| 1 |
On 16:33 Thu 08 May , Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
> Enforced retirement: After 2.5 hours on the previous topics, people had |
| 3 |
> to go to sleep and jokey's computer broke. Instead of waiting till the |
| 4 |
> next regular meeting, because of its urgency, we scheduled a special |
| 5 |
> session next week at the same time. The appeals will *not* be decided |
| 6 |
> then -- it's about figuring out the validity and the process. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
2 of us have shown up -- amne and me. That's really pathetic, guys. What |
| 9 |
happened? Did the rest of you miss the announcement in the summary? I |
| 10 |
was looking at the IRC log from last week, and here's what I saw |
| 11 |
(relevant parts only): |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
< FlameBook+> I'm fine with the reschedule, as I'm probably going away soon, too |
| 14 |
< dberkholz@> amne, Betelgeuse, FlameBook, solar -- rescheduling to a special session work? |
| 15 |
< dberkholz@> ah, FlameBook already said yes |
| 16 |
<Betelgeuse@> o |
| 17 |
<Betelgeuse@> k |
| 18 |
< dberkholz@> looks like amne went to bed |
| 19 |
< dberkholz@> enough of us agree on that, so let's do it |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
lu_zero said on IRC last night that he was going to be traveling today, |
| 22 |
but nobody's shown up to proxy for him: |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
< lu_zero@> dberkholz today we'll the extended council meeting, isn't it? |
| 25 |
< dberkholz@> i optimistically hope it's not "extended" in the "taking a long time" sense |
| 26 |
< dberkholz@> but the postponed topics from last week, yes |
| 27 |
< lu_zero@> dberkholz again I'll be travelling |
| 28 |
< dberkholz@> lu_zero: oh, did it just come up? |
| 29 |
< lu_zero@> dberkholz pretty much =_= |
| 30 |
< lu_zero@> lately my time-space position is quite random |
| 31 |
< lu_zero@> _Hopefully_ I'll be there |
| 32 |
< lu_zero@> but 4 hours of travel can be extended =_= |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
That means that it's conceivable that if solar (vapier's proxy), vapier |
| 35 |
and jokey didn't check IRC again or read the council summary, they |
| 36 |
could've missed the announcement. I guess I can see how people who are |
| 37 |
at the meeting might not read the summary, because they sat through it. |
| 38 |
I blame myself for not sending a standalone announcement outside of the |
| 39 |
summary. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
tove brought up an interesting point from GLEP 39: |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
If any meeting has less than 50% attendance by council members, a |
| 44 |
new election for all places must be held within a month. The 'one |
| 45 |
year' is then reset from that point. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
musikc questioned whether that was only intended for the regular |
| 48 |
meetings or also irregular ones like this. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Open up the floodgates, folks. What do you think, what should we do? I |
| 51 |
look forward to hearing your advice. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Thanks, |
| 54 |
Donnie |
| 55 |
-- |
| 56 |
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives