22:01:14 <cwickert> #startmeeting FAmSCo 2012-04-18
22:01:14 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Apr 18 22:01:14 2012 UTC.  The chair is cwickert. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:01:14 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
22:01:22 <cwickert> #meetingname famsco
22:01:23 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco'
22:01:32 <cwickert> #topic Roll call
22:01:35 <cwickert> .fas cwickert
22:01:35 <zodbot> cwickert: cwickert 'Christoph Wickert' <christoph.wickert@googlemail.com>
22:01:48 <zoltanh7211> .fas zoltanh721
22:01:49 <zodbot> zoltanh7211: zoltanh721 'Hoppár Zoltán' <hopparz@gmail.com>
22:02:28 * herlo is here
22:03:11 <cwickert> this is 3
22:03:50 <cwickert> #info y1nv sent regrets
22:04:07 * cwickert looks for igor
22:05:18 * cwickert also looks for kaio
22:05:36 <cwickert> btw: I was able to reach Gerard
22:06:10 <cwickert> he said he is very busy and wants to catch up with the FAmSCo meeting minutes and the mailing list on the weekend
22:06:15 <cwickert> and then get back to me
22:06:19 <cwickert> lets see what happens
22:06:29 <zoltanh7211> let's hope the best
22:06:39 <dramsey> :)
22:07:31 * cwickert waits a little more...
22:11:30 <cwickert> ok, even if we don't have a quorum
22:11:46 <cwickert> I want to discuss the transition thing again
22:11:51 <cwickert> herlo: your take?
22:12:26 <herlo> cwickert: I stand where I've always stood. We should move sooner. I think option 1 was my vote and still is
22:12:28 <cwickert> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/famsco/2012-April/001044.html
22:12:54 <cwickert> ok, just for the people watching here in the channel
22:13:09 <cwickert> hey!
22:13:21 <kaio_ph> Hi
22:13:31 <cwickert> yn1v and kaio_ph showing up at the same second
22:13:37 <cwickert> this means we have a quorum now
22:13:44 <cwickert> yn1v: are you there?
22:13:46 <kaio_ph> Just shower after work.
22:13:59 <cwickert> #topic New FAmSCo election guideliens
22:14:04 <yn1v> yeap, here I am
22:14:06 <cwickert> #topic New FAmSCo election guidelines
22:14:20 <kaio_ph> .fas me@kaio
22:14:20 <cwickert> ok, let me quickly summarize the options again
22:14:20 <zodbot> kaio_ph: kaio 'Caius Chance (かいお)' <me@kaio.net>
22:14:36 <cwickert> OPTION 1: Do as is written in the wiki: 7 seats were up for the F17 and earlier elections, and the F18 election will have 3 seats up for vote. The 3 seats that will be up for election will be the bottom 3 vote-getters from the F17 election.  The 4 seats not up for election in the F18 election, will be up for election in F19.
22:14:44 <cwickert> OPTION 2: All seats will be up for the F18 election.  The 4 (or 3) highest vote-getters will serve two releases, the lowest 3 (or 4) vote-getters will serve 1 release.
22:14:51 <cwickert> OPTION 3: As option 2 but delayed by one release: All seats will be up for F19 election, the 4 (or 3) highest vote-getters will serve two releases, the 3 (or 4) lowest vote-getters will serve 1 release.
22:14:58 <cwickert> OPTION 4: Ask to step down voluntarily in F18.
22:15:07 <cwickert> the question now is: how do we want to vote?
22:15:33 <cwickert> should everybody just state his favorite our should we try to single them out?
22:16:13 <cwickert> #info igor said he'd support option 3
22:16:36 <yn1v> I prefer # 1
22:17:13 <zoltanh7211> Prefer #3
22:17:15 <cwickert> herlo also supports #1
22:17:20 <herlo> indeed
22:18:19 * cwickert is pro #1, too
22:18:50 <cwickert> so far I count +3 for #1 and +2 for #3
22:18:59 <cwickert> is this correct?
22:19:22 <zoltanh7211> yes it seems
22:19:22 <cwickert> herlo, cwickert, yn1v want #1, igor and zoltanh7211 #3
22:19:39 <cwickert> does anybody prefer option #2 or #4?
22:19:44 <cwickert> kaio_ph: what about you?
22:19:49 <cwickert> #4 was your suggestion
22:20:13 <cwickert> yn1v: btw: you were ranked 2nd, it would be a pity if you step down
22:20:38 <yn1v> I can postulate again ;)
22:20:47 <kaio_ph> 4 is just a preliminary before 1 - 3.
22:20:59 <cwickert> kaio_ph: ?
22:21:49 <kaio_ph> I choose 4 as doing it before either 1 - 3.
22:22:16 <cwickert> but we cannot mix the options
22:22:41 <cwickert> this means we cannot have one or two people step down and then elect 6 or 5
22:22:53 <cwickert> we need either 3 people to step down or it won't work
22:23:01 <kaio_ph> If no one want to do 4 before either 1 - 3, then can I just make a void vote?
22:23:10 <herlo> cwickert: 3 or all step down
22:23:26 <cwickert> kaio_ph: we already voted, we are waiting for your vote
22:23:51 <kaio_ph> I vote 1 then.
22:24:03 <cwickert> cool, we are done
22:24:22 <cwickert> #1 has +4 and this is an absolute majority
22:24:36 <cwickert> this means that we will have 3 seats up for election in F18
22:24:56 <cwickert> and the 3 seats are: zoltanh7211, kaio_ph and gbraad
22:25:42 <cwickert> #agreed: In order to make the transition to the new FAmSCo election guidelines, 7 seats were up for the F17 and earlier elections, and the F18 election will have 3 seats up for vote. The 3 seats that will be up for election will be the bottom 3 vote-getters from the F17 election.  The 4 seats not up for election in the F18 election, will be up for election in F19.
22:25:51 <cwickert> glad we finally have a decision
22:25:58 <cwickert> now back to our daily business
22:26:05 <cwickert> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/report/9
22:26:22 <cwickert> #topic FUDCon bids 2012
22:26:30 <cwickert> .famsco 258
22:26:30 <zodbot> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/258
22:26:55 <cwickert> the only thing this ticket lacks is an official announcement for the EMEA FUDCon
22:27:43 <cwickert> so I hereby announce
22:27:51 <cwickert> #info FUDCon EMEA 2012 will take place in Paris
22:27:54 <cwickert> unless the FPL objects
22:28:12 <cwickert> ok, now we are open for other tickets
22:28:28 <cwickert> which ones are urgent?
22:29:05 <cwickert> kaio_ph: I think you had one?
22:29:09 <kaio_ph> My flight isn't reimbursed yet.
22:29:31 <kaio_ph> Another one was the Indonesia release party.
22:29:48 <cwickert> #topic Transit flight from KL to Hong Kong to start Fedora contacts with HKLUG.
22:29:54 <kaio_ph> The latter amount was updated.
22:29:56 <cwickert> .famsco 277
22:29:56 <zodbot> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/277
22:30:10 <cwickert> #info kaio's flight is not yet reimbursed
22:30:23 <kaio_ph> Just waiting for harish.
22:30:24 <cwickert> kaio_ph: can you update the ticket and nag harish?
22:30:32 <kaio_ph> Yes.
22:30:50 <cwickert> #action kaio_ph to update #277 and nag harish
22:31:13 <kaio_ph> I have more info for the event. I got in touch with bochecha, a fam currently living in hong kong.
22:31:45 <cwickert> will he attend?
22:31:58 <kaio_ph> His company will provide venue, snacks, etc. we are currently have 6 RSVPs.
22:32:10 <kaio_ph> As he said he will attend.
22:32:22 <cwickert> ok, ask him if he can give a talk
22:32:34 <kaio_ph> Sure.
22:32:37 <cwickert> other than that, anything for us to discuss?
22:32:53 <cwickert> for this event I mean
22:32:58 <kaio_ph> No. I will put all info to wiki page.
22:33:02 <kaio_ph> No.
22:33:05 <cwickert> yes, please do
22:33:29 <kaio_ph> Next ticket will be Indonesia rel event.
22:33:31 <cwickert> #action kaio_ph to update https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FADHK201205
22:33:40 <cwickert> #topic Funding request for Release Party F17 Surakarta
22:33:54 <cwickert> .famsco 275
22:33:54 <zodbot> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/275
22:34:00 <kaio_ph> Arif supplied more info.
22:34:10 <cwickert> I think we should approve it even if it is above the limit
22:34:29 <cwickert> everbody please read through the ticket and then lets vote
22:35:05 <herlo> cwickert: so $157USD now and $50USD to be reimbursed later, correct?
22:35:42 <cwickert> I think so, kaio_ph is in charge
22:35:57 * herlo says +1 then
22:36:10 <herlo> to the $157
22:36:27 <cwickert> kaio_ph: what amount is covered by receipts?
22:36:35 <kaio_ph> I will in charge for the production, org, and reports from him.
22:36:53 <yn1v> +1
22:36:55 <kaio_ph> He can get invoice of media and stickers.
22:37:15 <kaio_ph> But he can only get receipt on drinks after he purchased.
22:37:40 <kaio_ph> I will ask for all receipts right after the event.
22:37:55 <cwickert> my question was: what can we reimburse now?
22:38:09 <kaio_ph> Media and stickers.
22:38:15 <cwickert> the receipt lists 1.201.000 IDR, right?
22:38:17 <kaio_ph> Excl drinks.
22:38:21 <herlo> kaio_ph: do you want to wait until after the event for approval? I'm thinking we split it up. The $50 you can do on your own later on...
22:38:25 <cwickert> oh, sorry
22:38:34 <kaio_ph> Yes
22:38:35 <cwickert> 1.401.000
22:38:53 <kaio_ph> Split +1
22:39:00 <cwickert> ok, and this matches 152 USD
22:39:07 <yn1v> makes sense
22:39:18 <kaio_ph> So $152 +1
22:39:19 <cwickert> so lets approve this ticket and have harish reimburse it ASAP
22:39:32 <herlo> +1 to $152
22:39:40 <cwickert> USD 152,71 according to google
22:40:09 <cwickert> #agreed approve 1.401.000 IDR and have harish reimburse it ASAP
22:40:31 <cwickert> #info requester needs to file a new ticket for food and drinks after the event
22:40:34 <cwickert> ok
22:40:37 <kaio_ph> Ok
22:40:46 <cwickert> kaio_ph: any more tickets from you?
22:40:55 <kaio_ph> No from me.
22:41:05 <cwickert> ok, but I have some
22:41:08 <herlo> cwickert: side note on the additional ticket, it's under $100, so shouldn't we just let that get done by the cc holder?
22:41:16 <cwickert> herlo: yes
22:41:35 <herlo> you just noted another ticket above is all
22:41:43 <cwickert> ok, sorry
22:42:12 <cwickert> he will have to open a ticket for tracking, but he can mark it ready for payment and assign it to harish straight away
22:42:17 <herlo> it's all good, just didn't want to confuse the issue
22:42:45 <herlo> cwickert: I didn't see that as even necessary per our previous conversations
22:42:46 <cwickert> no, you clarified things
22:42:48 <herlo> but that's fine
22:42:59 <cwickert> #topic Sponsorship request for Linuxwochen Vienna and LibreGraphicsMeeting 2012 (gnokii)
22:43:06 <cwickert> .famsco 285
22:43:08 <zodbot> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/285
22:43:32 <cwickert> it's 171 EUR
22:43:50 <cwickert> that is USD 225
22:44:10 <cwickert> and as gnokii is one of our most active ambassadors and designers, I suggest we approve it
22:44:19 <cwickert> +1 from me
22:44:25 <herlo> +1
22:44:30 <zoltanh7211> +1
22:44:58 <cwickert> yn1v, kaio_ph: you votes?
22:45:02 <yn1v> +1
22:45:07 <cwickert> #agreed #285 is approved
22:45:16 <kaio_ph> +1
22:45:27 <cwickert> #topic Sponsorship request for Linuxwochen Vienna 2012 and LGM (2-6)
22:45:41 <cwickert> .famso 267
22:46:08 <cwickert> this ticket is for several people
22:46:14 <cwickert> because they all share an appartment
22:46:27 <cwickert> the owner has agreed to split the invoice
22:46:35 <cwickert> but I think we should approve everything
22:46:45 <cwickert> that is 600 EUR
22:47:03 <cwickert> or USD 787
22:47:05 <herlo> how many?
22:47:11 <cwickert> 6 people
22:47:21 <cwickert> and it even includes 3 RH folks
22:47:42 <cwickert> I am a little disappointed that RH doesn't care for their employees better
22:47:47 <cwickert> but we cannot change it
22:47:52 <herlo> so, around 170EUR for the 3 folks? Or are we reimbursing the RH employees too
22:47:56 <herlo> ahh...I see.
22:48:24 <cwickert> Jiri and Jaroslav are very active in Fedora
22:48:30 <cwickert> I don't have a problem sponsoring them
22:48:36 <cwickert> then there is Richard Hughes
22:48:55 <herlo> cwickert: the link didn't come through, so I didn't look, but I'm +1 on it anyway
22:49:01 <cwickert> he is not necessarily that active as a community member, but a great developer
22:49:10 <cwickert> herlo: https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/267
22:49:18 * herlo will look now
22:49:26 <cwickert> richard will be talking about colorhugh
22:49:29 <igorps> hello guys
22:49:35 <kaio_ph> I support all public Fedora contributors.
22:49:42 <zoltanh7211> hey igor
22:49:49 <cwickert> and colorhug*
22:50:19 <herlo> cwickert: I see Richard on the planet a lot lately
22:50:25 <herlo> colorhug specifically, yes
22:50:27 <cwickert> and as colorhug is not a RH project but something that Richard does in his spare time, we should definitely support this
22:50:31 <herlo> and colorkde or whatever
22:50:36 <cwickert> right
22:50:38 <herlo> yeah, I agree
22:50:39 <herlo> +1
22:50:45 <igorps> Richard is a great developer, indeed
22:50:50 <cwickert> Fedora will be *the* leader at libre Graphics meeting
22:51:01 <cwickert> we have 6 or 7 talks and one keynote!
22:51:12 <herlo> lol, okay
22:51:18 <cwickert> so this is a major event and we can spend some money there
22:51:27 <cwickert> #agreed #267 is approved
22:51:45 <cwickert> #topic Sponsorship request for Linuxwochen Vienna 2012 (rgeri77)
22:52:04 <cwickert> same event as the other two tickets
22:52:21 <cwickert> but I am not sure what needs to be sponsored
22:52:25 <cwickert> zoltanh7211: can you give us details?
22:52:31 <zoltanh7211> yes
22:52:33 <zoltanh7211> I try
22:52:48 <zoltanh7211> But he works too much within his compny
22:53:11 <zoltanh7211> he will take me and the booth stuff to the event
22:53:27 <cwickert> zoltanh7211: are you going by car?
22:53:27 <zoltanh7211> and we need and garage and some fuel
22:53:32 <zoltanh7211> yes
22:53:42 <cwickert> Gergely's talk is the only one that was not accepted but IHMO we should sponsor him nevertheless. we need his car ;)
22:54:03 <gnokii> cwickert: he has one the second one was not accepted
22:54:12 <cwickert> ah
22:54:24 <cwickert> so one was accepted? then we definitely need to sponsor him
22:54:34 <zoltanh7211> He active within the HU community, and supports us a lot
22:54:40 <gnokii> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Linuxwochen_Wien_2012
22:54:42 <zoltanh7211> else he is a pro in wine
22:54:44 <cwickert> zoltanh7211: can you please update the ticket and provide more detauls?
22:54:52 <zoltanh7211> yes I do that
22:55:18 * herlo needs to leave on the hour
22:55:31 * yn1v too
22:55:55 <cwickert> ok, should we approve this ticket in advance up to a certain limit or discuss it again next week?
22:56:09 <cwickert> zoltanh7211: can you give us a rough estimate?
22:56:23 * nb would urge all ambassadors to support my petition to dissolve FAmSCo and call new elections - http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2012-April/011540.html
22:56:29 <zoltanh7211> 36 Eur / 6 EUR per day for garage
22:56:54 <nb> Our current FAmSCo decided to disenfranchise the voters who voted in the last election and remove a minority merely to protect themselves from having to face reelection
22:57:10 <nb> and repeatedly fails to remove gbraad even though he doesn't show up to meetings or participate in discussions
22:57:12 * nb would urge all ambassadors to support my petition to dissolve FAmSCo and call new elections - http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2012-April/011540.html
22:57:20 <nb> #link http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2012-April/011540.html
22:57:37 <cwickert> nb: please get your facts straight
22:57:50 <cwickert> zoltanh7211: I mean overall
22:58:01 <zoltanh7211> cca 100 EUR
22:58:15 <nb> cwickert, hey, i'm not the only one that feels this way
22:58:41 <herlo> nb: please be considerate during this meeting. We can discuss it during open floor
22:58:53 <cwickert> nb: I am open for any discussion but I'd like to finish this ticket before the others have to leave
22:59:08 <kaio_ph> B
22:59:38 <cwickert> so, approve #283 or not? what limit?
22:59:46 <cwickert> should we just approve 100 EUR now?
23:00:47 <zoltanh7211> ?
23:00:47 <yn1v> Let approve 100 EUR if later this estimate is too low we re-examine the ticket
23:00:56 <cwickert> zoltanh7211: speak up, hurry up
23:01:10 <zoltanh7211> no noting just silence
23:01:24 <zoltanh7211> go on
23:01:28 <cwickert> +1 for approving 100 EUR now
23:01:38 <igorps> cwickert, +1
23:01:41 <herlo> +1
23:01:43 <zoltanh7211> +1
23:01:46 <yn1v> +1
23:02:08 <cwickert> #agreed #283 is approved up to 100 EUR for now
23:02:47 <cwickert> who needs to leave now?
23:02:50 <kaio_ph> +1
23:02:59 <yn1v> o/
23:03:13 <yn1v> I can spare ten more minute at the most
23:03:17 * herlo has to leave now
23:03:27 <cwickert> ok, we loose our quorum anyway
23:03:34 <herlo> sorry
23:03:39 <cwickert> np
23:03:44 <herlo> I'll read the notes and follow-up on anything
23:04:07 <cwickert> I don't think there is much we can discuss now anyway
23:04:25 <cwickert> so from now on everything will be informal and not be legally binding
23:04:54 <cwickert> this is why I'd like to take the chance to discuss nb's petition.
23:05:08 <cwickert> nb: you do agree that your facts are not correct?
23:05:09 <igorps> We still have some budget tickets, please cast votes on Track then
23:05:17 <cwickert> igorps: which ones?
23:05:19 <nb> cwickert, which facts?
23:05:52 <cwickert> nb: "It also just so happens that the ones that voted for that proposal are the ones that would benefit by that proposal by not having to stand for reelection at the next election."
23:06:18 <cwickert> nb: the 4th and important vote came from kaio_ph, this means from somebody who needs to run again
23:06:18 <igorps> cwickert, #296, #284, #279
23:06:27 * nb believes kaio is the only one that voted for it that would have to run again
23:07:05 <nb> plus, theres still the issue of if we are going to throw out part of the election, why not throw out the whole election?
23:07:26 <nb> and then elect the people receiving the top votes to a two release term and the others to a one release term?
23:07:28 <nb> that would be more fair
23:07:36 <cwickert> igorps: 279 will take too long, #296 is not on the agenda and 284 seems trivial
23:08:06 <cwickert> nb: let me try to address your concerns one by one
23:08:16 <igorps> #276 instead of #296, sorry
23:08:31 <cwickert> so, what are we to do now?
23:08:48 <igorps> We don't need to discuss them here, we can do it on Track
23:08:53 <cwickert> discuss tickets that we cannot approve anyway or discuss nb's petition
23:09:23 <cwickert> igorps: then please send a reminder. kaio_ph wanted to do this last week but forgot it, we must not make the same mistage again. ok?
23:09:41 <igorps> cwickert, no problem, will do it
23:09:59 <cwickert> #action igorps to senad a reminder about urgent budget tickets
23:10:05 <cwickert> ok, now back to nb
23:10:08 <igorps> let's discuss nb's petition then
23:10:12 <yn1v> My time is up... bye folks ... I will catch up with log later
23:10:20 <igorps> bye yn1v!
23:10:58 <cwickert> ok, first: it doesn't really matter if kaio was the only one or not, it was the important vote to get the majority.
23:11:42 <cwickert> and on the other hand you complain we don't kick gbraad out without ghearing him first
23:11:49 <cwickert> this doesn't make sense
23:12:23 <cwickert> on the one hand you complain that some inactive members are not taken into account and the more active members make a decision
23:12:28 <kaio_ph> I had been talking to a few FAms from APAC who interested to join the reelection. Their intention is what let me act for a smoother transition than dragging everyone behind.
23:12:38 <cwickert> and one the other hand you want the inactive members to be removed from FAmSCo without hearing them.
23:12:42 <igorps> As I stated in the mailing list I'm against changing the rules during the game, but I'll take whatever the majority of FAmSCo decide
23:12:48 <cwickert> nb: you see that this is not logical?
23:13:39 <gnokii> cwickert: topic
23:14:18 <nb> cwickert, I think the best way would be for everyone to face reelection
23:14:21 <cwickert> #topic nb's Petition for the Board to dissolve FAmSCo and call new elections
23:14:34 <nb> the only inactive member i see here is gbraad
23:15:09 <kaio_ph> If there are better leaders it is alright for me vacant the seat.
23:15:10 <cwickert> nb: active or inactive is not 1 or 0, there is no hard line you can draw
23:15:15 <nb> so i don't know what you are referring to by "inactive members"
23:15:52 <cwickert> well, there are members that are more active, that do more work, take over more tickets and show up at meetings more often
23:15:55 <cwickert> right?
23:16:08 <nb> yes
23:16:49 <cwickert> just have a look at the overall attendance:
23:17:07 <cwickert> 11 out of 12 --  Christoph, Igor
23:17:07 <cwickert> 10 out of 12 -- Clint, Neville
23:17:07 <cwickert> 9 out of 12 --  Caius
23:17:07 <cwickert> 7 out of 12 --  Zoltan
23:17:07 <cwickert> 0 out of 12 --  Gerard
23:17:48 <nb> yeah, i think theres a big difference between 0 and 7
23:18:03 <cwickert> to me this does not make sense: On the one hand you want an inactive member to be removed, on the other you want him to vote
23:18:18 <nb> gerard has been at 0. why has famsco not voted to remove him yet
23:18:40 <cwickert> nb: because the procedure is that he needs to be heard first
23:18:42 <nb> My issue is that #2 is the more fair option.  Have new elections for everyone
23:18:45 <cwickert> and this is currently happening
23:18:48 <cwickert> hold on
23:18:56 <cwickert> I have given him a deadline
23:19:22 <cwickert> he needs to get back to me after the weekend, after he had time to catch up with the mailing lists and the meeting logs
23:19:48 <cwickert> I want to give him a fair chance, even if his live has been busy and troubled recently
23:20:00 <nb> if his life is that busy, he should step down
23:20:05 <cwickert> right
23:20:09 <nb> That's what I did when i was on CAcert's board
23:20:16 <cwickert> that's what I told him, too
23:20:29 <cwickert> if you cannot fulfill your duties, you better step down
23:20:45 <cwickert> and I hope he either does this or promises to get stuff done
23:21:06 <cwickert> nevertheless I prefer giving him a chance to make this decision first
23:21:11 <cwickert> does this make sense?
23:21:22 <nb> no
23:21:38 <nb> he has failed to show up or offer and explanation so far, and this has been long enough already
23:22:07 <nb> and theres also the issue of why we are only having elections for half the famsco
23:22:15 <cwickert> so you don't want to give him a chance even though he was elected by the community and you have no clue what is going on?
23:22:22 <cwickert> hold on
23:22:37 <cwickert> can we please discuss the issues individually and not mix everything?
23:22:42 <nb> sure.
23:22:43 <igorps> This is pretty reasonable. We need to give gime a chance to explain or to come back. Once the deadline is met he will come back or will be removed. It's just a matter of time.
23:23:01 <igorps> give him*
23:23:10 <cwickert> right, we ratified a process and the rules say we need to hear him forst
23:23:12 <cwickert> first
23:23:21 <cwickert> ok, now to the other issue
23:24:59 <cwickert> so your suggestion is to have all members seats open for election in f18?
23:25:13 <nb> I believe that was what you had called #2
23:25:24 <nb> yes
23:25:31 <nb> <cwickert> OPTION 2: All seats will be up for the F18 election.  The 4 (or 3) highest vote-getters will serve two releases, the lowest 3 (or 4) vote-getters will serve 1 release.
23:25:52 <cwickert> correct
23:25:54 <igorps> nb, why not wait until f19 elections and make a smoother transition?
23:26:11 <nb> igorps, i would not be opposed to waiting
23:26:13 <cwickert> igorps: that would be option 3 then
23:26:24 <igorps> cwickert, exactly
23:26:42 <nb> igorps, i (among others) am opposed to just removing the lowest 4 vote-getters from the previous election while leaving the others
23:26:42 <cwickert> nb: but you are aware of the change in the group of eligible voters?
23:26:46 <igorps> IMHO that would be the best option
23:26:58 <cwickert> nb, 3!
23:27:01 <nb> cwickert, even more reason to elect all famsco members
23:27:23 <nb> since the eligible voters are changed, they should be able to elect all members of famsco
23:27:28 <nb> not just half of it
23:27:37 * nb would be fine with either #2 or #3
23:28:02 <cwickert> then why didn't you speak up in the meeting? why didn't you ask us first?
23:28:11 <gnokii> +1
23:28:12 <cwickert> why didn't you speak up last week?
23:28:23 <zoltanh7211> cwickert +1
23:28:25 <nb> I think i did say something last week
23:28:46 <nb> why wasn't a message sent to the ambassadors list asking for input or anything?
23:28:59 * nb thinks this decision shouldn't be made without community input
23:29:16 <cwickert> well, then we'd need the whole community
23:29:39 <cwickert> if you really think we need community input, then you should have mailed the ambassadors
23:29:41 <cwickert> but not the board
23:29:50 <gnokii> he did
23:29:51 <cwickert> you have left out several steps
23:29:57 <cwickert> gnokii: when?
23:30:01 <nb> I did mail ambassadors.  and the board
23:30:06 <gnokii> same mail ;)
23:30:49 <cwickert> ok, so why didn't you try to resolve this amicably with us first?
23:31:07 <cwickert> gnokii: I thought it went only to the board
23:31:22 <gnokii> no its also to ambassadors list
23:31:34 <nb> it seemed like you had your mind made up already.  Plus, i still say, why didn't famsco ask what anyone else thought, i think it seeems like a big decision to be making without input from others
23:31:44 <nb> changing what people voted for
23:31:52 <cwickert> not really
23:31:57 <cwickert> people can still vote
23:32:21 <cwickert> if they want somebody on FAmSCo again, they elect him again
23:32:27 <cwickert> it's up to them. not to us
23:32:29 <nb> actually, the message should really go to announce@, not ambassadors, since cla+1 can vote now
23:32:36 <nb> cwickert, yeah, then why can't they vote for all the seats?
23:32:41 <zoltanh7211> sorry guys I have to sleep some I wake up for work at 4AM
23:32:47 <nb> cwickert, why leave the top people on famsco?
23:32:50 <zoltanh7211> bb
23:32:56 <nb> not fair to the ones who have to stand for reelection
23:33:00 <zoltanh7211> thx
23:33:01 <cwickert> it makes a huge difference for the members but not so much for the voters
23:33:16 <cwickert> nb: I am personally totally fine with #2
23:33:55 <cwickert> but it's a fact that there was no chance to get this as 3 people had already expressed their support for #1
23:34:33 <nb> that is why i was asking the board to make it happen
23:34:34 <cwickert> so it's not that I am not willing to run for reelection
23:34:57 <cwickert> no, you should have tried to resolve it amicably first
23:35:19 <cwickert> again, it's not that I or anybody else is not willing to run again
23:35:39 <cwickert> but I think both your reasoning and the way you did it is fundamentally flawed
23:35:55 <cwickert> you wrote a mail without giving any context
23:36:22 <cwickert> and you outlined the facts in a very angled way
23:36:29 <nb> perhaps i misunderstood it
23:36:36 <cwickert> alright
23:36:43 <nb> although i do think someone from famsco should have asked for wider input before making the decision
23:37:21 <cwickert> I don't think it affects the voters as much as it affects the members
23:37:34 <cwickert> that's why the members are to make this discussion first of all
23:37:37 <cwickert> but anyway
23:37:45 <cwickert> I will respond to your email
23:37:51 <cwickert> and suggest we go for #2
23:38:03 <cwickert> but wanting to force this is totally wrong
23:38:13 <nb> thank you
23:38:18 <cwickert> neither you nor me are able to force this
23:38:30 <nb> perhaps i misunderstood the circumstances, and i am sorry if i did so.  It just seemed that way to me
23:38:34 <cwickert> last but not least: the board cannot dissolve FAmSCo
23:38:42 <nb> cwickert, ?
23:39:01 <cwickert> not any longer
23:39:06 <nb> ok, i suppose i mean the FPL
23:39:06 <nb> Additionally, there is a Chair appointed by Red Hat, who has veto power over any decision. The expectation is that this veto power will be used infrequently, as there are negative consequences that could arise from the frequent use of such power in a community project. Just as a CEO often serves as the bridge between a board of directors and a company's executive component, the Chair is a bridge between the Fedora Project Board and the larger Fedora communi
23:39:06 <nb> ty.
23:39:08 <cwickert> this was part of the old guidelines
23:39:15 <nb> but hopefully that would not be necessary
23:39:44 <cwickert> well, the chair could veto our decision
23:39:50 <cwickert> but he could not dissolve famsco
23:40:09 <nb> but it looks like that may not be necessary
23:40:19 <nb> so that sounds good (you responding to my email)
23:40:22 <cwickert> hopefully not
23:40:44 <cwickert> I hope we never happen the FPL to overpower anybody
23:40:51 <nb> yeah
23:41:00 <cwickert> anyway, lets all calm down and solve this by mail
23:41:07 <cwickert> fine with that?
23:41:20 <nb> yes thanks
23:41:40 <cwickert> ok,
23:41:46 <cwickert> I then end this meeting
23:42:06 <cwickert> nb: thanks for giving me a good shock just before bed time ;)
23:42:11 <cwickert> #endmeeting