Add the summary/log from July 24th

2 files changed, 153 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/meeting-logs/20080724-summary.txt b/meeting-logs/20080724-summary.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c8379a6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meeting-logs/20080724-summary.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+== Quick summary ==
+
+Item 1: userrel authority: Does userrel have the ability to enforce the
+        CoC on users like devrel does for developers?
+
+It was decided that userrel does have this authority.
+
+
+Item 2: coc extent
+
+All council members will review the CoC thread and comment on it by the
+next meeting (7 August 2008).  We will get a status update in that
+meeting to see if we can vote on any of the proposals brought up in that
+thread.
+
+
+Roll call:
+
+dberkholz       proxied by musikc
+jokey           here
+dertobi123      here
+betelgeuse      proxied by caster
+halcy0n         here
+lu_zero         here
+flameeyes       absent (no slacker mark due to personal reasons)
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20080724.txt b/meeting-logs/20080724.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..faa6e56
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meeting-logs/20080724.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
+--- Log opened Thu Jul 24 15:59:35 2008
+15:59 <@dertobi123> jmbsvicetto: yes, we're going to first mail to the people in question, then make the decision public. should happen soonish.
+15:59 < Caster> I'm for Betelgeuse but pls give me 5 minutes
+15:59  * dertobi123 is here
+15:59 < jmbsvicetto> dertobi123: thanks
+16:00 <@Halcy0n> Alright, so: musick (for donnie), jokey, dertobi123, caster (for betelgeuse), me 
+16:01 <@Halcy0n> We'll give lu_zero and Flameeyes a few minutes
+16:06  * jokey notes flameeyes is away on jabber as well
+16:06 <@dertobi123> let's start?
+16:06 <@Caster> ok
+16:06 <@musikc|laptop> ready whenever you folks are
+16:06 <@Halcy0n> Yea, I sent lu_zero and Flameeyes something on jabber a few minutes ago.  We can start now and just mark them as not here (unless they show up in the next few minutes)
+16:07 <@jokey> go for it
+16:07 <@jokey> who takes chair for donnie? ;)
+16:07 <@Halcy0n> I can if no one else wants to.
+16:07 -!- dertobi123 changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Council meeting today - July 24th 2000UTC | agend: 1) userrel authority 2) coc extent
+16:07 -!- dertobi123 changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Council meeting today - July 24th 2000UTC | agenda: 1) userrel authority 2) coc extent
+16:07 <@dertobi123> bleh
+16:08 <@jokey> Halcy0n: then do so :)
+16:08 <@Halcy0n> Alright, first thing to get out of the way is to announce that we have come to a decision on the appeals.  We will be sending emails to the parties involved directly before sending anything out publically.  Just for everyone that was wondering.
+16:09 <@musikc|laptop> good to hear, thx
+16:10 <@Halcy0n> So, for item #1:  When does everyone think they can reply to the thread on council with your ideas and concerns?  Is there anything in there that you would like to note as something that needs to be clarified.
+16:11 < antarus> coc!
+16:11 < jmbsvicetto> Halcy0n: In case you're considering my "proposal", let me know if you need me to clarify anything
+16:11 <@musikc|laptop> Halcy0n, are some council members already noted as having commented?
+16:12 <@Halcy0n> musikc|laptop: looking at the thread, it looks like myself, Donnie, Luca, and Petteri have commented.
+16:13 <@musikc|laptop> Halcy0n, cool i just wanted to be sure that people knew who did so those folks didnt think they had to again :)
+16:13 <@dertobi123> from my pov there's not that much to discuss there, "our house, our rules" as luca stated. therefore the coc is in place for users as well, except technical limitations when it comes to disciplinary actions
+16:13 <@dertobi123> i.e. we can ban names but not people
+16:14 <@Halcy0n> So, can we say that everyone will have read the thread and atleast posted what they agree with on there by August 1st?  That way by the next meeting we should have something to vote on.
+16:14 <@dertobi123> agreed
+16:15 <@Caster> yup
+16:15 <@musikc|laptop> Halcy0n, so waiting on dertobi123, flameeyes, and jokey right?
+16:15 <@jokey> yap
+16:15 <@jokey> luca!
+16:15 <@lu_zero> hi
+16:16 <@lu_zero> Diego got hospitalized again
+16:16 <@Halcy0n> Alright, Diego won't be making it due to situations outside of his control.
+16:16 <@Halcy0n> What he said
+16:16  * lu_zero got him on phone
+16:16 <@jokey> oh noes
+16:16 <@Caster> :(
+16:16 <@lu_zero> tomorrow he will know for how long hopefully
+16:16 <@musikc|laptop> lu_zero, serious condition or recovering?
+16:16 <@lu_zero> unknown so far =|
+16:17  * musikc|laptop nods
+16:17 <@lu_zero> hm
+16:17 <@musikc|laptop> so crew, not to be callous, with the other two responding by 8/1 is that sufficient?
+16:18 <@lu_zero> musikc|laptop what's the subject?
+16:18 <@Halcy0n> Yes, that's fine.  lu_zero we were discussing when everyone can reply to the userrel thread.
+16:18 <@musikc|laptop> <Halcy0n> So, for item #1:  When does everyone think they can reply to the thread on council with your ideas and concerns?  Is there anything in there that you would like to note as something that needs to be clarified.
+16:18  * jokey has no questions on the thread so vote works for me
+16:18 < jmbsvicetto> musikc|laptop: 01/08/2008 for us non-USians ;)
+16:18 <@musikc|laptop> lu_zero, waiting on dertobi123 and jokey i believe
+16:19 <@musikc|laptop> jmbsvicetto, ya i speak non-us before 9am and after 5pm
+16:19 < jmbsvicetto> musikc|laptop: I had to read that three times to understand what you meant ;)
+16:19 <@musikc|laptop> ;)
+16:19 <@dertobi123> as i said, no need for discussion for me - i'm ready to vote if we want to
+16:19 <@musikc|laptop> jmbsvicetto, just gotta keep you on your toes
+16:19 <@Halcy0n> Alright, so by the next meeting (in 2 weeks) we should be ready to make a decision on that issue, correct?
+16:20 -!- Halcy0n changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Council meeting today - July 24th 2000UTC | agenda: 1) userrel authority (decision by next meeting, council members to post by Aug 1st) 2) coc extent
+16:20 <@jokey> ++
+16:20 <@musikc|laptop> Halcy0n, do we wait two weeks when the remaining two folks said they need no more time or is it best to have them post their views first?
+16:21 < fmccor> Hard to discuss if they don't post.
+16:21 <@Halcy0n> musikc|laptop: we can make that decision before the next meeting if there seems to be outstanding issues that need further discussion.
+16:22 <@jokey> well dertobi123, any questions left or should we just vote?
+16:22 <@dertobi123> 22:20 <@dertobi123> as i said, no need for discussion for me - i'm ready to vote if we want to
+16:22 <@musikc|laptop> fmccor, not much to discuss i suppose as the thread is dead
+16:22 <@Halcy0n> Okay, then we can vote if everyone is ready.
+16:23 < fmccor> Which are you voting on, please?
+16:23 <@Halcy0n> We are still on #1.
+16:25 <@Halcy0n> So, we are voting on this single point: Does userrel have the authority to enforce the CoC on users like devrel does with developers?
+16:25 <@Halcy0n> Everyone here is ready to vote on that?
+16:25 <@Caster> ready
+16:25 <@musikc|laptop> user rel has done bans on users before, this really isnt a new precident (rbrown for example was done for a week)
+16:26  * musikc|laptop is also ready on dberkholz's behalf
+16:26 <@dertobi123> ready
+16:27  * lu_zero is ready as well
+16:28 <@Halcy0n> Okay, then lets vote:
+16:28 <@Halcy0n> Yes
+16:28 <@jokey> Yes
+16:28 <@musikc|laptop> Yes
+16:28 <@Caster> Yes
+16:29 <@lu_zero> yes]
+16:30 <@dertobi123> yes
+16:31 <@Halcy0n> Alright, so #1 has been approved.  Lets move on to #2, extent of CoC enforcement.
+16:31 -!- Halcy0n changed the topic of #gentoo-council to: Council meeting today - July 24th 2000UTC | agenda: 1) userrel authority (approved) 2) coc extent
+16:33 <@Halcy0n> This one definitely needs discussion on the lists so we can come up with some concrete proposals for the questions Donnie posted.  Would this be something everyone is able to comment on by the next meeting and we can check the status to see if everyone is ready to vote?
+16:34 <@jokey> sounds good to me, given discussion is still ongoing there
+16:34 <@lu_zero> fine as well
+16:35 <@musikc|laptop> would be nice, no one has responded to that discussion since my last post
+16:35 < fmccor> May I suggest something as well?
+16:35 <@musikc|laptop> perhaps someone on council could kick it back into discussion
+16:35 <@Halcy0n> musikc|laptop: I'll post something later tonight after I read through the most recent posts.
+16:35 <@Halcy0n> fmccor: ?
+16:36 < fmccor> One problem here is that Code of Conduct as posted is badly out of date (talks of proctors and such), and probably incomplete as well.
+16:37 <@musikc|laptop> fmccor, look up the word proctor
+16:37 <@musikc|laptop> i suspect you read it as a position and not its literal meaning
+16:37 <@Halcy0n> fmccor: this sounds like something that should be brought up in that discussion (if it hasn't been already).  I'd suggest having that conversation on the mailing list though.
+16:37 < fmccor> No, I read it as meant at the time and as implemented.
+16:37 <@musikc|laptop> "an official charged with various duties, esp. with the maintenance of good order."
+16:38 <@musikc|laptop> fmccor, you werent around for  the conversations about the chosen word, it was quite dilberate
+16:39 < fmccor> I remember that we established a proctors project, and now don't have one, and I remember discussions last year about updating it.
+16:39 <@musikc|laptop> fmccor, perhaps before we revise the CoC, we should continue the conversation about to what extent it should be enforced so we could make a single revision instead of one this week and one in two weeks
+16:40 <@Halcy0n> musikc|laptop: agreed.  Revising the CoC will likely be a part of any decision we make.
+16:40 <@jokey> so definitely defer it to ml
+16:40 < jmbsvicetto> fmccor / musikc|laptop: If by extent you include my proposal, as I've stated, it doesn't need to be directly tied to CoC
+16:41 <@dertobi123> jokey: yup
+16:41 < jmbsvicetto> fmccor / musikc|laptop: I see it as the final line for gentoo involvement, so it could be under userrel/devrel policy
+16:42 <@Halcy0n> Okay, so lets have everyone please comment on the CoC thread by next meeting and we will get a status update at that point to see if everyone is ready to vote, or if more discussion needs to take place.
+16:42 < fmccor> jmbsvicetto, More userrel, probably, because as written, your proposal (I think) does not apply to developers?
+16:42 <@Caster> Halcy0n: right
+16:42 <@jokey> ++
+16:42 <@Halcy0n> If everyone agrees to that, then we are done since that was everything on the agenda.
+16:43 <@musikc|laptop> Halcy0n, sounds good. same question as last time. do we know who has already commented and who remains?
+16:43 <@Halcy0n> musikc|laptop: looks like myself and dertobi123 were the only ones to comment.
+16:43 < wolf31o2> if anybody wants any information on the "intent" behind CoC stuff, feel free to ask me... since I was one of the primary people pushing it and was involved in all aspects of its creation, rather than listening to anyone who has only heard things "second hand" and wasn't involved...
+16:44 <@Halcy0n> wolf31o2: good to know.  We may have questions for you if anything comes up in the discussion on the mailinst list then
+16:44 <@musikc|laptop> wolf31o2, not sure. fmccor has mentioned a few times to see christel or kloeri regarding intent, ive advised that you and kingtaco really led it
+16:44 < wolf31o2> I've had fun over the last few days reading other people pushing their own ideas as if they were some kind of golden ticket to the intentions of the people involved, rather than simply *asking* said people
+16:45 < fmccor> I  had thought that last council had revised it or were going to, but I can't find the changes if they ever did.
+16:46 < wolf31o2> musikc|laptop: christel was acting as a secretary... she had no real part in the creation of it other than being present and being the one tasked with writing it and editing it... she did the first... the latter had to be reassigned to someone else because we couldn't track her down to work on it... when we finally did, she was off drinking with somebody (Astinus, I think, actually) and couldn't be bothered to participate
+16:46 <@musikc|laptop> cant that be found in CVS?
+16:46 < wolf31o2> so using her as a reference for something she barely had part of isn't exactly the best method for getting accurate responses
+16:46 < wolf31o2> ;]
+16:46 < igli> ugh
+16:47 <@Halcy0n> Alright, and with that I think we can say this meeting is adjourned :)  Thanks everyone.
+16:47 <@musikc|laptop> thanks for chairing Halcy0n :)