From Pirate Party of Canada
19:48:01 MikkelPaulson: okay, I call the meeting to order
19:48:14 MikkelPaulson: we have a bit to cover today, so let's get on it
19:48:22 Mike Bleskie: First item
19:48:23 MikkelPaulson: agenda: https://www.pirateparty.ca/forum/index.php?topic=577.0
19:48:45 Mike Bleskie: Election post-mortem
19:48:56 MikkelPaulson: indeed
19:49:21 MikkelPaulson: I'm fairly pleased with the results, though there's definitely a lot of
room for improvement in the way we ran the campaign
19:49:55 MikkelPaulson: Jeff did a fantastic job, and I hope he'll consider running again in the
next general election
19:50:04 Mike Bleskie: Agreed
19:50:06 Stephane Bakhos: I hope so too
19:50:35 Mike Bleskie: And this campaign proves that candidates must put in some effort
19:50:47 Mike Bleskie: Jeff showed how to do so
19:51:07 Mike Bleskie: But on our part, we need to make sure we are ready for such an event
19:51:11 MikkelPaulson: although Winnipeg Centre and Winnipeg South Centre are significantly better
for membership
19:51:18 MikkelPaulson: definitely
19:51:27 MikkelPaulson: we need to launch our YouTube channel
19:51:40 MikkelPaulson: and order some campaign signs
19:52:01 Stephane Bakhos: absolutely
19:52:05 Mike Bleskie: Well, if we have the finances for that
19:52:09 Mike Bleskie: we should start ASAP
19:52:11 MikkelPaulson: as we've discussed before, I think the best way to go about that is to
print a generic sign and order a bunch of stickers with candidates' names
19:52:39 MikkelPaulson: that way we can more easily reuse signs and distribute them with less
wastage
19:53:15 MikkelPaulson: I think Jake was working on getting some pricing on that matter, has anyone
heard anything more about that?
19:53:16 Mike Bleskie: That is a viable option
19:53:26 Mike Bleskie: I haven't heard anything
19:53:28 Mike Bleskie: however
19:53:39 Mike Bleskie: I do know that it would be the cheaper option
19:53:53 MikkelPaulson: to get them in bulk?
19:54:08 Mike Bleskie: yeah, with the stickers
19:54:13 MikkelPaulson: indeed
19:54:16 Mike Bleskie: In John Rodriguez' municipal campaign, we were reusing signs
19:54:26 Mike Bleskie: the old website was on the signs
19:54:49 Mike Bleskie: and so the first option was to get stickers with the new website, and stick
it on top
19:54:51 Stephane Bakhos: we could use transparent stickers so that it doesn't look too bad
19:55:01 MikkelPaulson: no
19:55:05 MikkelPaulson: because that precludes reuse
19:55:13 Mike Bleskie: Just remember that the background will be a rich red
19:55:42 MikkelPaulson: if we have red with a white horizontal stripe, we could use a black-
on-white bumper sticker in the stripe and it wouldn't look too bad
19:55:58 MikkelPaulson: matching reds would be a headache otherwise
19:56:09 MikkelPaulson: especially in subsequent uses, since the colours would have faded somewhat
19:56:23 Mike Bleskie: I'm not sure what you're getting at
19:56:40 MikkelPaulson: well, if we wanted to use white-on-red and stick it onto the red background
19:57:21 Mike Bleskie: " if we have red with a white horizontal stripe, we could use a black-
on-white bumper sticker in the stripe and it wouldn't look too bad"
19:57:23 Stephane Bakhos: better to have the name black on white
19:57:29 Mike Bleskie: I'm having difficulty picturing this
19:57:40 MikkelPaulson: I'll do a quick mockup to illustrate later
19:57:54 MikkelPaulson: bottom line, sign+sticker is the way to go
19:58:08 MikkelPaulson: we can work out the specifics later on
19:58:10 Mike Bleskie: I don't know what happened to the using-the-persons-portrait idea
19:58:27 Stephane Bakhos: we should
19:58:33 MikkelPaulson: it'd be nice if it's feasible
19:58:52 Stephane Bakhos: I know here they do reuse signs by having a sticker on top of the old face
19:58:54 MikkelPaulson: full-colour signs would be a lot more expensive and wouldn't be reusable
for other candidates, though
19:59:01 MikkelPaulson: hmm, okay
19:59:04 Stephane Bakhos: depends how we design them
19:59:09 MikkelPaulson: well if you can find a way to make it work, that'd be fantastic
19:59:14 Stephane Bakhos: we could get 2 uses out of a sign
19:59:38 Stephane Bakhos: the elements will have worked their magic on the signs by the end of the
2nd campaign that I doubt there will be much left to reuse
19:59:47 MikkelPaulson: yeah, could be
19:59:55 MikkelPaulson: guess it depends when the campaigns happen too
20:00:15 MikkelPaulson: of course, if we print signs with pictures on them, it would be harder to
manage inventory
20:00:35 MikkelPaulson: we'd have to cope with each candidate having leftover, rather than ordering
a bunch and sending them to each candidate as they need more
20:01:01 MikkelPaulson: or rather signs with any personalization pre-printed
20:01:02 Stephane Bakhos: candidates should be installing all the signs they get...
20:01:15 MikkelPaulson: good point
20:01:20 Stephane Bakhos: I doubt we'll have enough to run out of places to put them
20:01:26 MikkelPaulson: doesn't cost anything to put a sign on public property like along roads
20:01:57 Stephane Bakhos: as long as they are taken down after the election
20:01:58 MikkelPaulson: it would be nice to get a few really big signs too, but maybe not
economically or practically feasible
20:02:07 MikkelPaulson: yes, there are some pretty significant fines for failing to do that
20:02:58 MikkelPaulson: step 1 is to price all of these promotional expenses out, from flyers and
lawn signs to billboards and TV ads
20:03:04 MikkelPaulson: then we can allocate money accordingly
20:03:22 MikkelPaulson: and prioritize to get the most promotional bang for our buck
20:04:24 Mike Bleskie: Mhm
20:04:52 MikkelPaulson: which reminds me, we should produce a budget for the new year
20:05:00 MikkelPaulson: to be voted on by our members
20:05:19 MikkelPaulson: it's a PITA, but pretty important in the interest of accountability and
transparency
20:05:56 Stephane Bakhos: how do you expect to plan a meaningful budget for next year?
20:06:05 MikkelPaulson: with great difficulty
20:06:22 Mike Bleskie: Exactly. It's going to be hard to forecast any budget
20:06:36 Mike Bleskie: And anything can pop up
20:06:40 MikkelPaulson: yeah
20:06:44 MikkelPaulson: 100% contingency fund
20:07:03 Stephane Bakhos: all I really can expect is the 50$ or so in government fees, and maybe
buying another batch of bumper stickers and membership cards
20:07:14 MikkelPaulson: I'd like to have something approved, though, even if it's just giving us
the authority to manage our finances autonomously for the next year
20:07:20 Stephane Bakhos: and maybe getting around to filing the trademark application
20:07:34 MikkelPaulson: the money's coming from our members, they have the right to have some input
as to how it's spent
20:07:42 Stephane Bakhos: sure
20:07:59 Stephane Bakhos: and I'm happy to listen to any suggestion and implement what is feasible
20:08:14 Stephane Bakhos: personally I'd hire out the newsletter writing
20:08:25 MikkelPaulson: maybe we can compile a simple report of what funds we have available and
what specific expenses we have planned rather than a comprehensive budget
20:08:31 MikkelPaulson: whatever we know for sure, anyway
20:08:42 Stephane Bakhos: yeah
20:08:45 Stephane Bakhos: auditor too
20:08:51 MikkelPaulson: yup
20:08:53 Stephane Bakhos: definitely not quicktax again
20:09:08 MikkelPaulson: does our first audit take place in the new year?
20:09:13 Stephane Bakhos: yes
20:09:18 Stephane Bakhos: due for march-ish
20:09:26 MikkelPaulson: okay, we have a bit of time then
20:09:35 Stephane Bakhos: I'll have a baby in my hands by then
20:09:40 MikkelPaulson: :)
20:09:45 Stephane Bakhos: on that note, we do need to look for at least another director of the fund
20:10:01 MikkelPaulson: yeah
20:10:09 MikkelPaulson: doesn't need to be someone in the Federal Council
20:10:47 MikkelPaulson: ideally our Chief Agent wouldn't be a Director too, since it's double the
work
20:11:06 MikkelPaulson: but we all have to wear plenty of different hats until we get more active
members I suppose
20:11:22 MikkelPaulson: anyone come to mind?
20:11:52 Mike Bleskie: Not in particular
20:12:04 MikkelPaulson: hmm
20:12:16 MikkelPaulson: well I'd rather not solicit volunteers for this one, should be someone we
already know and trust
20:12:21 Stephane Bakhos: yeah
20:12:25 MikkelPaulson: we'll give it some thought
20:13:14 MikkelPaulson: so here's the next big question: do we contest the Calgary Centre-North
by-election?
20:13:21 Stephane Bakhos: sure
20:13:30 Mike Bleskie: If you want to.
20:13:36 MikkelPaulson: of course, if we end up with a general election in the spring, there may be
no by-election at all
20:13:43 Mike Bleskie: I wouldn't put much resourses into it
20:13:57 MikkelPaulson: well Jeff's campaign was pretty autonomous
20:13:58 Stephane Bakhos: actually
20:14:09 Stephane Bakhos: I'd like to know if JeffColeman managed to raise any money during his
campaign
20:14:16 MikkelPaulson: good question
20:14:24 MikkelPaulson: I just noticed that Winnipeg North is up to 7 members
20:14:30 MikkelPaulson: I think it was at 6 last month
20:14:38 MikkelPaulson: so he raised $10 :)
20:15:18 MikkelPaulson: there's a lot of literature that we should have available for the next
election anyway, so preparing for a Calgary by-election would be a good excuse to put that together
20:15:25 MikkelPaulson: now would be a very good time to get moving on that style guide
20:15:41 Mike Bleskie: Yes it would.
20:17:05 MikkelPaulson: think you might be able to spare some time, Mike? I can certainly pitch in
20:17:16 MikkelPaulson: and maybe if we're really lucky we could get Jake to surface from time to
time
20:17:39 MikkelPaulson: we've got a few basic rudiments in place so far, anyway
20:18:32 Mike Bleskie: When?
20:18:50 MikkelPaulson: by the January General Meeting?
20:18:54 Mike Bleskie: Sure.
20:19:05 MikkelPaulson: good way to spend the hols :)
20:19:06 Mike Bleskie: We can be started by then
20:19:11 Mike Bleskie: before
20:19:24 MikkelPaulson: indeed
20:19:39 MikkelPaulson: given the response last time, I don't know that we should bother with open
invites for a committee
20:19:41 MikkelPaulson: just get 'er done
20:19:54 Stephane Bakhos: please get it done
20:20:51 MikkelPaulson: okay, next bit is PPI
20:21:26 MikkelPaulson: I think we've already discussed this at some length and arrived at the
agreement that it can't hurt to talk, correct?
20:21:26 Mike Bleskie: I was invited to discuss with the directors in one of their teleconferences
20:21:35 Mike Bleskie: Exactly
20:21:36 Stephane Bakhos: correct
20:21:42 MikkelPaulson: okay
20:21:48 MikkelPaulson: want to skip right to a motion and be done with it?
20:21:54 Mike Bleskie: Sure
20:22:29 MikkelPaulson: I move that the Federal Council direct Mike Bleskie to open a dialogue with
Pirate Parties International regarding the costs and benefits of becoming an official member of the
organization
20:22:34 MikkelPaulson: yes
20:22:55 Stephane Bakhos: yes
20:23:08 Mike Bleskie: yes
20:23:18 MikkelPaulson: okay, the motion passes
20:23:24 MikkelPaulson: go for it, and keep us posted
20:23:29 Mike Bleskie: Indeed
20:23:48 MikkelPaulson: the final bit I had to raise was staggered elections
20:24:01 Mike Bleskie: and a FedCouncil by-election
20:24:10 MikkelPaulson: right
20:24:24 MikkelPaulson: it sounds like it's pretty well unanimous among the Constitutional
Refinement Committee that we should hold elections on an alternating 2-year cycle
20:24:44 MikkelPaulson: which means that two members of the Council would be asked to stand for
election in 2012 rather than 2014
20:25:33 MikkelPaulson: now I don't know how you feel about that or would want to choose who should
have a shortened term
20:26:25 MikkelPaulson: nothing's set in stone yet, so you're welcome to speak against it if you
disagree at the meeting, but ultimately the general membership does have the power to override the
Federal Council on this
20:26:45 Stephane Bakhos: I'm definitely against this idea
20:26:48 Mike Bleskie: I'd be willing to have a shortened term.
20:26:52 MikkelPaulson: I was thinking our current vacant seat should be to conclude in 2012
20:26:58 Mike Bleskie: And I am in support of the idea.
20:27:06 Mike Bleskie: It keeps things fresh.
20:27:19 MikkelPaulson: you're against staggered terms or against requiring the current Council to
change its expiry date?
20:27:22 Mike Bleskie: And at this point, it's obvious that burn-out does happen.
20:27:59 MikkelPaulson: yeah
20:28:06 Stephane Bakhos: against staggered terms at this point
20:28:18 Stephane Bakhos: we need to get more people involved first
20:28:43 MikkelPaulson: I suggested it, and in my initial proposal identified the following
potential benefits
20:28:44 MikkelPaulson: • The Federal Council is never replaced all at once, meaning that some
experienced Directors remain at all times.
• The Federal Council is more permeable, allowing newer members more frequent opportunities to run.
• By electing for only two rather than four positions at a time, the elections would become more
competitive and thus more democratic.
20:29:01 MikkelPaulson: we elected 5 people at once, all by acclamation
20:29:13 MikkelPaulson: that was a huge number of people for a small party
20:29:30 MikkelPaulson: electing 2 or 3 is potentially more competitive
20:30:05 MikkelPaulson: of course, there's nothing wrong with standing for re-election and being
re-elected by acclamation
20:30:26 Stephane Bakhos: I'm kind of worried that it would be the end result
20:30:44 MikkelPaulson: more so than requiring 5 at a time?
20:30:58 MikkelPaulson: for a party that conducts virtually all of its business online, elections
are fairly simple and inexpensive in terms of time or money, so I don't think that should be a
concern
20:31:03 Stephane Bakhos: 5 at a time means we only deal with that every 4 years
20:31:34 MikkelPaulson: yeah, that's sorta the point
20:31:52 MikkelPaulson: if someone comes along and wants to be involved in the leadership, 4 years
is a long time to wait for a party just starting out
20:31:58 Mike Bleskie: We haven't even been active for 2 years
20:32:09 Mike Bleskie: I was just going to say that
20:32:28 MikkelPaulson: I think we would see more candidates in total if we had a 2-year rather
than 4-year cycle
20:32:33 Stephane Bakhos: anyways, at the rate of attrition we'll have more elections then every 4
years
20:33:05 MikkelPaulson: that's true
20:33:13 MikkelPaulson: I don't know that we should count on it, though
20:33:59 MikkelPaulson: Mike and I touched on the subject of reducing the term to 2 years, which I
would also be okay with
20:34:12 Mike Bleskie: I was the one that brought that up
20:34:20 MikkelPaulson: 4 years is a heck of a commitment for an unpaid, overworked, and rather
thankless job
20:34:32 Mike Bleskie: It just irks me that we have a chunk of council away
20:34:36 Mike Bleskie: one burned out
20:34:45 MikkelPaulson: yeah
20:34:47 Mike Bleskie: one just too busy, thus resigning
20:34:55 MikkelPaulson: right now for all intents and purposes we have a council of 3
20:35:10 MikkelPaulson: which is liable to lead to more burnout because we have to do the work of 5
20:35:27 MikkelPaulson: if we lose someone else, I'm afraid it'll be the end of the party, or at
least a crippling blow
20:36:06 Mike Bleskie: Which is also why I feel it's the right time for the by-election
20:36:13 Stephane Bakhos: we need to launch the by election for DLS
20:36:19 Mike Bleskie: Exactly
20:36:31 MikkelPaulson: I'd like to get the matter of the staggered elections settled first
20:36:39 MikkelPaulson: so if we hold a by-election, it says 2012 on the box
20:37:10 MikkelPaulson: the Constitutional Refinement Committee should have its report ready for
the December meeting, so we can call the by-election then
20:37:32 Mike Bleskie: Sounds fine
20:37:50 MikkelPaulson: Nuitari: would you be okay with that?
20:38:25 Stephane Bakhos: let's try with the 2012 date for the by-election and see what kind of
response we get
20:38:54 MikkelPaulson: well, if we implement staggered elections, we would have to designate 2
right away
20:39:14 MikkelPaulson: preferably with a motion at the same meeting
20:39:28 Mike Bleskie: I'm sorry
20:39:39 Mike Bleskie: but I'm not waiting until 2012 for the by-election
20:39:47 MikkelPaulson: oh no
20:39:49 Stephane Bakhos: sorry
20:39:55 MikkelPaulson: but the by-election would be for a position to expire in 2012
20:39:58 Stephane Bakhos: yes
20:40:07 Mike Bleskie: Thanks for the clarification
20:40:15 MikkelPaulson: so 3 motions in total, adopting the report, designating the persons to
stand for re-election in 2012, then calling the election
20:40:55 Stephane Bakhos: for re-election I'd have to say Jake and the vacant position
20:40:59 MikkelPaulson: to be blunt, I'd rather see Jake up for re-election in 2012, particularly
if he doesn't manage to overcome his burnout
20:41:02 MikkelPaulson: yeah
20:41:06 Mike Bleskie: Sure
20:41:22 Mike Bleskie: if he does come back, I'll be the alternative
20:41:23 MikkelPaulson: but more than that, I'd rather it be that person's choice
20:41:25 MikkelPaulson: whoever it is
20:41:49 Mike Bleskie: Let's talk to Jake before the 19th then
20:41:56 MikkelPaulson: okay
20:41:56 Mike Bleskie: See how he feels
20:41:59 MikkelPaulson: want to give him a call?
20:42:02 Mike Bleskie: Sure.
20:42:04 MikkelPaulson: you know him better than I
20:42:14 MikkelPaulson: we'll discuss it again at the next meeting
20:42:23 Mike Bleskie: Mhm
20:42:26 MikkelPaulson: and settle on a motion to make on the 19th
20:43:00 MikkelPaulson: okay, anything else to raise before we call it a night?
20:43:26 Mike Bleskie: Nope.
20:43:48 MikkelPaulson: okay then, the meeting stands adjourned
Also see Minutes and Vote Log
Return to list
