Pirate Party of Canada - Recent changes [en]

GM 2012-05-16 minutes

2012-05-17T03:04:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:04, 17 May 2012
Line 2:		Line 2:

	The regular General Meeting of the Pirate Party of Canada was called to order at 20:32 Eastern Time, May 16, 2012 at irc.pirateparty.ca, irc channel #canada. The president was in the chair and the secretary was present. Minutes from previous meeting was approved.		The regular General Meeting of the Pirate Party of Canada was called to order at 20:32 Eastern Time, May 16, 2012 at irc.pirateparty.ca, irc channel #canada. The president was in the chair and the secretary was present. Minutes from previous meeting was approved.
		+
		+	Patrick Fitzgerald moved for adoption of the following special rule of order:
		+	"Non-members shall normally be permitted to speak at meetings, including in debate. That permission may be withdrawn or reinstated for any non-member individually or for all as a group with a majority vote on an undebatable motion to do so. This motion is a question of the privilege of the assembly. The motion cannot be renewed or the opposite motion made after it is adopted unless it presents a fundamentally different question or the parliamentary situation has changed."
		+	The motion was adopted with 11 ayes and 0 nays.
		+
		+	Jack Mcleod moved to appoint Travis McCrea as the candidate for Vancouver Centre. The motion was adopted with 11 ayes and 0 nays.
		+
		+	Johann Weiss moved to amend the special rule of order defining the IT Committee by inserting "by the Executive Board" after "The IT Director will be elected". The motion was adopted with 10 ayes and 0 nays.

Special Rules of Order

2012-05-17T02:53:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:53, 17 May 2012
Line 31:		Line 31:

	This rule cannot be suspended, as granting the power to suspend it would often defeat its purpose. Any majority strong enough to suspend this rule would be strong enough to adopt most of these votes without a telephone and Internet vote.		This rule cannot be suspended, as granting the power to suspend it would often defeat its purpose. Any majority strong enough to suspend this rule would be strong enough to adopt most of these votes without a telephone and Internet vote.
		+
		+	=Permitting non-members to speak during meetings=
		+	Non-members shall normally be permitted to speak at meetings, including in debate. That permission may be withdrawn or reinstated for any non-member individually or for all as a group with a majority vote on an undebatable motion to do so. This motion is a question of the privilege of the assembly. The motion cannot be renewed or the opposite motion made after it is adopted unless it presents a fundamentally different question or the parliamentary situation has changed.

GM 2012-05-16 minutes

2012-05-17T02:35:14Z

Created page with "[DRAFT] The regular General Meeting of the Pirate Party of Canada was called to order at 20:32 Eastern Time, May 16, 2012 at irc.pirateparty.ca, irc channel #canada. The preside..."

New page

[DRAFT]

The regular General Meeting of the Pirate Party of Canada was called to order at 20:32 Eastern Time, May 16, 2012 at irc.pirateparty.ca, irc channel #canada. The president was in the chair and the secretary was present. Minutes from previous meeting was approved.

GM 2012-04-18 minutes

2012-05-17T01:32:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:32, 17 May 2012
Line 25:		Line 25:
	Amendments was accepted after debates and amendments and will be submitted to the membership for a vote.		Amendments was accepted after debates and amendments and will be submitted to the membership for a vote.

-	Johann Weiss moved "to add a comments section to the ballot so that the voters can write in any questions/comments on them."	+	Johann Weiss moved "to add a comments section to the ballot so that the voters can write in any questions/comments on them." The motion was adopted with 7 ayes and 2 nays.

	David Ascroft moved "to appoint Robert McGrath as the candidate for Ottawa-Orleans." Motion was adopted with 9 ayes, 0 nays.		David Ascroft moved "to appoint Robert McGrath as the candidate for Ottawa-Orleans." Motion was adopted with 9 ayes, 0 nays.

EB 2012-05-14 transcript

2012-05-15T03:27:24Z

protected "[[EB 2012-05-14 transcript]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

EB 2012-05-14 minutes

2012-05-15T03:23:23Z

protected "[[EB 2012-05-14 minutes]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

Executive Board

2012-05-15T02:05:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:05, 15 May 2012
Line 137:		Line 137:
	! Members Present		! Members Present
	! Records in Vote Log (Y/N)		! Records in Vote Log (Y/N)
		+	\|-
		+	\| May 07 2012
		+	\| N/A
		+	\| [[EB_2012-05-07_minutes\|Minutes]]
		+	\| [[EB_2012-05-07_transcript\|Transcript]]
		+	\| Jack Mcleod, Ric Lim, Shawn Vulliez, Travis McCrea, Patrick Fitzgerald, Jeremy Howell and Stephane Bakhos.
		+	\| N
	\|-		\|-
	\| Apr 30 2012		\| Apr 30 2012
	\| N/A		\| N/A
	\| [[EB_2012-04-30_minutes\|Minutes]]		\| [[EB_2012-04-30_minutes\|Minutes]]
-	\|	+	\| [[EB_2012-04-30_transcript\|Transcript]]
	\| Jack Mcleod, Ric Lim, Shawn Vulliez, Travis McCrea, Patrick Fitzgerald, Jeremy Howell and Stephane Bakhos.		\| Jack Mcleod, Ric Lim, Shawn Vulliez, Travis McCrea, Patrick Fitzgerald, Jeremy Howell and Stephane Bakhos.
	\| N		\| N

EB 2012-05-14 minutes

2012-05-15T02:03:17Z

Created page with "The regular Executive Board meeting of the Pirate Party of Canada was called to order at 21:38 Eastern Time, May 14, 2012 at irc channel #exec, irc.pirateparty.ca. The president ..."

New page

The regular Executive Board meeting of the Pirate Party of Canada was called to order at 21:38 Eastern Time, May 14, 2012 at irc channel #exec, irc.pirateparty.ca. The president was in the chair and the secretary was present. In attendance were Sean Hunt (late), Jack Mcleod, Ric Lim, Travis McCrea and Jeremy Howell. The minutes from previous meetings were reviewed and approved.

The postponed motion "to accept xmux's resignation from the IT Committee." was taken up and adopted with 3 ayes and 0 nays.

The meeting was adjourned at Eastern Time.

View [[EB_2012-05-14_transcript|transcript]].

EB 2012-05-07 minutes

2012-05-15T01:50:22Z

protected "[[EB 2012-05-07 minutes]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

EB 2012-05-07 transcript

2012-05-15T00:26:41Z

Created page with "<PRE> NOTE: All log times are in Central time. (Eastern time -1 hr) 20:35 < JMcleod> Well anyone have business, I have 1 piece of business - thats it 20:36 < JMcleod> guess not,..."

New page

<PRE>
NOTE: All log times are in Central time. (Eastern time -1 hr)

20:35 < JMcleod> Well anyone have business, I have 1 piece of business - thats it
20:36 < JMcleod> guess not, so lets start by approving minutes of last week then
20:37 < RLim> http://wiki.pirateparty.ca/index.php/EB_2012-04-30_minutes
20:37 < CCitizen> Aside from maybe considering making OpE^2 an official project
20:38 < JMcleod> umm Travis McCrea moved "that the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee". MOtion was adopted with 5 ayes and 0 nays. - wasnted it operations in the PPI IRC instead of committee?
20:40 < CCitizen> Perhaps we should revisit that one... it sounds like our IT team would basically be the same. I think the idea was collaborating rather than implication of a merge/takeover sort of deal. We already lost one member who flipped out when they saw that
20:40 < TeamColtra> No thereno that is right
20:41 < TeamColtra> but it should be "merged the PPCA IT committee with the PPI IT Committee"
20:41 < TeamColtra> not the entire PPCA operations :P
20:42 < RLim> should I just change that?
20:43 < TeamColtra> I don't think it would cause much fuss
20:43 < RLim> yeah
20:43 < CCitizen> Well the term merge seems overkill collaborate is probably a better wording since it's not like they'd be running our servers for us
20:43 < TeamColtra> Also on the last item, the admin team of the PirateIRC have promised that we would have control over #Canada
20:44 < JMcleod> at worse we can make a motion to clarify last week's motions
20:45 < CCitizen> yeah we should clarify at least that one
20:46 < JMcleod> Alright so lets accept the minutes first, then form a motion aimed to correct last week's wording
20:46 < TeamColtra> umm
20:46 < JMcleod> (we cant just change the minutes like that)
20:46 < TeamColtra> we can't accept them if we don't view them as accurate
20:46 < JMcleod> Well are they accurated to the wording of last week
20:47 < TeamColtra> No they are accurate to the wording that the person wrote them down
20:47 < JMcleod> If that is the wording that was moved, then its correct
20:47 < RLim> ok
20:47 < JMcleod> But I dont have the whole logs
20:47 < TeamColtra> that's not the wording that was moved, I am 90% positive of that
20:47 < TeamColtra> because scshunt or myself would have been like "no that's poor wordign"
20:47 < CCitizen> Lets just approve the minutes and fix it
20:47 < JMcleod> No wait, RLim, do you have a whole log of last week's meeting?
20:47 < TeamColtra> you can't approve minutes like that, it's why we have this part in the beginning of our meeting
20:48 < TeamColtra> lol it's not just a formality
20:48 < RLim> one sec
20:49 < JMcleod> found my logs, looking through em
20:50 < JMcleod> This was what we voted on: [22:59:48] <JMcleod> The question is on that "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee" All in favor say aye , all against say nay.
20:51 < RLim> http://wiki.pirateparty.ca/index.php/EB_2012-04-30_transcript
20:51 < RLim> unedited
20:51 < CCitizen> Ah so lets get it approved and fix things
20:53 < TeamColtra> Okay fair enough
20:53 < TeamColtra> :P I must have been crazy tired
20:53 < JMcleod> [22:49:22] <TeamColtra> I move the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee
20:53 < TeamColtra> as stated
20:53 < TeamColtra> :P Clearly super tired :P
20:53 < JMcleod> It seemed fine with the wording then, so we can fix this this meeting
20:54 < JMcleod> Anyone disagree on the minutes?
20:54 < CCitizen> Nope they seem to be accurate
20:54 < JMcleod> brb
20:55 < RLim> nope
20:55 < JMcleod> alright then, minutes are approved
20:56 < JMcleod> 1st piece of business, who takes care of our PPCA member cards?
20:57 < CCitizen> Isnt the card printer in Vancouver now?
20:57 < TeamColtra> yes
20:57 < CCitizen> Then I guess someone in Vancouver is responsible for it
20:58 < TeamColtra> Jake does
20:58 < TeamColtra> it's in Jake's house
20:59 < CCitizen> Ok so we blame Jake then? heh...
20:59 < TeamColtra> I am not stating that
20:59 < TeamColtra> just stating that the card printer is located at Jake's place.
20:59 < JMcleod> I dont want to blame anyone, I would like to have someone officially responsible for those
21:00 < CCitizen> Just kidding though I guess he's in charge of it then
21:00 < scshunt> ugh, sorry guys
21:00 < scshunt> I don't have an exucse, my own damn fault
21:02 < scshunt> anyway, membership cards are jake? Is he getting them out?
21:02 < JMcleod> Hi Sean
21:02 < jhowell> here, finally. sorry for the delay
21:03 < JMcleod> OK well hi guys
21:04 < JMcleod> Mini resumé: We voted on something last week that had bad wording and plan to revise it this week. We are currently discussing who has control of PPCA membership card printing
21:04 < CCitizen> got almost everyone here tonight
21:04 < scshunt> right
21:04 < scshunt> I read the backlog
21:05 < JMcleod> So Sean should take over of this since he's here =)
21:05 < scshunt> oh right
21:05 < scshunt> that
21:05 < scshunt> :P
21:05 < scshunt> Ok, membership cards
21:05 < scshunt> discuss things, etc. :P
21:06 < scshunt> Does anyone have anything else to say?
21:06 < JMcleod> Yes - So Jake has printer
21:06 < JMcleod> How often do they go out?
21:07 < scshunt> Don't know about that.
21:07 < scshunt> TravisMcCrea, can you follow up with him on that?
21:08 < scshunt> unless anything has anyone else to say, let's move along since there's nothing happening
21:09 < scshunt> Ok then.
21:10 < scshunt> Does anyone have any other business?
21:10 < TeamColtra> scshunt: can you ping TeamColtra
21:10 < TeamColtra> not now, but just when you do :P
21:10 < scshunt> TeamColtra: ping
21:10 < scshunt> wait, confused
21:10 < TeamColtra> Nothing, you were making a comment directed at me
21:10 < CCitizen> I think we were going to reword the whole merge IT thing
21:10 < TeamColtra> and it doesn't highlight me - unless you ping TeamColtra
21:11 < scshunt> ah, I see
21:11 < JMcleod> Yeah, we need to get that reworded
21:11 < scshunt> I agree about rewording that
21:11 < CCitizen> Should probably change it to collaborate...if we're moving the irc to PPI IRC we should probably join their channel anyways
21:12 < scshunt> So, I wasn't here last week.
21:12 < JMcleod> Kinda off topic, but why do the forums give me An Error Has Occurred! The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you.
21:13 < scshunt> But was there any particular reason we thought we needed to make this an explicit direction to the committee?
21:13 < scshunt> rather than giving the committee freedom?
21:13 < jhowell> it didn't seem like a harmful idea that anyone would get in a huff over :)
21:13 < CCitizen> True might be better handled by letting the IT Committee handle it
21:14 < CCitizen> Hehe... only xmux or was it wasme that flipped out over this?
21:14 < TeamColtra> brb need to move desks
21:14 < jhowell> xmux
21:14 < JMcleod> xmux flipped out
21:14 < RLim> xmux
21:14 < scshunt> wasme flipped over other things at the last gm
21:14 < jhowell> but.. imho he has similar qualities as wasme..
21:14 < JMcleod> wasme always flips out ;)
21:14 < scshunt> I mean, his point is correct. The motion as worded was bad
21:14 < CCitizen> Yeah
21:15 < jhowell> At the risk of calling shenanigans, if someone *wants* a reason to get out, they'll jump at a chance
21:15 < CCitizen> which is why i hope if we fix it he might come back but really I would hope people would wait more than 5 minutes before bailing
21:15 < scshunt> which reminds me, does anyone want to make a motion to accept xmux's resignation?
21:15 < jhowell> not saying its the case, just saying its possible that they wanted to do something--thought it was different and didn't want to leave gracefully.
21:16 < jhowell> I'll make a motion
21:16 < CCitizen> I'd rather make a motion to fix the wording then give him till next meeting to decide if he wants to keep resigning
21:16 < scshunt> Ok. It has been moved to accept xmux's resignation from the IT Committee.
21:16 < jhowell> ccitizen he's had plenty of time to respond via email
21:17 < CCitizen> ok
21:17 < jhowell> he's left the itcomm room, has not responded to any correspondence (at least to me)
21:17 < scshunt> he's not in my #canada logs either
21:17 < jhowell> yeah
21:17 < JMcleod> Ok so I move to correct the motion adopted last week, "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee" to "the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee collaborates with the operations of the PPI IT Committee as the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee sees fit"
21:17 < CCitizen> did you try the mailing list
21:18 < jhowell> So, I think that's painting a picture
21:18 < scshunt> JMcleod: That motion is out of order for the moment, as we are currently discussing the motion to accept xmux's resignation.
21:18 < scshunt> I'm partial to agree with jhowell; we can always put him back if he indicates that he wants to get back in
21:18 < JMcleod> (Oh I dint see the actual motion?)
21:19 < scshunt> 22:16:28 < jhowell> I'll make a motion
21:19 < jhowell> if you'd like verbatim: "I put forward a motion to accept xmux's resignation from the IT Committee"
21:19 < jhowell> :)
21:19 < CCitizen> I'd say we should defer it until next week. Since we're fixing the source of the resignation
21:19 < JMcleod> ah ok :)
21:19 < scshunt> but I can see the other side too, since he hasn't been around at all
21:19 < jhowell> No opposition to that
21:20 < scshunt> CCitizen: is that a motion to postpone?
21:20 < CCitizen> Sure
21:20 < jhowell> if you'd like to wait, we can wait. its not like he has access to the system (Something I'd like to discuss in here too)
21:20 < scshunt> Ok. It has been moved to postpone the motion until next week.
21:20 < scshunt> Discussion?
21:20 < scshunt> Ok, are there any objections to postponing the question?
21:21 < jhowell> nothing that hasn't already been said from me. no objections
21:21 < CCitizen> Just it might look better to keep him on while we handle this than to kick him of and put him back on like IT is some sort of revolving door
21:21 < JMcleod> I wont object to that
21:21 < CCitizen> No objections here
21:21 < scshunt> Ok, seeing none, the motion is postponed to the next meeting.
21:21 < JMcleod> Ok so I move to correct the motion adopted last week, "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee" to "the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee collaborates with the operations of the PPI IT Committee as the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee sees fit"
21:21 < TeamColtra> back
21:22 < scshunt> Ok, JMcleod has made the motion mentioned there.
21:22 < scshunt> JMcleod: Do you want to speak?
21:22 < JMcleod> im pretty sure that this is more precisely what we intended to vote on last week
21:22 < scshunt> 'ello svulliez
21:22 < JMcleod> (its really all I have to say)
21:23 < JMcleod> Since it was Travis' original motion, perhaps TeamColtra should see if it fits with his idea
21:23 < scshunt> Is there appetite to discuss rescinding it instead? If not, I won't bother since I wasn't there for the original and I'm not really interested in second-guessing a meeting that I wasn't there for
21:23 < CCitizen> Seems good ... also if xmux doesnt come back after fixing the wording well next week I'll have no qualms about taking his resignation
21:23 < TeamColtra> It's just correcting something that was said in a state of tiredness
21:24 < TeamColtra> I don't see it as a big deal
21:24 < JMcleod> But is my motion accurate?
21:24 < TeamColtra> unless we want to carry on merging our entire PPCA into the PPI IT Committee
21:24 < TeamColtra> :P
21:24 < TeamColtra> err
21:24 < TeamColtra> I wouldn't word it exactly like that though
21:25 < TeamColtra> it goes beyond the scope of the origional motion
21:25 < scshunt> in what way?
21:25 < JMcleod> oh? explain?
21:25 < TeamColtra> Because the idea is that the PPCA team actually merges into the PPI team. It just works on it's own projects
21:26 < TeamColtra> it's not a "when it sees fit" thing, they are merged. It just keeps it's own structure within that group
21:26 < scshunt> ah
21:26 < CCitizen> Probably better to write it as 'The IT Committee is fully authorized and encouraged to collaborate with PPI IT Committee'
21:26 < scshunt> In that case, I /will/ make a motion to amend this motion to be a motion to rescind the motion adopted last week involving the merger of the PPCA IT Committee operations with the PPI IT Committee.
21:27 < TeamColtra> "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's IT operations into the PPI IT Committee"
21:27 < scshunt> yes, I would like to rescind that one.
21:27 < TeamColtra> would be keeping within the spirit of the first one
21:27 < JMcleod> Well we should rescind the first one
21:27 < JMcleod> Then adopt a new one
21:28 < JMcleod> I withdraw my motion
21:28 < TeamColtra> No, we should just patch / amend this one
21:28 < scshunt> It can't withdrawn unilaterally, especially not with a secondary amendment pending.
21:28 < scshunt> and TeamColtra objects, so I'll put it to a vote.
21:28 < JMcleod> Alright then ignore what I said =)
21:28 < scshunt> oh ok
21:28 < TeamColtra> JMcleod: already done ;)
21:29 < CCitizen> You could always use my wording. Lets them decide the level of integration and such
21:29 < scshunt> So then the question is now on the motion to amend JMcleod's motion to a motion to rescind the motion last week regarding merging the IT committee with PPI.
21:29 < scshunt> Please limit discussion to the relative merits of these two motions
21:30 < scshunt> I feel that rescinding is preferable to adopting a vague "they may collaborate" motion, since they can already collaborate and the less complicated and vague motions we adopt, the better
21:30 < CCitizen> which two are we working with?
21:30 < scshunt> JMcleod's motion to "to correct the motion adopted last week, "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee" to "the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee collaborates with the operations of the PPI IT Committee as the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee sees fit"
21:30 < scshunt> and my motion to amend it to a rescindment
21:31 < CCitizen> Ah yeah I suppose rescinding it would be better... sounds like this should have been discussed in the IT Committee first anyways
21:31 < svulliez> that's nice and simple :P
21:31 < jhowell> hahah
21:31 < jhowell> you know--if ppl show up :)
21:32 < scshunt> We should take everyone off the committee again for not showing up :P
21:32 < scshunt> anyway, I don't see much discussion
21:32 < scshunt> so we'll go to a vote.
21:32 < JMcleod> I dont have much to discuss
21:32 < jhowell> well, we don't have much business to go over every week but after this we'll chat about that.
21:32 < RLim> again? how many weeks have it been? Did they miss couple or never show up?
21:32 < scshunt> JMcleod moved "to correct the motion adopted last week, "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee" to "the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee collaborates with the operations of the PPI IT Committee as the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee sees fit"
21:33 < scshunt> The question is on the motion to substitute a motion to rescind the decision for the motion to amend it.
21:33 < scshunt> If adopted, we will be discussing a motion to rescind; if defeated, we will be discussing the original motion to amend.
21:33 < scshunt> All in favor, say aye. All opposed, say nay.
21:33 < scshunt> aye
21:33 < TeamColtra> nay
21:33 < jhowell> aye
21:33 < RLim> aye
21:33 < svulliez> aye
21:33 < CCitizen> aye
21:34 < JMcleod> nay
21:34 < scshunt> The ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted. The question is now on the motion to rescind the motion that the IT Committee merge its operations into the PPI IT Committee.
21:34 < scshunt> I don't think we want to actually merge our operations with PPI.
21:35 < scshunt> Collaboration is a good thing, but doing any sort of merger will just create more bureaucracy
21:35 < jhowell> we aren't.. no. its more of a collaboration, thinktank
21:35 < TeamColtra> so would that be to do away with all of this?
21:35 < scshunt> and we already have an it committee that doesn't do much
21:35 < jhowell> at least--it should be
21:35 < scshunt> TeamColtra: it would un-do the motion
21:35 < jhowell> if something like this happens, ---and we can discuss it later remember--
21:35 < TeamColtra> My question is we just passed: "the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee collaborates with the operations of the PPI IT Committee as the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee sees fit"
21:35 < TeamColtra> will this recend that?
21:35 < scshunt> No, we didn't.
21:36 < JMcleod> No we didnt pass taht
21:36 < scshunt> As I said, we just passed an amendment to change it into a motion to rescind.
21:36 < scshunt> now we are debating that motion to rescind.
21:36 < TeamColtra> Oh I see.
21:36 < TeamColtra> So now the motion on the floor is "the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee collaborates with the operations of the PPI IT Committee as the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee sees fit"
21:36 < CCitizen> Well after we rescind we can discuss new wording and such right?
21:36 < scshunt> TeamColtra: No.
21:36 < TeamColtra> but there is now a motion to rescind it?
21:36 < scshunt> 22:34:38 < scshunt> The ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted. The question is now on the motion to rescind the motion that the IT Committee merge its operations into the PPI IT Committee.
21:36 < TeamColtra> Yes
21:36 < scshunt> being, specifically, the motion adopted last week.
21:36 < TeamColtra> the amendment is adopted
21:37 < scshunt> the amendment to JMcleod's motion is adopted.
21:37 < JMcleod> yes, the amendment cancels out my motion
21:37 < scshunt> not the amendment to the one from last week, which is no longer being considered.
21:37 < TeamColtra> So what exactly does this do away with?
21:37 < JMcleod> The one with the bad wording of last week
21:37 < scshunt> If adopted, this would rescind last week's motion.
21:37 < TeamColtra> but we just amended it
21:37 < scshunt> No.
21:37 < JMcleod> No we didnt
21:37 < CCitizen> IMHO Easiest way to do things in the future is to rescind and rewrite... Rather than get multiple amendments going at once
21:37 < scshunt> We amended the motion to amend it.
21:37 < JMcleod> lol
21:38 < scshunt> TravisMcCrea: do you understand?
21:38 < TeamColtra> holy god... and whos on third, right?
21:38 < TeamColtra> :P
21:38 < scshunt> haha
21:38 < scshunt> no, whos out of order and sitting in the penalty box
21:38 < RLim> lol BTW have to leave in 30 minutes
21:38 < scshunt> anyway, are we clear now, TeamColtra?
21:38 < scshunt> sorry for the confusion
21:38 < CCitizen> Thats how I feel right now Travis...anyways are we voting on rescinding now?
21:38 < TeamColtra> ... not in the slightest, but I am going to let this play out
21:39 < TeamColtra> and hope that I get it
21:39 < scshunt> TeamColtra: ok. Right now, we are debating a motion to rescind last week's motion.
21:39 < CCitizen> The old wording then we can make a motion with the new wording
21:39 < scshunt> If you have further questions, PM please :)
21:39 < TeamColtra> Why can't we just create a new rule which superscedes it?
21:39 < CCitizen> Have we had enough discussion we can just vote and get to the next step where things arent as clear as mud?
21:40 < scshunt> TeamColtra: We just voted not to.
21:40 < TeamColtra> >.>
21:40 < scshunt> CCitizen: asking questions about procedure is in order, since ensuring that everyone is clear on what is going on is important.
21:40 < scshunt> if it strays into debate, I'll cut it off.
21:40 < scshunt> (even a motion to end debate can't stop questions about procedure)
21:41 < TeamColtra> Sorry I was following rules of order which means we have to vote on a motion
21:41 < TeamColtra> before a new motion is presented
21:41 < TeamColtra> you stated JMcleod moved "to correct the motion adopted last week, "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee" to "the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee collaborates with the operations of the PPI IT Committee as the Pirate Party of Canada IT committee sees fit"
21:41 < scshunt> That is correct.
21:41 < TeamColtra> Which was the first motion on the floor
21:41 < scshunt> Then I moved to amend JMcleod's motion.
21:41 < scshunt> which is a subsidiary motion affecting JMcleod's.
21:41 < TeamColtra> that's not a valid amendment though
21:41 < scshunt> It's too late to raise a point of order on that point, so I won't rule on it.
21:42 < TeamColtra> Yes, except for when voting, I was expecting I was voting based on rules of procedure
21:42 < CCitizen> so at this point if we moved it to voting we'd basically be voting on rescinding the old flawed wording?
21:42 < TeamColtra> since I don't have enough time to read through every comment posted, I saw that above. Then I saw a vote, so I voted.
21:42 < scshunt> CCitizen: yes.
21:42 < CCitizen> Alright then lets do that and we can move on to the replacement bit
21:43 < CCitizen> which is what everyone seems to be wanting to get to
21:43 < TeamColtra> So we are all on the same page I call for a "standing vote" (or a revote in IRC terms) on the last motion
21:43 < scshunt> TeamColtra: I'm sorry, but you're straying into arguing with me, and we need to keep the meeting going. If you have a specific point of order, raise it and I will rule. If you have a question, ask and I will answer. Otherwise, please contact me privately.
21:43 < RLim> scshunt can you confirm CCitizen last comment will not be out of order
21:43 < RLim> once we vote to rescind
21:44 < RLim> *21:42 comment
21:44 < scshunt> RLim: Sure, gimme a sec.
21:44 < scshunt> TeamColtra: It's out of order to retake a vote by the same method, and simply revoting would be retaking it by the same method.
21:44 < scshunt> So I will rule that out of order, given the lack of distinction between how we voted and what we would do on a revote.
21:44 < CCitizen> I'm always out of order since TUEBL doesnt have a copy of RONR
21:45 < TeamColtra> we can all type /me stands if you really want to
21:45 < scshunt> RLim: It would be in order if it is different enough to present a substantially different question.
21:45 * JMcleod tries to emote
21:45 < JMcleod> oh it would work
21:45 < TeamColtra> I feel that the motion wasn't properly presented and broke rules of order.
21:45 < scshunt> I rule that it is too late to raise a point of order regarding the previous motion.
21:46 < TeamColtra> Which is why I am calling for a revote as RRs entitle me to
21:46 < CCitizen> Can I make a motion that we dispense with the rules of order and rescind the old wording? (then we can get to new business)
21:46 < TeamColtra> I dislike the idea of rescinding it, and would rather us just patch it
21:47 < TeamColtra> And had proper debate happened
21:47 < RLim> CCitizen you can call for suspension of the rule
21:47 < TeamColtra> I could have presented logical arguments againsti t
21:47 < scshunt> TeamColtra: I rule this request out of order as the rule to demand a standing vote is a rule allowing a member to demand a form of vote that provides an accurate comparison. Our voting was accurate. You do not have a right to reopen debate on a motion that has been decided, or to have it voted on again.
21:47 < CCitizen> Well then lets suspend the rules and get it done... stop dicking around with rules of order when we know what the hell we want to do and stop arguing over bureaucratic bullshit
21:48 < scshunt> Now, a motion has been made to suspend the rules and rescind last week's motion regarding merging the IT Committee with PPI.
21:48 < scshunt> This motion is not debateable; it requires a two-thirds vote.
21:48 < scshunt> All in favor, say aye. All opposed, say nay.
21:48 < scshunt> aye
21:48 < TeamColtra> nay
21:48 < CCitizen> aye
21:49 < jhowell> aye
21:49 < svulliez> aye
21:49 < JMcleod> nay
21:49 < RLim> aye
21:49 < scshunt> There are two thirds in favor and the motion is adopted. The motion from last week is rescinded.
21:50 < RLim> ok now can we introduce a new motion
21:50 < RLim> ?
21:50 < scshunt> Yes.
21:50 < scshunt> As long as it presents a substantially different question from something decided at a previous meeting
21:51 < TeamColtra> I still disagree with the chairs merging two motions together, because that was /not/ CCitizen's motion
21:51 < scshunt> 22:46:23 < CCitizen> Can I make a motion that we dispense with the rules of order and rescind the old wording?
21:52 < TeamColtra> I stand corrrected :)
21:52 < scshunt> So does anyone have any motion that they would like to present here.
21:52 < scshunt> ?
21:52 < CCitizen> We can rewrite it and make it acceptable now? Or do we have to do anything else
21:52 < RLim> CCitizen it has to be substantially different
21:52 < RLim> but go for it
21:52 < scshunt> Basically, it can't be a variation of wording on JMcloed's.
21:53 < scshunt> if it has any actual difference, then it's good
21:53 < scshunt> err
21:53 < scshunt> it can't be /only/ a variation of wording
21:53 < JMcleod> Yeah - so if it doesnt include to correct last week's motion, that was just rescinded, its good
21:53 < JMcleod> Because that would be a substantial difference from mine :)
21:54 < scshunt> Does anyone want to discuss anything else in the meantime?
21:54 < CCitizen> Technically last weeks motion doesnt exist anymore
21:54 < JMcleod> Exactly my point
21:54 < TeamColtra> Here is the problem
21:54 < jhowell> i wanna
21:55 < scshunt> jhowell: What matter?
21:55 < jhowell> not so much a motion but to request something we're having problems getting within the IT committee
21:55 < TeamColtra> I move "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's IT operations into the PPI IT Committee"
21:56 < JMcleod> Can Travis explain the exact purpose he wishes to attain when doing that?
21:56 < jhowell> The IT Committee needs to slot in a piece of time with Nuitari to make sure everyone is able to successfully login to the servers, being able to confirm proper access
21:56 < jhowell> requesting this informally doesn't seem to be working
21:56 < TeamColtra> jhowell: which is why I had arranged you and Nuitari to talk
21:57 < TeamColtra> and get stuff done, and I told you
21:57 < scshunt> TeamColtra: is that the motion from last week verbatim?
21:57 < TeamColtra> get it now, because he is not going to be available for you later
21:57 < TeamColtra> scshunt: no it's a clearification
21:57 < TeamColtra> "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's operations into the PPI IT Committee" was last weeks
21:57 < jhowell> Travis, we're talking but like i just said.. informally, its not working out
21:57 < jhowell> its tough to get the guys attention
21:57 < jhowell> just looking for some advice
21:58 < jhowell> once we got everyones login info solidified most of our agenda is complete
21:58 < scshunt> TeamColtra: I'm going to rule that out of order. The motion does not, in the chair's opinion, present a substantially different question.
21:58 < jhowell> or ready to initiate
21:58 < TeamColtra> scshunt: ugh that's the whole reason this thing came up in the first place
21:58 < scshunt> TeamColtra: you're welcome to appeal.
21:58 < TeamColtra> I appeal:
21:58 < CCitizen> actually it would be good to get Nuitari to help jhowell to set up other accounts for login
21:58 < scshunt> Ok, the ruling of the chair is appealed.
21:58 < JMcleod> I appeal too
21:58 < scshunt> The chair gets to speak first on an appeal.
21:59 < TeamColtra> The wording that was passed last week was too vague and actually stated that the PPCA should merge with the PPI's IT committee
21:59 < scshunt> Order,
21:59 < TeamColtra> which would obviously be bad
21:59 < scshunt> the chair gets to speak first
21:59 < TeamColtra> Speak your worshipfulness
21:59 < scshunt> I believe, from the context of the initial motion, that it is clear that the intent was to merge IT operations only. I cannot imagine any reasonable circumstance under which the motion could be interpreted as a motion to actually merge the entire Party into the IT Committee of PPI.
21:59 < TeamColtra> Sorry :\ that wasn't proper
22:00 < scshunt> not to mention something far beyond the jurisdiction of the EB
22:00 < TeamColtra> The wording that was passed last week was too vague and actually stated that the PPCA should merge with the PPI's IT committee, which would obviously be bad. We had agreed with the motion last week with a vote of 5 to 0
22:00 < TeamColtra> Sorry I pressed enter
22:02 < TeamColtra> The point is that we would have ignored it and left it as is... and no one would have cared about it... but we pulled it out to clearify the wording. That was the whole point of brining it up.
22:02 < JMcleod> ...
22:02 < scshunt> Is there any more discussion?
22:02 < TeamColtra> So you ruling the adjustment that we were initally intending to do being out of order is sily
22:02 < TeamColtra> done
22:03 < RLim> can I speak
22:03 < RLim> ?
22:03 < scshunt> sure
22:04 < RLim> I think the intent is clear that several people here want it amended. Travis, Jack and CCitizen
22:04 < JMcleod> The motion presented by TeamColtra is substantially different from last week's version as written out. We rescinded the motion, not the intent of the motion.
22:04 < RLim> and me
22:05 < RLim> so I moved to suspend the rule and allow a motion on joining PPCA IT and PPI's IT
22:05 < RLim> one sec
22:05 < RLim> can I amend the motion or introduce a motion
22:05 < RLim> ?
22:05 < RLim> There's no motion right now correct?
22:05 < scshunt> No, as we're currently handing the appeal.
22:06 < TeamColtra> RLim: you can't amend it unless he says that it is a valid motion
22:06 < TeamColtra> if he claims it invalid, then you can make your motion
22:06 < scshunt> If it's overturned, then TeamColtra's motion will be considered.
22:06 < Nuitari> jhowell: email me what is needed, nuitari@pirateparty.ca
22:06 < JMcleod> I would like to vote on the chair's ruling
22:06 < scshunt> Is there any further discussion on the appeal?
22:06 < RLim> ok quick I have to leave soon. But I think there should still be a quorum
22:06 < TeamColtra> scshunt: I think the members are in agreement that you should overrule
22:07 < TeamColtra> or atleast rough agreement
22:07 < scshunt> It has to go to a vote;
22:07 < TeamColtra> I need to leave too.
22:07 < scshunt> The question is on the appeal of the ruling of the chair.
22:07 < CCitizen> so which way do we vote to go handle the motion by Travis?
22:08 < scshunt> The chair ruled that TeamColtra's motion "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's IT operations into the PPI IT Committee" was out of order due to being substantially similar to one rescinded earlier in this meeting.
22:08 < scshunt> The question is "Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?"
22:08 < scshunt> A vote in favor is a vote to sustain the ruling that it was out of order.
22:08 < scshunt> A vote against is a vote to overturn the ruling and find instead that the motion was in order.
22:08 < TeamColtra> So I vote nay?
22:08 < scshunt> The question is "Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?". All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay.
22:08 < JMcleod> nay
22:09 < TeamColtra> Nay
22:09 < RLim> nay
22:09 < scshunt> aye
22:09 < CCitizen> nay
22:09 < jhowell> abstain
22:09 < scshunt> The ruling of the chair is overturned. The motion is in order. The question is now on the motion that the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges its IT operations into the PPI IT Committee.
22:10 < TeamColtra> RLim: you have an amendment?
22:10 < RLim> I move to amend the motion
22:10 < TeamColtra> you actually make your amendment in your motion I believe
22:10 < scshunt> ^
22:10 < scshunt> What do you want the motion to say?
22:11 < scshunt> Uh, ok, we'll go back to debate on the primary motion then, in the meanwhile.
22:11 < scshunt> I oppose this motion.
22:12 < scshunt> Unfortunately, last week's meeting has left scrollback
22:12 < scshunt> but the reason I do is because this is not, as presented, a motion to merely cooperate with the PPI IT Committee.
22:12 < scshunt> It is a motion to merge.
22:12 < CCitizen> Personally I'd like to change it from 'merges' to 'collaborates'.. at this time anyways we dont know how well the personalities within both bodies will mesh and it's better to take things slowly
22:13 < svulliez> I think "merging" is too far too, I agree with hunt and patrick
22:13 < svulliez> especially if it's going to make some it members upset that we made the decision without them
22:13 < scshunt> I'm also opposed to making an explicit motion to collaborate as I think that the IT Committee is full of smart people, Patrick and Travis included, who will go collaborate with PPI as needed.
22:14 < scshunt> and every motion adopted is just a little more bureaucracy being added.
22:14 < CCitizen> Maybe we could encourage it... Is liquid feedback partlydeveloped by PPI or is that all PPDE?
22:15 < TeamColtra> I feel that by actually merging our operations with PPI we keep our intelligent team, plus we are adding a whole bunch of others
22:15 < Nuitari> CCitizen: fyi, it's vulnerable to XSS
22:15 < scshunt> I believe it's mostly PPDE, but I could be wrong.
22:15 < scshunt> TeamColtra: But at the cost of having our members having to work on PPI stuff.
22:15 < TeamColtra> not having to
22:15 < RLim> TravisMcCrea: Do you see any issue with IT collaboration if there's no motion?
22:15 < TeamColtra> just having the ability to
22:16 < scshunt> TeamColtra: it is hardly a merger if they don't become a single body!
22:16 < scshunt> which also brings up the question of whether we can do this at all, arguably.
22:16 < TeamColtra> scshunt: none of our IT Committee is forced to work on IT Committee projects
22:16 < scshunt> but this motion is too vague to make a reasonable decision of that
22:16 < TeamColtra> They just have the option to
22:16 < JMcleod> collaborates allows the ITcomm to pull out if ever the PPI IT makes a dumb decision and participate if its a great idea. Merger means they become one, so the word merge is not the correct word to use here. (lets not fuck up the wording again)
22:16 < scshunt> They have the responsibility to.
22:16 < RLim> sorry to get a bit off topic. But I a leaving and just want to leave this link for Sean for the amendment vote.
22:16 < RLim> http://wiki.pirateparty.ca/index.php/GM_2012-04-18_Proposed_Amendments_to_the_Constitution
22:16 < RLim> night
22:16 < scshunt> RLim: thanks.
22:17 < TeamColtra> It's not as much a "merge" as it is "becomes a member of"
22:17 < scshunt> The fact that we can't even agree what this motion means makes me think it's a horrid idea.
22:17 < TeamColtra> lol because most of our motions we just all agree with eachother
22:17 < TeamColtra> and dance with puppies on rainbows
22:18 < scshunt> No, because a motion should be clear.
22:18 < TeamColtra> Can we use that wording to make people more happy? "PPCA's IT Committee becomes a member party of the PPI IT Committee"
22:18 < scshunt> A committee being a memory of a committee?
22:18 < scshunt> *member
22:19 < JMcleod> Can you rephrase that in French so I can understand that last one Travis?
22:19 < TeamColtra> It's really not that weird.. I don't think you are getting it. We still operate totally independantly, we just share the same IRC channel as everyone else, and probably would start using more globalized tools
22:20 < scshunt> JMcleod: note commité allait devenir un member de la commité de PPI
22:20 < TeamColtra> Just like our IT Committee might have a server team and a web team
22:20 < JMcleod> OK, but we should also word it in the sense that we are independant
22:20 < TeamColtra> the PPI IT Committee would have a Canada team a US team etc
22:21 < JMcleod> lol google xlate really sucks for that one
22:21 < svulliez> I don't think explicit commitment of a "merge" is required and it seems to be contentious to word it that way, so in the interests of expediency, can we just say "collaborates"?
22:21 < scshunt> TeamColtra: That is not what "merge" means.
22:21 < scshunt> Nor "become a member"
22:22 < TeamColtra> But I would like it (at least in my vision for it) to be clear that the teams should operate closely using the same communication channels.
22:22 < TeamColtra> scshunt: it doesn't negate it either
22:22 < scshunt> svulliez: Like I said, I think adopting a motion directing the committee to collaborate is a waste of time.
22:22 < TeamColtra> it's not an antonym
22:22 < JMcleod> merge/mərj/
22:22 < JMcleod> Verb:
22:22 < scshunt> TeamColtra: It means far more than that
22:22 < JMcleod> Combine or cause to combine to form a single entity, esp. a commercial organization.
22:22 < scshunt> ^
22:22 < JMcleod> Blend or fade gradually into something else so as to become indistinguishable from it.
22:22 < svulliez> It's not a waste of time; this discussion is
22:22 < scshunt> svulliez: agreed
22:23 < TeamColtra> yes, we would become a single entity: The PPI IT Committee, within that committee the PPCA would have it's team
22:23 < svulliez> merging is too strong a wording, let's just direct them to collaborate or defer to question to the IT committee themselves
22:23 < TeamColtra> I am okay with dropping merge
22:23 < scshunt> I support just letting the IT committee handle this as they see fit
22:23 < CCitizen> "The IT Committee of the Pirate Party of Canada is committed to continued collaboration and cooperation with the Pirate Party International IT Committee" <- This better
22:23 < JMcleod> make it a motion CCitizen
22:24 < scshunt> CCitizen: It doesn't DO anything
22:24 < TeamColtra> The IT Committee can hardly organize themselves into their own meetings, let alone decide on a new communication direction
22:24 < scshunt> it's ridiculous political doublespeak
22:24 < CCitizen> Yeah
22:24 < scshunt> yeho would have a fit, and rightly so
22:24 < CCitizen> How about we defer this to the IT Committee to handle?
22:24 < scshunt> TeamColtra: you're a member, you should perhaps help with that
22:25 < TeamColtra> scshunt: I have been at every meeting
22:25 < CCitizen> It isnt out of their mandate to handle such things is it?
22:25 < TeamColtra> Though most of them no one showed up
22:25 -!- jhowell1 [6ca29178@ppca-B6DDC28A.mibbit.com] has joined #exec
22:25 -!- jhowell [6ca29178@ppca-A3A5A5B2.mibbit.com] has quit [Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client]
22:25 < svulliez> because irc meetings are laborous and sad
22:25 < JMcleod> Yeah, attendence seems to be a problem for the ITcomm
22:25 < svulliez> its no wonder people don't want to show up
22:25 < jhowell1> yeah
22:25 < jhowell1> ok couple things about the it committee meetings
22:25 < svulliez> asynchronous meetings are needed
22:25 < CCitizen> I'm hoping that IT Committee could use Piratepad to handle the meetings then everyone doesnt have to be there at the same time
22:25 < jhowell1> we're working on a frequency, and a method
22:26 < scshunt> This debate is getting offtopic.
22:26 < jhowell1> Collaboration is a better word
22:26 < JMcleod> Alright, so what we want to accomplish with the motion essentially is to enable the ITcomm to work with the PPI ITcomm right?
22:26 < jhowell1> we just want to formalize an open communication
22:26 < scshunt> No, I don't think we do.
22:26 < scshunt> Not the exec, anyway
22:26 < TeamColtra> scshunt: what's the question on the floor
22:26 < scshunt> TeamColtra: your motion.
22:26 < TeamColtra> yes
22:27 < TeamColtra> what's the wordnig
22:27 < TeamColtra> my scroll sucks
22:27 < scshunt> If there are structural problems with the IT Committee not doing things, that's not a problem that is solved by telling them to do more
22:27 < scshunt> that "the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges it's IT operations into the PPI IT Committee"
22:27 < TeamColtra> "the Pirate Party of Canada officially aligns it's IT operations into the PPI IT Committee"
22:27 < scshunt> in fact, the more we tell them to do without solving the structural problems, the worse they will get
22:27 < TeamColtra> err I move to amend "the Pirate Party of Canada officially aligns it's IT operations into the PPI IT Committee"
22:27 < scshunt> Ok.
22:27 < scshunt> TeamColtra has moved to strike "merge" and insert "aligns"
22:27 < JMcleod> a·lign/əˈlīn/
22:28 < JMcleod> Verb:
22:28 < JMcleod> Place or arrange (things) in a straight line.
22:28 < scshunt> err, strike "merges"
22:28 < JMcleod> Put (things) into correct relative positions.
22:28 < TeamColtra> JMcleod: it's the "ally" definition.
22:28 < TeamColtra> look up alliance
22:28 < CCitizen> That's quite a bit better
22:28 < JMcleod> 3. To ally (oneself, for example) with one side of an argument or cause:
22:29 < scshunt> I still think this whole thing is stupid.
22:29 < TeamColtra> ^ there
22:29 < Nuitari> wow this is more pointless then the meetings I have at work
22:29 < scshunt> ^^^^^
22:29 < TeamColtra> I move to previous question
22:29 < JMcleod> align makes sense
22:29 < scshunt> TeamColtra has moved the previous qestion on the amendment to strike "merges" and insert "aligns"
22:29 < TeamColtra> let's get the ball rolling
22:29 < scshunt> All in favor say aye. All opposed say nay.
22:29 < scshunt> aye
22:29 < CCitizen> aye
22:29 < TeamColtra> aye
22:29 < JMcleod> aye
22:30 < TeamColtra> svulliez: ?
22:30 < scshunt> There are two-thirds in favor. The question is now on the motion to strike "merges" and insert "aligns". The motion currently reads "that the Pirate Party of Canada officially merges its IT operations into the PPI IT Committee"; if this amendment is adopted, it will read "that the Pirate Party of Canada officially aligns its IT operations into the PPI IT Committee".
22:30 < TeamColtra> I move to previous question on the motion on the floor.
22:30 < scshunt> All in favor say aye, all opposed say nay.
22:30 < JMcleod> aye
22:30 < TeamColtra> oh yeah
22:31 < CCitizen> aye
22:31 < scshunt> aye
22:31 < TeamColtra> aye
22:31 < jhowell1> aye
22:31 < scshunt> The ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. The question is now on the motion "that the Pirate Party of Canada officially aligns its IT operations into the PPI IT Committee."
22:31 < scshunt> Now before the previous question
22:31 < TeamColtra> I move to previous question on the motion on the floor.
22:31 < scshunt> ...
22:31 < TeamColtra> :P go ahead
22:32 < CCitizen> we have a previous question?
22:32 < scshunt> it was withdrawn
22:32 < scshunt> I think this is a really bad motion. It's got no real meaning to it. It's ridiculously vague and basically doublespeak
22:32 < scshunt> redacted is a critic, but sometimes he's right
22:32 < scshunt> this motion is just a lot of doing nothing
22:32 < CCitizen> Ah mine was basically superceded by this so yeah withdrawn
22:32 < scshunt> and I'd rather not have official doing nothing.
22:33 < scshunt> Any more debate?
22:33 < CCitizen> debate on what?
22:33 < TeamColtra> I don't think there is any debate
22:33 < scshunt> The question is on the motion "that the Pirate Party of Canada officially aligns its IT operations into the PPI IT Committee."
22:33 < TeamColtra> CCitizen: on the motion
22:33 < scshunt> All in favor, say aye, all opposed, say nay.
22:33 < CCitizen> ah we probably had it already
22:33 < scshunt> nay
22:33 < TeamColtra> aye
22:34 < JMcleod> aye
22:34 < svulliez> aye
22:34 < CCitizen> aye
22:35 < scshunt> The ayes have it and the motion is adopted.
22:35 < scshunt> jhowell1: Now, to talk about credentials
22:35 < JMcleod> [22:07:19] <oxpirate> https://www.pirateparty.ca/forum/index.php?board=111.0
22:35 < JMcleod> [22:07:26] <oxpirate> Please read both threads
22:35 < JMcleod> [22:07:51] <oxpirate> Pass the link on to other elected reps at this point please. The sooner we get on this the better.
22:35 < scshunt> YOU should be handing out the credentials
22:35 < JMcleod> I dont have access to that board, what is it?
22:35 < jhowell1> pl
22:35 < jhowell1> ok
22:36 < JMcleod> oh n/m i have access now
22:36 < jhowell1> from what i understand, there are no credentials to give.. all authentication is done through certificate
22:36 < CCitizen> Yeah I set it so 'leadership' group can read (it's basically a combo of PC/EB)
22:36 < scshunt> jhowell1: You need to put that stuff in though
22:37 < scshunt> We can talk about it, but it should be you.
22:37 < scshunt> it's both part of your job description to have root to everything, and also a role directly given to you by the it committee.
22:38 < jhowell1> Nuitari's been emailed, since he seen the message earlier.
22:38 < jhowell1> we need a list of outstanding people who have not yet successfully accessed the system
22:38 < jhowell1> and a piece of his time to give us some basic instruction on how to get in and use it
22:38 < TeamColtra> What we need is a spreadsheet which states exactly who has access to what
22:39 < scshunt> jhowell1: sounds like a good job for the it director?
22:39 < scshunt> TeamColtra: or a page, or something, but yes.
22:39 < TeamColtra> spreadsheets are the nerdy way to do it
22:39 < scshunt> google docs or microsoft 365? :P
22:39 < TeamColtra> OpenOffice supports spreadsheets ;)
22:39 < TeamColtra> But realistically Google Docs ;)
22:39 < scshunt> TeamColtra: but not shared ones, and they WILL not get updated.
22:39 < jhowell1> Its just a matter of locking in time with Nuitari
22:40 < scshunt> No, it isn't.
22:40 < scshunt> Nuitari isn't needed for most of this stuff.
22:40 < jhowell1> I find it hit/miss in getting contact
22:40 < scshunt> Scott and I both have root to all the machines.
22:40 < TeamColtra> it's Nuitari it's always hard getting in contact with him, which is why when you need him you should have a list of things you want
22:40 < TeamColtra> and then get them.
22:40 < TeamColtra> or ask him
22:40 < scshunt> maybe Nuitari has the only admin to the CRM, but I dunno how it works
22:40 < jhowell1> It is because you're giving me access to a system i need to re familiarize with myself with
22:40 < scshunt> it's terrible, but we have bigger priorities to fix.
22:41 < scshunt> jhowell1: don't rely on Nuitari. There are others who can help you out.
22:41 < jhowell1> Ok, so who would be a better alternative to bounce questions off of then
22:41 < scshunt> the committee
22:41 < TeamColtra> Bounce everything off me
22:41 < TeamColtra> ;)
22:41 < TeamColtra> Anyway, I am going to lunch unless I am needed for something?
22:41 < jhowell1> haha ok how available are you Travis, and when is the best time to talk to you
22:41 < scshunt> if someone else knows, they can pick it up and reply.
22:41 < scshunt> otherwise Nuit will get to it eventually
22:42 < TeamColtra> jhowell1: realistically if you really need me - I am almost always available
22:42 < jhowell1> ok
22:42 < TeamColtra> I am always connected to IRC somehow
22:42 < jhowell1> I'll be bugging you tomorrow
22:42 < scshunt> as am I
22:42 < scshunt> and I have a lot of compilation to do tomorrow
22:42 < scshunt> so... swordfights!
22:42 < TeamColtra> I am going to lunch, unless there is somthing left to vote on?
22:42 < CCitizen> So did we finish voting on the new wording...
22:42 < jhowell1> dem call centre lunches
22:42 < TeamColtra> yes CCitizen :P
22:43 < CCitizen> Or we have a motion we're working on?
22:43 < TeamColtra> I hope they are still open >.>
22:43 * TeamColtra too late .. I am out ttyl
22:43 < scshunt> CCitizen: it's done
22:43 < scshunt> over my objections, but hey, that's democracy
22:43 < CCitizen> I'm going to make a motion... I'd like to switch Jake Daynes as Project Leader of CaPT for Travis McCrea (I believe they both wanted this anyways)
22:44 < scshunt> Ok, CCitizen has moved to have Travis McCrea replace Jake Daynes as project leader of CaPT.
22:44 < scshunt> Is there any objection to this?
22:46 < JMcleod> well itd be nice
22:46 < scshunt> Seeing none, the motion is adopted.
22:46 < scshunt> any other business?
22:46 < JMcleod> if travis would be here to say if hed want to do it
22:46 < scshunt> meh, CCitizen is the projects manager
22:46 < scshunt> I trust him
22:46 < JMcleod> True
22:46 < JMcleod> we can always change back if needed
22:47 < JMcleod> move to end this meeting for today :)
22:47 < scshunt> Any objections to adjourning?
22:47 < CCitizen> Yeah just one
22:48 < CCitizen> I'd like to motion that we consider the EncryptEverything.ca project an official project and if adopted place 0xPirate (Steve Henderson) in charge of it.
22:48 < scshunt> Ok. In that case we'll first have to vote on the motion to adjourn.
22:48 < scshunt> The question is on the motion to adjourn. All in favor, say aye. All opposed, say nay.
22:48 < scshunt> aye
22:48 < CCitizen> actually that can wait till next week
22:48 < CCitizen> aye
22:49 < JMcleod> aye
22:49 < jhowell1> aye
22:49 < scshunt> The ayes have it and the motion is adopted.
22:50 -scshunt:#exec- The meeting is now adjourned.

EB 2012-05-07 minutes

2012-05-15T00:14:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:14, 15 May 2012
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Jeremy Howell moved "to accept xmux's resignation from the IT Committee." The motion was postponed to the next meeting.		Jeremy Howell moved "to accept xmux's resignation from the IT Committee." The motion was postponed to the next meeting.

-	~~Sean Hunt~~ moved to ~~rescind~~ last ~~wek's motion by Travis McCrea~~ to ".~~..nerge~~"	+	Travis McCrea moved to strike "merge" and insert "aligns" to last week motions to read "that the Pirate Party of Canada officially aligns it's IT operations into the PPI IT Committee." The motion was adopted with 4 ayes and 0 nay.

-	The meeting was adjourned at Eastern Time.	+	Patrick Fitzgerald moved "to have Travis McCrea replace Jake Daynes as project leader of CaPT." The motion was adopted without dissent.
		+
		+	The meeting was adjourned at 23:50 Eastern Time.

	View [[EB_2012-05-07_transcript\|transcript]].		View [[EB_2012-05-07_transcript\|transcript]].

Main Page

2012-05-12T21:08:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:08, 12 May 2012
(One intermediate revision not shown)
Line 17:		Line 17:
	\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|		\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|
	= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =		= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =
-	* Political Council Minutes available for the new Council ([[PC_2012-03-01_minutes\|March 1st]], [[PC_2012-03-08_minutes\|March 8th]], [[PC_2012-03-15_minutes\|March 15th]], [[PC_2012-03-22_minutes\|March 22nd]], March 29th, [[PC_2012-04-05_minutes\|April 5th]], April 12th, [[PC_2012-04-19_minutes\|April 19th]])	+	* Political Council Minutes available for the new Council ([[PC_2012-03-01_minutes\|March 1st]], [[PC_2012-03-08_minutes\|March 8th]], [[PC_2012-03-15_minutes\|March 15th]], [[PC_2012-03-22_minutes\|March 22nd]], March 29th, [[PC_2012-04-05_minutes\|April 5th]], April 12th, [[PC_2012-04-19_minutes\|April 19th]], [[PC_2012-04-26_minutes\|April 26th]])
	* Updated [[Executive Board]] members		* Updated [[Executive Board]] members
	* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]		* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]

PC 2012-04-26 minutes

2012-05-12T21:07:37Z

Created page with "Called to order at 7:30 1. EB requested we clarify the purpose of CaPT <br> CCitizen's answer: "1) To promote BitTorrent as a distribution method for artists and other peo..."

New page

Called to order at 7:30

1. EB requested we clarify the purpose of CaPT <br>
CCitizen's answer:

"1) To promote BitTorrent as a distribution method for artists and other people who make content.
2) To share and preserve our cultural heritage"

Discussion ensues

''The purpose of CaPT is to promote BitTorrent as a distribution method for artists and other people who make content, and to share and preserve our cultural heritage. CaPT is not intended for copyright infringement or for distribution of illegal materials.''

Unanimous approval of the above wording

2. Apparently we don't have a welcome email for new members, so let's pick someone to make it.

- Johann and Shawn will take responsibility for writing a welcome email for next week. EB/IT will ensure that the emails are going out

3. EB also requested we look at the VPN promise
Several options discussed:

- banked accounts for emergency usage (eg. giving them to Tunisia in the Arab Spring) <br>
- give members a second account to gift <br>
- implement the system as it was intended to be

We need to inform the VPN subscribers

Question: Should we ask them for input before deciding what route to take?

Alt: Decide on an option, inform subscribers and ask for feedback

Conclusion: Jake will write up the email to inform subscribers of the situation and email it around. We will discuss and think on the options, and bring it back to the next meeting.

4. Minutes

No votes or conclusive statements.

5. James Wilson has a project idea for keeping tabs on MPs

When James has finished his project will will review and decide if we can approve it

Political Council

2012-05-12T21:01:17Z

Political Council, Feb 29 2012 - Present:

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:01, 12 May 2012
Line 148:		Line 148:
	\| Apr 19 2012		\| Apr 19 2012
	\| [[PC 2012-04-19 minutes\|Minutes]]		\| [[PC 2012-04-19 minutes\|Minutes]]
		+	\|-
		+	\| Apr 26 2012
		+	\| [[PC 2012-04-26 minutes\|Minutes]]
	\|}		\|}

Main Page

2012-05-12T20:55:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:55, 12 May 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|		\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|
	= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =		= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =
		+	* Political Council Minutes available for the new Council ([[PC_2012-03-01_minutes\|March 1st]], [[PC_2012-03-08_minutes\|March 8th]], [[PC_2012-03-15_minutes\|March 15th]], [[PC_2012-03-22_minutes\|March 22nd]], March 29th, [[PC_2012-04-05_minutes\|April 5th]], April 12th, [[PC_2012-04-19_minutes\|April 19th]])
	* Updated [[Executive Board]] members		* Updated [[Executive Board]] members
	* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]		* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]

GM 2012-04-18 agenda

2012-05-10T02:43:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:43, 10 May 2012
Line 6:		Line 6:
	*Committee or Officer's Reports		*Committee or Officer's Reports
	*CCitizen to move for enactment of Special Rule of Order. http://wiki.pirateparty.ca/index.php/GM_2012-05-16_CCitizen_Motion		*CCitizen to move for enactment of Special Rule of Order. http://wiki.pirateparty.ca/index.php/GM_2012-05-16_CCitizen_Motion
-	*Jeremy Howell to move “to amend the special rule of order defining the IT Committee to allow the Executive Board to appoint the IT Director.	+	*Jeremy Howell to move “to amend the special rule of order defining the IT Committee to allow the Executive Board to appoint the IT Director".
	*Vote to affirm candidacy of Travis McCrea for Vancouver Centre		*Vote to affirm candidacy of Travis McCrea for Vancouver Centre
	*Member Motions		*Member Motions

	If anyone have any motion they would like to bring forward, please post it in this thread before the meeting.		If anyone have any motion they would like to bring forward, please post it in this thread before the meeting.

Constitution 2011-12-18

2012-05-10T02:37:41Z

VI.1 Composition:

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:37, 10 May 2012
(3 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 26:		Line 26:
	The Party shall collect a membership fee annually from each member. Members of the Executive Board and of the Political Council, as well as selected candidates and Members of Parliament representing the Party, may, at their option, receive membership free of charge for the duration of their service on one or more of these positions. The Party may award free membership for a period of time not to exceed two years with approval of a general meeting, of the Executive Board, and of the Political Council.		The Party shall collect a membership fee annually from each member. Members of the Executive Board and of the Political Council, as well as selected candidates and Members of Parliament representing the Party, may, at their option, receive membership free of charge for the duration of their service on one or more of these positions. The Party may award free membership for a period of time not to exceed two years with approval of a general meeting, of the Executive Board, and of the Political Council.

-	Membership begins immediately when the fee is ~~�rst~~ paid, and may be paid for up to five years in advance. If a member is delinquent in paying the fee, they shall lose their membership.	+	Membership begins immediately when the fee is first paid, and may be paid for up to five years in advance. If a member is delinquent in paying the fee, they shall lose their membership.

	=Article IV. Officers=		=Article IV. Officers=
Line 49:		Line 49:
	==VI.1 Composition==		==VI.1 Composition==

-	The Executive Board shall consist of the ~~o�cers~~ of the Party and the chairs of any standing	+	The Executive Board shall consist of the officers of the Party and the chairs of any standing
	committees of the Party.		committees of the Party.

Line 56:		Line 56:
	==VI.2 Powers & Duties==		==VI.2 Powers & Duties==

-	The Executive Board is responsible for the general ~~a�airs~~ of the Party and has full power and authority over its affairs in between general meetings except where authority is held by the Political Council, or as otherwise limited. The Executive Board's actions are subject to change by, and shall	+	The Executive Board is responsible for the general affairs of the Party and has full power and authority over its affairs in between general meetings except where authority is held by the Political Council, or as otherwise limited. The Executive Board's actions are subject to change by, and shall
	not conflict with decisions of a general meeting.		not conflict with decisions of a general meeting.

Line 126:		Line 126:

	When meetings are held in this fashion, members shall be required to check in specifically for that meeting in order to establish quorum. Once checked in, a member shall be assumed present unless they disconnect. To safeguard against small groups, no motion shall be adopted at a meeting		When meetings are held in this fashion, members shall be required to check in specifically for that meeting in order to establish quorum. Once checked in, a member shall be assumed present unless they disconnect. To safeguard against small groups, no motion shall be adopted at a meeting
-	held by telecommunications unless the number of votes in the ~~a�rmative~~ is at least half of quorum.	+	held by telecommunications unless the number of votes in the affirmative is at least half of quorum.

	==IX.2 All-Party Ballots==		==IX.2 All-Party Ballots==

GM 2012-04-18 agenda

2012-05-10T02:35:49Z

Created page with "Our monthly General Meeting will occur at 8:00 pm Eastern time on May 16, 2012 (Wednesday) in the IRC channel #canada at irc.pirateparty.ca - SSL port 6697 (connect using any IRC..."

New page

Our monthly General Meeting will occur at 8:00 pm Eastern time on May 16, 2012 (Wednesday) in the IRC channel #canada at irc.pirateparty.ca - SSL port 6697 (connect using any IRC client. You can also connect through several web options available from our site's 'Chat' link).

This month's agenda includes:

*Approval of last month’s General Meeting minutes. http://wiki.pirateparty.ca/index.php/GM_2012-04-18_minutes
*Committee or Officer's Reports
*CCitizen to move for enactment of Special Rule of Order. http://wiki.pirateparty.ca/index.php/GM_2012-05-16_CCitizen_Motion
*Jeremy Howell to move “to amend the special rule of order defining the IT Committee to allow the Executive Board to appoint the IT Director.
*Vote to affirm candidacy of Travis McCrea for Vancouver Centre
*Member Motions

If anyone have any motion they would like to bring forward, please post it in this thread before the meeting.

GM 2012-01-18 agenda

2012-05-10T02:34:59Z

protected "[[GM 2012-01-18 agenda]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

GM 2012-02-15 agenda

2012-05-10T02:34:18Z

protected "[[GM 2012-02-15 agenda]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

GM 2012-03-21 agenda

2012-05-10T02:33:56Z

protected "[[GM 2012-03-21 agenda]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

Meeting minutes

2012-05-10T02:32:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:32, 10 May 2012
Line 5:		Line 5:
	! Minutes		! Minutes
	! Transcripts		! Transcripts
		+	\|-
		+	\| 2012 04 18
		+	\| [[GM_2012-04-18_agenda\|Agenda]]
		+	\| [[GM_2012-04-18_minutes\|Minutes]]
		+	\| [[GM_2012-04-18_transcript\|Transcript]]
	\|-		\|-
	\| 2012 03 21		\| 2012 03 21

GM 2012-03-21 minutes

2012-05-10T02:28:27Z

protected "[[GM 2012-03-21 minutes]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

GM 2012-02-29 transcript

2012-05-10T02:28:07Z

protected "[[GM 2012-02-29 transcript]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

GM 2012-04-18 transcript

2012-05-10T02:27:59Z

protected "[[GM 2012-04-18 transcript]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

GM 2012-04-18 minutes

2012-05-10T02:26:08Z

protected "[[GM 2012-04-18 minutes]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

GM 2012-05-16 CCitizen Motion

2012-05-10T02:15:58Z

New page

Patrick Fitzgerald to move for the enactment of a Special Rule of Order.

Non-members shall normally be permitted to speak at meetings, including in debate. That permission may be withdrawn or reinstated for any non-member individually or for all as a group with a majority vote on an undebatable motion to do so. This motion is a question of the privilege of the assembly. The motion cannot be renewed or the opposite motion made after it is adopted unless it presents a fundamentally different question or the parliamentary situation has changed.

(privilege of the assembly means that it takes precedence over everything except a motion to recess, to adjourn, or to set when the assembly adjourns to, and those are all undebateable)

Additional comment about the motion:

Plain Language Version (for non-bureucrats): The default will now be everyone can have teh privilege to speak. If someone or all non-members are being disruptive any member can make a motion to revoke that privilege and it is dealt with immediately. There will be no debate (it should be obvious why this was invoked anyways) and go immediately to voting. A motion to restore the privileges cannot be made until things have changed (typically by moving on from the motion or order of business that caused this in the first place)

GM 2012-04-18 EB Reports

2012-05-10T02:12:13Z

protected "[[GM 2012-04-18 EB Reports]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

GM 2012-04-18 Proposed Amendments to the Constitution

2012-05-10T02:00:30Z

protected "[[GM 2012-04-18 Proposed Amendments to the Constitution]]" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite) Official document

GM 2012-04-18 EB Reports

2012-05-10T01:53:20Z

Created page with "First and foremost, financial reports. We have received word that the credit card statements arrived from the bank last Friday after quite a bit of waiting. We don't have the fin..."

New page

First and foremost, financial reports. We have received word that the credit card statements arrived from the bank last Friday after quite a bit of waiting. We don't have the financial reports yet, but hopefully they were finished in time for the general meeting. If they were not, we will post them publicly when they become an available.

Once the reports are received, we will be better equipped to evaluate expenditures, and we will proceed to work on developing a funding policy for projects, as directed at the March general meeting. We have, however, made some minor progress. Sean Hunt and Jack McLoed, the President and Vice-President, have been appointed as agents of the Party and given the authority to approve small expenditures.

No significant progress has been made on improving general meetings. Some members are proposing that we use LiquidFeedback, software developed by the Pirate Party of Germany, but no one has yet taken a good look at it.

Movement in the IT Committee has started up. The committee now consists of Jeremy Howell, the IT Director, Patrick Fitzgerald, Scott Elcomb, Travis McCrea, Jake Daynes, and another active member who prefers not to have his name spread around. The Committee has decided to being development on a new Drupal-based website.

Lastly, the Board has considered the proposed constitutional amendments as posted at https://www.pirateparty.ca/forum/index.php?topic=2073.msg11899#msg11899, and has the following recommendations. These recommendations do not necessarily represent the views of the individual members, but of the Board as a whole:

#1: The Board recommends that the proposed amendment be divided into two, as the Board recommends the adoption of the first section and against the adoption of the second.
#2: The Board recommends the adoption of the proposed amendment.
#3: The Board recommends the adoption of the proposed amendment.
#4: The Board offers no recommendation on the disposition of the proposed amendment, but recommends that, before it is sent out for a vote, paragraphs three and four be stricken.
#5 & #6: The Board recommends that these amendments be sent to a committee for further review so as to ensure that the proposed changes do not create contradicitions or ambiguity.
#7: The Board recommends against the adoption of the proposed amendment.
#8: The Board recommends against the adoption of the proposed amendment.
#9: The Board recommends against the adoption of the proposed amendment.
#10: The Board recommends against the adoption of the proposed amendment.
#11: The Board has no recommendation.

Executive Board

Pirate Party of Canada

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:08, 12 May 2012
(One intermediate revision not shown)
Line 17:		Line 17:
	\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|		\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|
	= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =		= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =
-	* Political Council Minutes available for the new Council ([[PC_2012-03-01_minutes\|March 1st]], [[PC_2012-03-08_minutes\|March 8th]], [[PC_2012-03-15_minutes\|March 15th]], [[PC_2012-03-22_minutes\|March 22nd]], March 29th, [[PC_2012-04-05_minutes\|April 5th]], April 12th, [[PC_2012-04-19_minutes\|April 19th]])	+	* Political Council Minutes available for the new Council ([[PC_2012-03-01_minutes\|March 1st]], [[PC_2012-03-08_minutes\|March 8th]], [[PC_2012-03-15_minutes\|March 15th]], [[PC_2012-03-22_minutes\|March 22nd]], March 29th, [[PC_2012-04-05_minutes\|April 5th]], April 12th, [[PC_2012-04-19_minutes\|April 19th]], [[PC_2012-04-26_minutes\|April 26th]])
	* Updated [[Executive Board]] members		* Updated [[Executive Board]] members
	* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]		* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:55, 12 May 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|		\|width="50%" valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:3px solid #393939; background-color:#DEDEDE"\|
	= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =		= <font color="#393939">'''What's New? \| Nouveautés''' =
		+	* Political Council Minutes available for the new Council ([[PC_2012-03-01_minutes\|March 1st]], [[PC_2012-03-08_minutes\|March 8th]], [[PC_2012-03-15_minutes\|March 15th]], [[PC_2012-03-22_minutes\|March 22nd]], March 29th, [[PC_2012-04-05_minutes\|April 5th]], April 12th, [[PC_2012-04-19_minutes\|April 19th]])
	* Updated [[Executive Board]] members		* Updated [[Executive Board]] members
	* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]		* Political Board transcript available for [[PB_2011-12-29_transcript\|Dec 29th, 2011]] and [[PB_2012-01-05_transcript\|Jan 5th, 2012]]