EB 2012-05-07 transcript

 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]  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]  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 ugh, sorry guys 21:00 I don't have an exucse, my own damn fault 21:02 anyway, membership cards are jake? Is he getting them out? 21:02 < JMcleod> Hi Sean 21:02 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 right 21:04 I read the backlog 21:05 < JMcleod> So Sean should take over of this since he's here =) 21:05 oh right 21:05 that 21:05 :P 21:05 Ok, membership cards 21:05 discuss things, etc. :P 21:06 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 Don't know about that. 21:07 TravisMcCrea, can you follow up with him on that? 21:08 unless anything has anyone else to say, let's move along since there's nothing happening 21:09 Ok then. 21:10 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 TeamColtra: ping 21:10 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 ah, I see 21:11 < JMcleod> Yeah, we need to get that reworded 21:11 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 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 But was there any particular reason we thought we needed to make this an explicit direction to the committee? 21:13 rather than giving the committee freedom? 21:13 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 xmux 21:14 < JMcleod> xmux flipped out 21:14 < RLim> xmux 21:14 wasme flipped over other things at the last gm 21:14 but.. imho he has similar qualities as wasme.. 21:14 < JMcleod> wasme always flips out ;) 21:14 I mean, his point is correct. The motion as worded was bad 21:14 < CCitizen> Yeah 21:15 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 which reminds me, does anyone want to make a motion to accept xmux's resignation? 21:15 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 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 Ok. It has been moved to accept xmux's resignation from the IT Committee. 21:16 ccitizen he's had plenty of time to respond via email 21:17 < CCitizen> ok 21:17 he's left the itcomm room, has not responded to any correspondence (at least to me) 21:17 he's not in my #canada logs either 21:17 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 So, I think that's painting a picture 21:18 JMcleod: That motion is out of order for the moment, as we are currently discussing the motion to accept xmux's resignation. 21:18 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 22:16:28 I'll make a motion 21:19 if you'd like verbatim: "I put forward a motion to accept xmux's resignation from the IT Committee" 21:19 :) 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 but I can see the other side too, since he hasn't been around at all 21:19 No opposition to that 21:20 CCitizen: is that a motion to postpone? 21:20 < CCitizen> Sure 21:20 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 Ok. It has been moved to postpone the motion until next week. 21:20 Discussion? 21:20 Ok, are there any objections to postponing the question? 21:21 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 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 Ok, JMcleod has made the motion mentioned there. 21:22 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 '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 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 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 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 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 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 It can't withdrawn unilaterally, especially not with a secondary amendment pending. 21:28 and TeamColtra objects, so I'll put it to a vote. 21:28 < JMcleod> Alright then ignore what I said =) 21:28 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 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 Please limit discussion to the relative merits of these two motions 21:30 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 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 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 that's nice and simple :P 21:31 hahah 21:31 you know--if ppl show up :) 21:32 We should take everyone off the committee again for not showing up :P 21:32 anyway, I don't see much discussion 21:32 so we'll go to a vote. 21:32 < JMcleod> I dont have much to discuss 21:32 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 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 The question is on the motion to substitute a motion to rescind the decision for the motion to amend it. 21:33 If adopted, we will be discussing a motion to rescind; if defeated, we will be discussing the original motion to amend. 21:33 All in favor, say aye. All opposed, say nay. 21:33 aye 21:33 < TeamColtra> nay 21:33 aye 21:33 < RLim> aye 21:33 aye 21:33 < CCitizen> aye 21:34 < JMcleod> nay 21:34 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 I don't think we want to actually merge our operations with PPI. 21:35 Collaboration is a good thing, but doing any sort of merger will just create more bureaucracy 21:35 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 and we already have an it committee that doesn't do much 21:35 at least--it should be 21:35 TeamColtra: it would un-do the motion 21:35 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 No, we didn't. 21:36 < JMcleod> No we didnt pass taht 21:36 As I said, we just passed an amendment to change it into a motion to rescind. 21:36 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 TeamColtra: No. 21:36 < TeamColtra> but there is now a motion to rescind it? 21:36 22:34:38 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 being, specifically, the motion adopted last week. 21:36 < TeamColtra> the amendment is adopted 21:37 the amendment to JMcleod's motion is adopted. 21:37 < JMcleod> yes, the amendment cancels out my motion 21:37 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 If adopted, this would rescind last week's motion. 21:37 < TeamColtra> but we just amended it 21:37 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 We amended the motion to amend it. 21:37 < JMcleod> lol 21:38 TravisMcCrea: do you understand? 21:38 < TeamColtra> holy god... and whos on third, right? 21:38 < TeamColtra> :P 21:38 haha 21:38 no, whos out of order and sitting in the penalty box 21:38 < RLim> lol BTW have to leave in 30 minutes 21:38 anyway, are we clear now, TeamColtra? 21:38 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 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 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 TeamColtra: We just voted not to. 21:40 < TeamColtra> >.> 21:40 CCitizen: asking questions about procedure is in order, since ensuring that everyone is clear on what is going on is important. 21:40 if it strays into debate, I'll cut it off. 21:40 (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 That is correct. 21:41 < TeamColtra> Which was the first motion on the floor 21:41 Then I moved to amend JMcleod's motion. 21:41 which is a subsidiary motion affecting JMcleod's. 21:41 < TeamColtra> that's not a valid amendment though 21:41 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 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 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 RLim: Sure, gimme a sec. 21:44 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 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 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 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 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 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 This motion is not debateable; it requires a two-thirds vote. 21:48 All in favor, say aye. All opposed, say nay. 21:48 aye 21:48 < TeamColtra> nay 21:48 < CCitizen> aye 21:49 aye 21:49 aye 21:49 < JMcleod> nay 21:49 < RLim> aye 21:49 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 Yes. 21:50 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 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 So does anyone have any motion that they would like to present here. 21:52 ? 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 Basically, it can't be a variation of wording on JMcloed's. 21:53 if it has any actual difference, then it's good 21:53 err 21:53 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 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 i wanna 21:55 jhowell: What matter? 21:55 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 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 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 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 Travis, we're talking but like i just said.. informally, its not working out 21:57 its tough to get the guys attention 21:57 just looking for some advice 21:58 once we got everyones login info solidified most of our agenda is complete 21:58 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 or ready to initiate 21:58 < TeamColtra> scshunt: ugh that's the whole reason this thing came up in the first place 21:58 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 Ok, the ruling of the chair is appealed. 21:58 < JMcleod> I appeal too 21:58 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 Order, 21:59 < TeamColtra> which would obviously be bad 21:59 the chair gets to speak first 21:59 < TeamColtra> Speak your worshipfulness 21:59 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 It has to go to a vote; 22:07 < TeamColtra> I need to leave too. 22:07 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 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 The question is "Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?" 22:08 A vote in favor is a vote to sustain the ruling that it was out of order. 22:08 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 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 aye 22:09 < CCitizen> nay 22:09 abstain 22:09 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 ^ 22:10 What do you want the motion to say? 22:11 Uh, ok, we'll go back to debate on the primary motion then, in the meanwhile. 22:11 I oppose this motion. 22:12 Unfortunately, last week's meeting has left scrollback 22:12 but the reason I do is because this is not, as presented, a motion to merely cooperate with the PPI IT Committee. 22:12 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 I think "merging" is too far too, I agree with hunt and patrick 22:13 especially if it's going to make some it members upset that we made the decision without them 22:13 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 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 I believe it's mostly PPDE, but I could be wrong. 22:15 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 TeamColtra: it is hardly a merger if they don't become a single body! 22:16 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 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 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 RLim: thanks. 22:17 < TeamColtra> It's not as much a "merge" as it is "becomes a member of" 22:17 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 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 A committee being a memory of a committee? 22:18 *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 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 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 TeamColtra: That is not what "merge" means. 22:21 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 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 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 ^ 22:22 < JMcleod>    Blend or fade gradually into something else so as to become indistinguishable from it. 22:22 It's not a waste of time; this discussion is 22:22 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 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 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 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 it's ridiculous political doublespeak 22:24 < CCitizen> Yeah 22:24 yeho would have a fit, and rightly so 22:24 < CCitizen> How about we defer this to the IT Committee to handle? 22:24 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 because irc meetings are laborous and sad 22:25 < JMcleod> Yeah, attendence seems to be a problem for the ITcomm 22:25 its no wonder people don't want to show up 22:25 yeah 22:25 ok couple things about the it committee meetings 22:25 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 we're working on a frequency, and a method 22:26 This debate is getting offtopic. 22:26 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 we just want to formalize an open communication 22:26 No, I don't think we do. 22:26 Not the exec, anyway 22:26 < TeamColtra> scshunt: what's the question on the floor 22:26 TeamColtra: your motion. 22:26 < TeamColtra> yes 22:27 < TeamColtra> what's the wordnig 22:27 < TeamColtra> my scroll sucks 22:27 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 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 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 Ok. 22:27 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 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 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 ^^^^^ 22:29 < TeamColtra> I move to previous question 22:29 < JMcleod> align makes sense 22:29 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 All in favor say aye. All opposed say nay. 22:29 aye 22:29 < CCitizen> aye 22:29 < TeamColtra> aye 22:29 < JMcleod> aye 22:30 < TeamColtra> svulliez: ? 22:30 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 All in favor say aye, all opposed say nay. 22:30 < JMcleod> aye 22:30 < TeamColtra> oh yeah 22:31 < CCitizen> aye 22:31 aye 22:31 < TeamColtra> aye 22:31 aye 22:31 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 Now before the previous question 22:31 < TeamColtra> I move to previous question on the motion on the floor. 22:31 ... 22:31 < TeamColtra> :P go ahead 22:32 < CCitizen> we have a previous question? 22:32 it was withdrawn 22:32 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 redacted is a critic, but sometimes he's right 22:32 this motion is just a lot of doing nothing 22:32 < CCitizen> Ah mine was basically superceded by this so yeah withdrawn 22:32 and I'd rather not have official doing nothing. 22:33 Any more debate? 22:33 < CCitizen> debate on what? 22:33 < TeamColtra> I don't think there is any debate 22:33 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 All in favor, say aye, all opposed, say nay. 22:33 < CCitizen> ah we probably had it already 22:33 nay 22:33 < TeamColtra> aye 22:34 < JMcleod> aye 22:34 aye 22:34 < CCitizen> aye 22:35 The ayes have it and the motion is adopted. 22:35 jhowell1: Now, to talk about credentials 22:35 < JMcleod> [22:07:19] https://www.pirateparty.ca/forum/index.php?board=111.0 22:35 < JMcleod> [22:07:26] Please read both threads 22:35 < JMcleod> [22:07:51] Pass the link on to other elected reps at this point please. The sooner we get on this the better. 22:35 YOU should be handing out the credentials 22:35 < JMcleod> I dont have access to that board, what is it? 22:35 pl 22:35 ok 22:36 < JMcleod> oh n/m i have access now 22:36 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 jhowell1: You need to put that stuff in though 22:37 We can talk about it, but it should be you. 22:37 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 Nuitari's been emailed, since he seen the message earlier. 22:38 we need a list of outstanding people who have not yet successfully accessed the system 22:38 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 jhowell1: sounds like a good job for the it director? 22:39 TeamColtra: or a page, or something, but yes. 22:39 < TeamColtra> spreadsheets are the nerdy way to do it 22:39 google docs or microsoft 365? :P 22:39 < TeamColtra> OpenOffice supports spreadsheets ;) 22:39 < TeamColtra> But realistically Google Docs ;) 22:39 TeamColtra: but not shared ones, and they WILL not get updated. 22:39 Its just a matter of locking in time with Nuitari 22:40 No, it isn't. 22:40 Nuitari isn't needed for most of this stuff. 22:40 I find it hit/miss in getting contact 22:40 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 maybe Nuitari has the only admin to the CRM, but I dunno how it works 22:40 It is because you're giving me access to a system i need to re familiarize with myself with 22:40 it's terrible, but we have bigger priorities to fix. 22:41 jhowell1: don't rely on Nuitari. There are others who can help you out. 22:41 Ok, so who would be a better alternative to bounce questions off of then 22:41 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 haha ok how available are you Travis, and when is the best time to talk to you 22:41 if someone else knows, they can pick it up and reply. 22:41 otherwise Nuit will get to it eventually 22:42 < TeamColtra> jhowell1: realistically if you really need me - I am almost always available 22:42 ok 22:42 < TeamColtra> I am always connected to IRC somehow 22:42 I'll be bugging you tomorrow 22:42 as am I 22:42 and I have a lot of compilation to do tomorrow 22:42 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 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 CCitizen: it's done 22:43 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 Ok, CCitizen has moved to have Travis McCrea replace Jake Daynes as project leader of CaPT. 22:44 Is there any objection to this? 22:46 < JMcleod> well itd be nice 22:46 Seeing none, the motion is adopted. 22:46 any other business? 22:46 < JMcleod> if travis would be here to say if hed want to do it 22:46 meh, CCitizen is the projects manager 22:46 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 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 Ok. In that case we'll first have to vote on the motion to adjourn. 22:48 The question is on the motion to adjourn. All in favor, say aye. All opposed, say nay. 22:48 aye 22:48 < CCitizen> actually that can wait till next week 22:48 < CCitizen> aye 22:49 < JMcleod> aye 22:49 aye 22:49 The ayes have it and the motion is adopted. 22:50 -scshunt:#exec- The meeting is now adjourned.