14:05:28 <potty> Let's wait 5 minutes to see if more people is coming.
14:05:43 <gnokii_> pong
14:05:50 <gnokii_> .fas gnokii
14:05:51 <zodbot> gnokii_: gnokii 'Sirko Kemter' <buergermeister@karl-tux-stadt.de>
14:06:16 <mailga> hi gnokii_
14:11:27 <potty> #chair mailga gnokii_
14:11:27 <zodbot> Current chairs: gnokii_ mailga potty
14:11:44 <potty> #info Attendance 3/6
14:12:05 <potty> #topic Funding Request nullcon Goa 2017 and Amrita University
14:12:13 <potty> #link https://fedorahosted.org/emea-swag-tracking/ticket/623
14:12:26 <potty> Please review the ticket and let's vote on it.
14:12:45 <mailga> potty: it's also open in the FAmSCo trac.
14:12:57 <potty> mailga: please share the link with tus
14:13:03 <potty> s/tus/us
14:13:18 * mailga checking
14:13:51 <mailga> #link https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/406
14:13:55 <mailga> here it is.
14:14:41 <potty> Thank you, mailga.
14:14:57 <mailga> I just spoke with kital, mitzie and bexelbie, funds are available, we just have only to approve or not the ticket.
14:15:13 <gnokii_> can you tell whats is? I tether so...
14:15:14 <potty> .famsco 406
14:15:14 <zodbot> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/406
14:16:52 <potty> gnokii_: Fabian and Joerg want to speak about Fedora Security Lab and the OSSTMM at nullcon Goa 2017 and at the Amrita University.
14:17:09 <mailga> gnokii_: Joerg and Fabian are invited to teach to the nullcon https://rupalitalwatkar.wordpress.com/2016/03/17/red-hat-nullcon-2016/
14:17:14 <potty> gnokii_: They request their budget approval, which is $2500.
14:17:20 <mailga> ups sorry potty.
14:17:24 <gnokii_> ok, what means funds are available?
14:17:25 <potty> mailga: it is ok :)
14:18:26 <mailga> gnokii_: it means that mitzie have some funds available to sponsorize the travel and the hosting.
14:18:51 <gnokii_> potty its not ok as there was a strange decision a while ago according to inter-region travel APAC has no funds for it
14:19:17 * bexelbie is now here if needed - was active in a f2f convo
14:19:56 <bexelbie> .hello bexelbie
14:19:57 <zodbot> bexelbie: Sorry, but you don't exist
14:20:02 <bexelbie> .hello bex
14:20:03 <zodbot> bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' <bex@pobox.com>
14:20:21 <potty> gnokii_: we have to vote on this
14:20:26 <mailga> hello bexelbie
14:20:41 <gnokii_> potty before I vote on something I wanna know some points
14:20:45 <potty> welcome bexelbie
14:20:53 <potty> gnokii_: ok let's discuss on this :)
14:21:25 <gnokii_> I mean on one hand, giannisk says simple there is no inter-region travel and receiving region has to pay and now we have the case.....
14:21:36 <mailga> gnokii_: we know EMEA has the money, so we have to vote only for the event attendance. A discussion about the money isn't a FAmSCo issue. Is it right bexelbie?
14:21:51 <bexelbie> I would encourage us to focus on how to make the best outcome for Fedora
14:22:05 <bexelbie> does it make sense for Fedora to provide resources for this kind of an activity
14:22:10 <bexelbie> if so, then lets see if we can get the resources
14:22:23 <bexelbie> let's not use a rule to stop good things ... we aren't setting precedent
14:22:31 <bexelbie> we are seeing one region volunteering to help out the project overall
14:22:43 <potty> bexelbie: i agree with you
14:22:43 <bexelbie> we aren't saying that we are overturning the starting point for thinking about resourcing travel
14:24:35 <bexelbie> Did the network split or are people just quiet?
14:24:48 <potty> bexelbie: people quiet i think
14:24:49 <gnokii_> so EMEA pays?
14:25:22 <mailga> gnokii_: yes.
14:25:40 <bexelbie> before we figure out who pays, is this a worthwhile activity
14:25:45 <bexelbie> should we even do this if it was free?
14:26:22 <bexelbie> because if we wouldn't do it if resources weren't in question then it doesn't matter how we resource it
14:26:52 <gnokii_> bexelbie: haha when it comes out of APAC budget, there is no way even its worth because its 25% of the pot
14:27:04 <mailga> bexelbie: Joerg and Fabian are doing a great work in that region, IMO we have to support them as we can.
14:27:15 <bexelbie> gnokii_, if APAC had all of the money in the entire world - that doesn't change whether this is worth doing or not
14:27:39 <potty> bexelbie: +1
14:27:40 <bexelbie> mailga, so what I am hearing you say is that the activity will have huge impact for Fedora and we should do it
14:27:51 <potty> gnokii_: do you got any other questions?
14:28:06 <potty> We have no quorum, but still votes are valid.
14:28:24 <mailga> bexelbie: exactly, but it my own opinion of course.
14:28:57 <bexelbie> I think we should ask the FAmSCo members present to articulate whether they think the activity is worthwhile to do at all.
14:29:04 <mailga> potty: isn't it better put our vote on the ticket?
14:29:11 <potty> i think so, mailga
14:29:17 <bexelbie> Then if they say yes we can decide if we want to block it over people's interpretation of rules and processes or not
14:30:43 <bexelbie> potty, what is your opinion on the value of this activity?
14:30:47 <bexelbie> gnokii_,  what is your opinion on the value of this activity?
14:31:35 <potty> bexelbie: I agree. I think it adds value to Fedora.
14:31:51 <potty> bexelbie: Great opportunity we should not ignore.
14:31:51 <bexelbie> gnokii_, ?
14:32:18 <gnokii_> well they always had a good outcome with
14:33:07 <bexelbie> mailga, potty gnokii_ based on your positive assessment of hte activity, are you ok with EMEA choosing to use their funds this way?  It is an unexpected use.  It is also an effective statement that they think this is the best way to use their funds?  Do we feel this is incorrect or that this usage harms EMEA?
14:33:36 <bexelbie> "use their funds." - that part wasn't a question ... sorry for the typo
14:33:52 <potty> bexelbie: I'm OK with the way. It is not incorrect.
14:36:04 <mailga> bexelbie this is what I think, it's an old article I wrote year ago https://fedoramagazine.org/we-are-everywhere-you-need/
14:36:22 <bexelbie> mailga, I'll start reading, but can you summarize it in 1-2 sentences :)
14:37:37 <mailga> bexelbie: it's a double interview where both Joerg and Fabian described their job in APAC, in that case tibet. My final comment was enthusiastic.
14:38:20 <bexelbie> mailga, I am understanding that to mean that you think this use of funding is acceptable for EMEA to undertake and doesnt harm the EMEA region
14:38:22 <bexelbie> is that right?
14:38:25 <bexelbie> gnokii_, ?
14:38:42 <mailga> bexelbie: this is right! +1
14:38:56 <gnokii_> see above i said they always had a good outcome
14:39:27 <bexelbie> gnokii_, the question si about allowing the use of resources in this manner
14:39:50 <bexelbie> you all three seem to be in agreement that the activity is a good one for Fedora to undertake and that the right people are engaged
14:39:58 <gnokii_> is it the question? Because its not the first time they do
14:40:15 <bexelbie> gnokii_, they require FAmSCo to approve the expense because of hte size
14:40:50 <gnokii_> well thats strange, it s required just because its not in the budget plan, not because of the amount
14:41:37 <bexelbie> on the contrary, this was raised to FAmSCo solely because of hte amount, as I understand it from the tickets
14:41:48 <bexelbie> There didn't seem to be any requirement that EMEA seek FAmSCo approval to just allocate budget
14:41:59 <bexelbie> I gather that if this was lower in value, it wouldn't even be asked here
14:42:03 <gnokii_> yeah but its a bit wrong
14:42:07 <bexelbie> mailga, potty is this correct?
14:42:12 <bexelbie> gnokii_, what is a bit wrong?
14:42:22 <gnokii_> otherwise we would have to decide a lot more cases
14:42:34 <potty> bexelbie: correct, they call us because of the amount
14:42:42 <mailga> gnokii_: it's not completely in the budget plan. But it's also out of the range of the regional vote (it raise 2000 $)
14:42:54 <potty> bexelbie: this is just a yes/no decision, logistics was already made
14:43:07 <bexelbie> gnokii_, I don't understand your comment.  What is wrong?
14:43:25 <bexelbie> potty, I don't fully understand your comment about logistics
14:44:08 <gnokii_> bexelbie: we transferred all budget to the regions, its not out of the regional vote as 2 persons 2500$?2 is 1250$ that is in the regional vote
14:44:10 <potty> bexelbie: i mean, as i understand EMEA already made the arrangements on their budget to have it available for this particular ticket
14:44:29 <gnokii_> if the sum would count a event, we would have to decide much more cases
14:45:10 <bexelbie> gnokii_, If you believe that regions have not submitted activities exceeding the trigger values properly, open FAmSCo tickets and I will help follow up
14:45:26 <bexelbie> gnokii_, please provide your opinion on this specific spend
14:45:37 <gnokii_> I AM FINE
14:46:03 <gnokii_> I just wait that the chair starts the voting
14:46:17 <bexelbie> potty, I apologize for monopolizing the meeting briefly.  If I can offer one more suggestion, I would encourage all three of you to articulate your opinions and support of both the event and spend in the ticket to allow for quorum to be reached quickly
14:46:24 <bexelbie> this way we can not delay and save $$ on airfare
14:46:54 <potty> bexelbie: It is ok. Don't have to apologize. :)
14:47:25 <bexelbie> :)
14:48:28 <potty> @famsco, so we have put our vote on this ticket (#406)
14:48:34 <potty> lazy consensus on this
14:48:58 <bexelbie> What is lazy consensus timing for this particular group?
14:49:26 <gnokii_> a week
14:49:43 <bexelbie> gnokii_, ty
14:52:53 <gnokii_> mmh
14:53:11 <bexelbie> gnokii_, ?
14:53:35 <gnokii_> i thought i am disconnected nobody goes on
14:54:47 <bexelbie> gnokii_, I empathize.  Things got real quiet :)
14:55:03 <mailga> bexelbie: I think you know me quite well and also yhink youu should know I'm +1 to encourage people working at 360°. It's not a money question, it's only a willing question.
14:55:05 <gnokii_> can we vote now on this?
14:55:25 <bexelbie> mailga, I know - but I like to get you on record saying good stuff like that :)
14:55:38 <potty> gnokii_: vote on the ticket #406, famsco trac
14:55:40 <bexelbie> gnokii_, voting has started in the ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/406
14:55:54 <bexelbie> gnokii_, I think your +1 there would be hugely valuable in moving to lazy consensus
14:56:18 <mailga> gnokii_: I voted yet, but I can repeat here my +1 for the ticket #406
14:57:08 <gnokii_> yeah well then I have to do it tomorrow, sorry I dont wait endless long untl I can comment in trac
14:57:30 <bexelbie> gnokii_, perhaps you could express your +1 here so we can reflect it from the minutes
14:57:53 <bexelbie> Having recently been traveling, I can respect having network challenges
14:57:54 <gnokii_> yeah if the chair never starts a vote here and puts it to the log
14:58:07 * bexelbie is grateful for having good network connectivity today
14:58:17 <potty> gnokii_: ok
14:58:22 <bexelbie> gnokii_, since the voting is in the ticket because tehre is no quorum you should just say something
14:58:23 <bexelbie> :)
14:58:31 <potty> mailga and I already voted... but ok...
14:58:33 <potty> Let's vote here:
14:58:43 <potty> mailga, gnokii_?
14:58:45 <potty> +1
14:58:48 <mailga> +1
14:58:50 <gnokii_> +1
14:59:11 <potty> I will paste this meeting log on the ticket.
14:59:31 <potty> :)
14:59:33 <potty> Thank you for voting
14:59:42 <potty> Thank you bexelbie for the information
14:59:46 <potty> guys, let's move on topics
14:59:56 <bexelbie> yw
15:00:06 * bexelbie will step away for a few in case you need me later just ping
15:01:12 <potty> #topic FAmSCo membership status for lbazan
15:01:18 * potty waves at cwickert
15:01:25 <potty> .famsco 403
15:01:25 <zodbot> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/403
15:02:17 <potty> lbazan on comment:8 mentioned he will not be available to attend this role. Which is the action then?
15:02:53 <gnokii_> we have two options
15:03:02 <gnokii_> 1. runner up follows
15:03:07 <mailga> potty: no comments here. lbazan is stepping down. We should update the wiki page.
15:03:11 <gnokii_> 2. we appoint somebody
15:03:27 <gnokii_> or 3 we say we can handle without 7th person
15:04:07 <bexelbie> Question: When is the next FAmSCo election?
15:04:14 <mailga> gnokii_: IMO we can handle without 7th person.
15:04:16 <bexelbie> if it is soon, would #3 get greater value?
15:04:41 <mailga> bexelbie: it depends on what we decide about keeping FAmSCo alive.
15:05:43 <bexelbie> mailga, assuming that FAmSCo continues
15:05:53 <bexelbie> or that it isn't resolved before the election should be held
15:06:25 <mailga> Our nominations should end at the next release. The general rules said that it lasts for 2 release if I remeber correctly.
15:06:41 <potty> so, let's vote on gnokii_ options:
15:06:46 <potty> +1 for option 3
15:06:59 <gnokii_> its no my options its what the rules say
15:07:48 <gnokii_> I am fine with 3 to, it should work
15:08:18 <mailga> +1 for not integrate the number of the FAmSCo members
15:08:28 <bexelbie> I have another question re: election when this vote is complete
15:08:32 <bexelbie> for open floor
15:09:06 <potty> mailga: is that option 3, right?
15:09:30 <mailga> potty: yes it is. Let me reformulate.
15:09:38 <mailga> +1 for option 3
15:09:41 <potty> Good
15:09:51 <potty> Current results are: +3 for option 3
15:10:02 <potty> I will update the ticket #403 with this information
15:10:16 <potty> And let's remove lbazan from famsco related-stuff
15:10:21 <potty> Anything else on this topic?
15:10:43 <gnokii_> means now the ticket gets assigned to kital to move on
15:12:16 <mailga> gnokii_: +1
15:13:00 <potty> +1
15:13:16 <mailga> sorry guys, got to move. I'll read the log for the final part of this meeting. See you guys, a big hug.
15:14:39 <gnokii_> means that we move on to open floor now?
15:14:47 * bexelbie will open a ticket with his question
15:15:04 <potty> bexelbie: what is current status on FOSCo?
15:15:07 <potty> mailga: ok
15:15:18 <potty> gnokii_: i think so
15:15:37 <gnokii_> good I have two things
15:15:54 <gnokii_> first, we should talk about competencies
15:16:14 <gnokii_> I am a bit sick of commops now
15:17:00 <gnokii_> I write in the post clear, I award only badges if everybody brings a report and then it get changed to in the communityblog
15:17:15 <bexelbie> gnokii_, can you please provide a link?
15:17:43 <gnokii_> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-25-awesome-release-party/
15:17:54 <bexelbie> It says in that link that you get a badge with a report
15:17:59 <bexelbie> what is the problem?
15:18:06 <gnokii_> not a report
15:18:18 <gnokii_> as some come then and say there is one in the communityblog
15:18:43 <bexelbie> gnokii_, I don't understand what you're saying, please rephrase
15:19:10 <bexelbie> "Just make sure you write a report of it (only people with reports get a badge awarded) " from your article
15:19:18 <gnokii_> after that article I got a mail from the french why they dont got the party badge for f24, its simple I just look to the table in the wiki, no event report from the person no badge
15:19:27 <gnokii_> and the french not even have listed their events
15:20:15 <bexelbie> gnokii_, what does an F24 release party have to do with your complaint about your F25 release party commblog article?
15:21:17 <gnokii_> then I did missread
15:21:43 <gnokii_> but changes nothing on the creation of the badge for visitors
15:22:18 <bexelbie> gnokii_, ok - what is the problem with visitor badges? you started with a complaint about your article that has turned out to be a misread on your part.  Can you help me understand the current issue?
15:22:48 <gnokii_> simple then all stop writing reports and claim that badge instead of the organizer one
15:23:16 <bexelbie> gnokii_, what are you specifically proposing?
15:23:43 <gnokii_> that sometimes, some inside commops listen to famsco
15:24:03 <bexelbie> gnokii_, are you saying that all release party organizers are members of commops?
15:24:15 <bexelbie> I would have thought they were ambassadors
15:24:24 <gnokii_> no I say that commops came up with another party badge
15:24:41 <bexelbie> So you don't think that people should get a badge for attending release partys?
15:24:43 <bexelbie> parties
15:24:58 <gnokii_> and so far, we still have to work hard bringing our ambassadors to make parties at all
15:25:23 <bexelbie> so what are you specifically proposing?
15:26:03 <bexelbie> so far I hear you complaining about unspecified grievances against commops because you don't think that ambassadors should be allowed to give badges to release party attendees.  And that doesn't make sense to me
15:26:48 <gnokii_> bexelbie: that badge would destroy all efforts we do here to getting ambassadors to make parties and write reports
15:27:12 <bexelbie> How is offering an attendee badge causing people to not organize parties?  If there is no organized party then no one gets the badge
15:27:15 <bexelbie> I don't understand that
15:27:50 <bexelbie> If the problem is reports why not stop people from organizing parties if they have a history of not reporting on previous parties.  Just like we may stop funding people from attending events if they don't write reports.
15:27:52 <gnokii_> bexelbie: again no report no badge
15:28:19 <bexelbie> So, gnokii_, are you suggesting that no one can earn the attendee badge if the organizer doesn't write a report?
15:28:29 <gnokii_> not the organizer
15:28:53 <bexelbie> So what specifically are you proposing?  I don't understand which badge you want to deny to which person or people.
15:28:53 <gnokii_> I eg gave churchyard no badge because he was referring to a article not from him
15:29:17 <bexelbie> did churchyard attend the party or organize it?
15:29:45 <gnokii_> brazil same, some came and said he there is an article about from that person
15:30:07 <bexelbie> gnokii_, can you please offer a specific proposal for the rule change or policy you want adopted?
15:30:39 <gnokii_> i just dont want that visitor badge as many would then claim that one instead of the organizer badge that is all
15:31:02 <bexelbie> gnokii_, are you suggesting that there should be no release party attendee badges?
15:31:09 <gnokii_> YES
15:31:19 <bexelbie> gnokii_, do you think that is a good thing for the Fedora project as a whole?
15:31:32 <bexelbie> Doesn't the badge system exist to motivate contribution
15:31:42 <gnokii_> yes exact
15:31:43 <bexelbie> aren't you taking away a badge that new members of our community can earn and get excited by?
15:32:20 <bexelbie> so how does denying an attendee badge to a random, possibly new, community member help the Fedora project?
15:32:46 <gnokii_> bexelbie: I give you a bet, that this badge will be claimed in 90% of existing fas account holder
15:33:17 <bexelbie> gnokii_, how does it hurt us to see Fedora community members claiming a badge
15:33:20 <bexelbie> that is called participation
15:33:32 <bexelbie> I don't understand how having this badge is causing us to not have parties
15:33:33 <gnokii_> so how does an attendee badge help the project if they see its not necessary to do anything anymore
15:33:35 <bexelbie> no party == no badge
15:33:56 <bexelbie> gnokii_, if I go to a party I don't expect to have to write a report proving I was there if I was able to scan the QR code
15:34:18 <bexelbie> gnokii_, you could have had a badge at the recent FUDCon in APAC to do the same, you just chose not too
15:34:23 <bexelbie> but attendance doesn't mean a report
15:34:27 <gnokii_> exact and then all the organizers starting getting that and we see no reports anymore
15:34:38 <gnokii_> fine what a win
15:34:41 <bexelbie> gnokii_, so why not propose something that solves your real problem
15:34:51 <bexelbie> instead of going nuclear propose a more targeted idea
15:34:53 <bexelbie> for example
15:35:05 <bexelbie> you could suggest that organizers of release parties should not be allowed to get attendance badges
15:35:23 <bexelbie> or your could propose that organizers who don't write reports are not allowed to organize a new party for at least 2 releases
15:35:35 <bexelbie> but your solution is to punish everyone for what you perceive as the offense of a few
15:36:49 <gnokii_> bexelbie: why should I not allow them to organize a party?
15:36:59 <bexelbie> gnokii_, because they aren't writing the reports you think they owe
15:37:11 <bexelbie> so if they don't follow up then they aren't allowed to use Fedora resources
15:37:18 <bexelbie> either htat or the report really isn't required
15:37:30 <gnokii_> helps us totally to forbid them to organize parties
15:37:40 <bexelbie> Also, why is this being handled here and not in the region?
15:37:45 <gnokii_> so far it was simple no report no badge
15:37:54 <bexelbie> gnokii_, you're arguing that the report is required right?
15:37:58 <bexelbie> then why do we need reports?
15:38:01 <gnokii_> if the event owner writes one, he gets the remibursement
15:38:15 <bexelbie> so then the event owners must be writing reports
15:38:20 <bexelbie> so therefore they earn the badge
15:38:23 <bexelbie> so what is hte problem?
15:38:37 <gnokii_> OK how many owners are there?
15:38:42 <gnokii_> its always one
15:39:02 <gnokii_> but several try to claim the badge what is for me ok as long they write their report
15:39:12 <bexelbie> If I host an event on behalf of Fedora and I organize someone to wirte a report about it (perhaps because I am busy or they are a better writer) why is that a problem?
15:39:15 <gnokii_> but now attendee badge is enough for them, no report anymore
15:39:26 <bexelbie> the goal of hte report is to both inform the project about what happened and to provide promotional material
15:39:29 <bexelbie> who cares who actually writes it
15:39:38 <bexelbie> we aren't a writing school
15:40:12 <gnokii_> useless to debate
15:40:26 <bexelbie> gnokii_, what you're telling me is that we don't pay for events without a report.  Tehrefore if we had an event that was donated (because no one wrote a report) then there will be no organizer badge - ok
15:40:26 <gnokii_> I will award next release none so simple
15:40:43 <potty> guys, we are overtime on this meeting
15:40:50 <potty> sorry for being the bad guy
15:41:51 <bexelbie> potty, thank you for hosting
15:42:04 <gnokii_> no we dont pay for many of these and we even dont know they happen just say french, so now all effort to encourage to tell us destroyed fine go ahead
15:42:16 <potty> thank you all for having this productive meeting
15:42:26 <potty> I will change the topic to OpenFloor
15:42:30 <potty> #topic Open Floor
15:42:59 <bexelbie> gnokii_, consider trying carrots and not sticks
15:43:19 <gnokii_> yeah carrot is the badge
15:44:47 <bexelbie> gnokii_, apparently your carrot isn't enough.  So look for a better carrot
15:45:03 <bexelbie> I find it hard to believe that the attendee badge is the real blocker to reporting
15:47:30 <bexelbie> potty, I believe you are free to close the meeting
15:47:44 <potty> ok
15:47:47 <potty> #endmeeting