FC 2010-12-02 transcript

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