#governance | Logs for 2023-08-04

« return
[00:00:23] <kolie> audioguy, I have a pretty good idea how you function.
[00:01:03] <kolie> If NC and matt say I can operate under whats supposed to be then cool.
[00:01:44] <kolie> My problem is I'm bound by the bylaws and what ive been given authority to do in the PBC.
[00:02:21] <kolie> Intent or not - that's what legally i've been attached to for the time being until I've been given otherwise.
[00:02:30] <kolie> I have no problem with giving access to staff the linode or anything else.
[00:02:54] <kolie> I don't have access to give it to the linode. I'm asking the PBC to transfer it to staff.
[00:03:09] <audioguy> The correct word is not giving, it is restoring
[00:03:44] <audioguy> Ok, if you don't have access yourself I can see where you are at.
[00:04:01] <kolie> I Thought I might so I checked and I dont.
[00:04:02] <audioguy> Consoder this encouragement to demand it :-)
[00:04:15] <audioguy> Consider
[00:04:35] <kolie> NC says to transfer it and has pushed back a little on accessing the existing.
[00:05:09] <kolie> I have full access on the staging acct only.
[00:05:17] <audioguy> He has no right to do so.
[00:06:03] <audioguy> You need to have a board vote to force him, and if he still won;t, expel hime fromthe board. Surely MAtt cansee this.
[00:06:15] <audioguy> YOu have a diity to the corporatins too.
[00:06:23] <audioguy> Things are falling apart.
[00:06:28] <audioguy> duty
[00:06:50] <kolie> we have root to everything rn nothing is an emergency but yea im going back and forth with him it wasnt much we didnt talk but maybe one sentence back and forth on it.
[00:06:59] <kolie> I think the linode has other shit in it is the issue.
[00:07:01] <kolie> idk for sure.
[00:08:15] <audioguy> I have the orignal list of all the linode passwords and login, and all the original machines root passwords (as we all did). If you simply changed them back we woldhave full access.
[00:08:44] <kolie> Ok I have root one every machine. Only thing I don't control is linode itself.
[00:08:53] <kolie> So if you don't have root somewhere we can resolve that asap.
[00:09:18] <audioguy> Ok, currently I do not have root pass for three of the machines.
[00:09:38] <kolie> yea which?
[00:09:56] <audioguy> looka up my notes, hang on a sec...
[00:11:06] <audioguy> missing helium, fluorine, beryllium
[00:11:19] <kolie> are you in sysop
[00:11:24] <kolie> you can sudo on bery if you are.
[00:11:50] <kolie> same on helium afaik.
[00:12:24] <audioguy> No, I will join
[00:12:26] <kolie> yea your listed in sysops
[00:12:35] <kolie> I checked you have group 2501.
[00:12:49] <audioguy> I just tried again and worked, so you must have fixed that
[00:12:54] <kolie> %sysops ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL
[00:12:54] <kolie>
[00:13:02] <kolie> I didn't change it but it shows your listed.
[00:13:22] <audioguy> WAsn't sure what you meant
[00:13:55] <audioguy> we should move this to the more private place
[00:13:55] <kolie> does that work for the other two as well?
[00:13:59] <kolie> ok cool.
[03:10:02] -!- mrpg has quit [Quit: mrpg]
[17:30:44] -!- halibut has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
[17:34:28] -!- halibut [halibut!~halibut@CanHazVHOST/halibut] has joined #governance
[18:58:50] <Deucalion> I can ssh bery, can kinit, can't use sudo. I'm in groups =
[18:58:57] <Deucalion> firefighters dev_team ircops
[18:59:46] <Deucalion> Wrong channel :D
[20:16:33] <janrinok> now on my laptop
[20:20:12] -!- halibut has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
[20:20:28] -!- halibut [halibut!~halibut@CanHazVHOST/halibut] has joined #governance
[20:23:50] * Deucalion puts more logs on the fire - don't get too close halibut, you may start to smell delicious
[20:27:29] <Fnord666> Just a reminder that Loggie is in the chat so anything said here is publicly available
[20:27:56] <janrinok> thx I will try to restrain myself
[20:28:20] Deucalion changed topic of #governance to: SoylentNews Governance Committee - Meeting Friday 4th August 20:30 UTC
[20:28:47] <kolie> Alright we are just around the specified time. I'll call the meeting to order of the governance committee.
[20:29:03] <janrinok> janrinok is now safely tucked up in bed with his laptop
[20:29:12] <kolie> First I'd like to establish who is present from the governance committee at this time. Please just respond here.
[20:29:16] <Deucalion> Current committee members are janrinok, audioguy, bytram cmn32480, deucalion, fnord666, mechanicjay, requerdanos
[20:29:24] <Fnord666> present
[20:29:27] <requerdanos> Here.
[20:29:28] * Fnord666 is present
[20:29:33] <Deucalion> present
[20:29:33] <janrinok> present
[20:29:41] <Deucalion> kolie - do you count as a member?
[20:29:57] <kolie> I do.
[20:30:04] <Deucalion> Current committee members are janrinok, audioguy, bytram cmn32480, deucalion, fnord666, mechanicjay, requerdanos, kolie
[20:30:28] <kolie> Absent I have audioguy and bytram and mechanicjay.
[20:30:35] <requerdanos> by my count we have 5/9 = majority present
[20:30:45] <kolie> It's now 1:30 and we do have a quorom present.
[20:31:09] <kolie> First order of business - I'd like to establish who will be acting as secretary for the committee.
[20:31:29] <janrinok> we might have a quorum but not the people who know most about the subject
[20:31:35] <kolie> Responsible for keeping the minutes and other agenda records. Is there any volunteers?
[20:31:43] <janrinok> nope
[20:32:14] <kolie> Ok noted.
[20:32:24] <requerdanos> if what I did for the board meeting would suffice, then I could do it in that style
[20:32:49] <kolie> I feel that it is adequate as long as it captures the pertinent details and we can circulate to the group afterwords for sign off.
[20:33:16] <Deucalion> I think agenda and minutes should be published on a new section of the public wiki
[20:33:37] <Deucalion> Ideally, agenda ahead of the meeting in future
[20:33:39] <kolie> I agree to both requerdanos and the minute publication - we also have full logs of this channel. Are we all good with that?
[20:33:47] <Fnord666> That sounds reasonable.
[20:33:53] <janrinok> I concur
[20:34:22] <kolie> Ok great. Requerdanos will be secretary and publishing to the wiki.
[20:34:27] <Deucalion> requerdanos, are you volunteering to minute this one meeting or to volunteering ti act as Sec going forward?
[20:34:55] <kolie> I ask if you can't make a meeting, to pass the duty on to someone who will be, or at the very least give a heads up so we can do so without delay.
[20:34:57] <requerdanos> I can be secretary going forward if no one else wants it. someone's got to do it.
[20:35:07] <Deucalion> Thanks requerdanos
[20:35:46] <requerdanos> I don't understand "pass the duty (of making a meeting) on to someone." to whom?
[20:36:16] <kolie> A volunteer.
[20:36:19] <janrinok> if you can;t be there - joe somebody else with the task
[20:36:21] <requerdanos> oh, secretary duty, sure, I will make sure it's covered
[20:36:26] <kolie> Thanks.
[20:36:29] <Fnord666> Someone who will be or is in the meeting in question.
[20:36:43] <Fnord666> and thanks.
[20:36:59] <Deucalion> I think between us if the Sec is a no show we can volunteer a temp for the day
[20:37:11] <kolie> Deucalion, that would be typical yes.
[20:37:34] <kolie> So I want to clarify the objective of this committee. There is a general understanding from the PBC that the bylaws need an update, the board needs a replacement, etc. They are eager to do so but that was understanded to take the form of a new entity being formed with said bylaws and board creation.
[20:38:29] <kolie> I have talked about certain discussion with regards to gutting the current entity and altering in place.
[20:39:05] <kolie> That path is of high resistance and I don't recommend proceeding as such - I think all the outcomes everyone is looking for are in the direction we have set forth on the committee's creation.
[20:39:12] <janrinok> can I ask a relevant question?
[20:39:16] <kolie> Go ahead.
[20:39:31] <janrinok> who pays for the creation of the new entity.
[20:39:59] <kolie> We could certainly discuss the details of which - I believe using the existing funds would be sufficient, the PBC essentially paying for its next iteration.
[20:40:17] <janrinok> does the existing Board agree to that?
[20:40:42] <kolie> The existing board wants a functioning SN with community governance - they see the PBC as a vessel for the group so yes I believe that's entirely inline with it.
[20:41:08] <janrinok> I know that you do - does the existing Board agree to that?
[20:41:30] <Fnord666> I would expect that to be a part of the proposal that this committee would draft and present to the board.
[20:41:31] <kolie> I can get explicit confirmation - I believe it's under my power as the COO to fund that.
[20:41:58] <requerdanos> as to purpose of committee I believe it will be easiest to do what the board voted, which is to explore forming a new entity and transferring to it.
[20:42:00] <janrinok> please do so
[20:42:04] <Fnord666> But hey, if we can get explicit approval ahead of time that would be great too.
[20:42:28] <janrinok> I don't want any last minute surprises
[20:42:33] <kolie> Alright moving on any thing else on that point?
[20:42:47] <Fnord666> Obviously that would be limited by the assets available to the PBC at the time at a max.
[20:43:23] <janrinok> legal fees might not be cheap
[20:44:01] <kolie> Good jan?
[20:44:02] <Fnord666> We'll have to burn that bridge when we get to it. It will be dependent on the type of legal entity for instance.
[20:44:10] <janrinok> that is all from me for the moment thx
[20:44:36] <Deucalion> Q
[20:44:44] <kolie> Deucalion, go ahead
[20:45:22] <Deucalion> Has matt_ made any indication as to his wish to stay / leave / non-committal?
[20:45:44] * mechanicjay in meetings, following as I can
[20:45:49] <kolie> matt_ has said that he is entirely fine vacating his board/shares. I'm not sure about his willingness to persists beyond that or desire.
[20:46:17] <kolie> I've noted the mechanicjay is here.
[20:46:54] <kolie> Deucalion, I recommend you reach out to him directly or I can if we have any specific questions - good?
[20:47:43] <Deucalion> Personally I think we should sound him out on that. He has always been a very competent behind the curtain - just run the corp affairs benefit IME. No idea how others have found him, but he always replied very promptly and took care of matters.
[20:48:12] <janrinok> i would like to keep him if he is willing
[20:48:15] <Fnord666> He is the current Treasurer, correct?
[20:48:20] <janrinok> yes
[20:48:38] <kolie> Are we proposing his current involvement in the governance committee or just as a potential board elect come the changes?
[20:48:42] <mechanicjay> I would like to keep him as well, though I have concerns about his only making an hour available for the Board meeting the other day when there was kind of a lot to discuss.
[20:49:08] <Deucalion> mechanicjay, it was kinda short notice and matt_ is mostly hands off with SN
[20:49:20] <kolie> He let me know it was a hard hour long in advance.
[20:49:42] <janrinok> well we didn't know until the meeting started
[20:50:12] <Deucalion> I will drop him a mail and ask if he wishes to divulge his feelings. kolie, you may have his ear too.
[20:50:45] <kolie> I feel that it is better coming from your side - but I can provide persuasion to our benefit if needed.
[20:50:55] <kolie> He's a good dude I like him
[20:51:09] <requerdanos> Do members present agree that the objective of the committee is to form a new entity (for which the PBC should pay), as opposed to rehabilitating the PBC itself? I ask for recordkeeping purposes
[20:51:11] <janrinok> I don't think that he can act as the treasurer for both entities simultaneously - but I will leave that for others to confirm
[20:51:12] <Fnord666> As part of out proposal we will need a Treasurer/CFO so it would be good to know his desires on that.
[20:51:16] <Deucalion> My last couple of mails to both NC and matt_ have gone unanswered. Probably due to everything being up in the air. But I shall try again
[20:51:48] <kolie> Ok forward them to me as well, cc, I can reply back to prod them.
[20:52:21] <Deucalion> What's your email kolie - not sure I have it
[20:52:30] <kolie> Point of order - let's move that we understand the object of the committee.
[20:52:35] <kolie> justin.ennen@ennwise.com
[20:52:53] <kolie> Any second?
[20:52:57] <janrinok> seconded
[20:53:08] <kolie> Ok aye from me.
[20:53:10] <Deucalion> Sure
[20:53:12] <requerdanos> aye
[20:53:14] <Fnord666> aye
[20:53:15] <janrinok> aye
[20:53:18] <Deucalion> Do we have an agenda?
[20:53:25] <mechanicjay> Aye
[20:53:35] <kolie> Motion passes.
[20:53:38] <kolie> No. Next order of businsess is does anyone have items for the agenda.
[20:54:06] <kolie> I realize this is our first meeting - we should prepare such in advanced and schedule the next meeting.
[20:54:12] <Deucalion> Next meeting date. Or would that be A.O.B.?
[20:54:21] <janrinok> AOB usually
[20:54:26] <Deucalion> sorry
[20:54:29] <kolie> Sorry not good with letters.
[20:54:37] <Deucalion> any other business
[20:54:38] <janrinok> any other business
[20:54:47] <Deucalion> comes after agenda items
[20:54:51] <Fnord666> We need to discuss possible types of entity to be formed.
[20:54:56] <requerdanos> On that note, I'd like to point out that there was no notice to the community of this meeting and scant notice to its members, and ask that these things be taken rather more formally in the futurte
[20:55:12] <janrinok> good point
[20:55:19] <Fnord666> Whether that's now or the next mtg
[20:55:27] <kolie> Ok so motion to have a formal announcement for any scheduled committee meeteings.
[20:55:33] <Deucalion> Agreed requerdanos - propose we keep this meeting short and schedule the next and publish it and its agenda properly
[20:55:57] <janrinok> I agree with Deucalion
[20:56:19] <kolie> Thats essentially the plan here - and maybe some items to discuss and flesh out in chat,
[20:56:28] <requerdanos> discussion if I may, what does formal announcement look like?
[20:56:47] <Fnord666> With it being a public channel and meetings announced, are we planning on only allowing voice to members of the committee and voice given by the chair to others as needed?
[20:56:50] <kolie> Post when we decide the meeting date, and perhaps the day before with agenda on meta.
[20:56:53] <janrinok> A meta with a minimum of x days notice?
[20:57:06] <Fnord666> ^^^^
[20:57:14] <janrinok> Agenda at least 1 day in advance
[20:57:22] <Deucalion> Plus topic here to contain next meeting date.
[20:57:50] <Fnord666> Next meeting date will also be a part of the minutes I expect.
[20:58:01] <kolie> So what's the proposal here, someone care to word that?
[20:58:11] <Fnord666> And update the meta post after the meeting with a link to the meeting minutes?
[20:58:18] <Deucalion> Fnord666, we could certainly set this channel moderated for meetings and take community input during A.O.B I;d have thought
[20:58:33] <kolie> I Think we should leave the date to be determine in #governance over the next day or so - to make sure the members who arent here are good with it.
[20:58:52] <kolie> Unless everyone agreed to the standing 1:30 time.
[20:59:09] <janrinok> That future meetings be promulgated with at least 4 days notice via a meta and the agenda published at least 24 hours before the meeting is scheduled to begin
[20:59:23] <Deucalion> christ - use a TZ people understand. UTC is a good starting point
[20:59:29] <kolie> 2030 utc yea.
[20:59:40] <kolie> So I move and second jans: That future meetings be promulgated with at least 4 days notice via a meta and the agenda published at least 24 hours before the meeting is scheduled to begin
[20:59:40] <janrinok> I am happy with that
[21:00:01] <Deucalion> aye
[21:00:06] <Fnord666> aye
[21:00:11] <janrinok> aye
[21:00:14] <requerdanos> aye
[21:00:21] <kolie> aye from me, we are good.
[21:00:28] <janrinok> the agenda can be as a comment in the Meta
[21:00:45] <Fnord666> The meta should include a link to the previous minutes?
[21:00:49] <janrinok> Logged in Users only
[21:01:26] <kolie> Ok great.
[21:01:27] <Deucalion> second janrinok on irc auth'd
[21:01:39] <kolie> That's fine we don't need to vote on that.
[21:02:05] <Fnord666> I think Jan meant on the meta post but I could be mistaken.
[21:02:15] <kolie> I believe he did, but we also discussed the IRC
[21:02:16] <janrinok> both - makes sense
[21:02:17] <Deucalion> oops
[21:02:21] <kolie> And how to handle the populace in here.
[21:02:27] <kolie> I imagine set it up like we did #meeting.
[21:02:40] <kolie> All good on that point?
[21:02:44] <Fnord666> yes
[21:02:45] <janrinok> if you are happy to manage it
[21:03:02] <kolie> I am more than pleased to serve this committee.
[21:03:13] <kolie> Any other agenda for the committee to consider before we move on
[21:03:51] <kolie> crickets allright.
[21:04:01] <requerdanos> who is the most knowledgeable on what type of entity we should pursue
[21:04:03] <janrinok> nothing from me
[21:04:15] <kolie> So a great question here is - what type of entity is being formed.
[21:04:35] <kolie> We won't solve that here, but we could address how to approach that and set it for the next meeting as well and to discuss this week.
[21:04:41] <Fnord666> Does anyone here have experience with PBCs v. NPCs?
[21:04:45] <janrinok> mech_jay and audioguy I think - but they might not agree. Separatrix might be useful.
[21:04:47] <Deucalion> Honestly - I'd plumb the vast depths of Matt Angel's knowledge on corp stuff
[21:05:09] <kolie> janrinok has a good point of someone with direct involvement in a volunteer based organization.
[21:05:44] <kolie> I've setup NFP corps in the past.
[21:05:50] * Deucalion has no real knowledge of US corps or associated law etc
[21:05:55] <janrinok> but with all due respect to him it should be a non-voting participation
[21:06:10] * janrinok separatrix
[21:06:26] <kolie> He can advise the committee without voting and has said he'd be willing as such.
[21:06:28] <Deucalion> Does the new / revised entity need to US based?
[21:06:34] <mechanicjay> All I know of NFPs are being employed by various ones since ~2003
[21:06:48] <kolie> It doesn't but there are certain advantages with the safe harbor laws and free speech.
[21:07:04] <requerdanos> I am on the board of a NC NFP but that just tells me what we have to do in NC.
[21:07:04] <mechanicjay> That doesn't make me an expert, but I do have some innate understand of how they can practically function.
[21:07:09] <Deucalion> Shame about the privacy :D
[21:08:01] <kolie> The specifics about the organizational entity are mainly going to relate to who can participate in it legally - not necessarily under its rule but as officers of the corporation - and how that vehicle is used for tax and liability purposes.
[21:08:29] <kolie> The bylaws are going to specify how it operates at a high level organizationally - and provide legal recourse for deviation.
[21:08:42] <kolie> We can fit our bylaws or intent into many structures.
[21:08:46] <janrinok> I have nothing to add on this subject
[21:09:04] <kolie> It's something to be discussed at length at another time.
[21:09:14] <requerdanos> it sounds like--all i have heard mentioned--is we are generally tending towards a not for profit corporation
[21:09:30] <kolie> Does the committee wish to vote or propose any action on this topic?
[21:09:38] <mechanicjay> requerdanos: That is my understanding, and my desire.
[21:09:53] <kolie> I am leaning towards setting up in a NFP and exploring that in detail.
[21:10:05] <janrinok> I would support this
[21:10:12] <kolie> How are we going to come to that decision?
[21:10:49] <requerdanos> separatrix seems to have posted a template of bylaws for a not for profit which might be a good place to start
[21:11:00] <janrinok> I suggest that we look at NFP as a primary thrust, but if others have better suggestions then let them run with them if they wish to do so.
[21:11:04] <requerdanos> once we have an entity conceptually formed we can vote it up or down
[21:11:13] <kolie> Is there someone we want to take lead on that?
[21:11:21] <janrinok> Only this committee can decide the final outcome
[21:11:37] <Fnord666> I was not involved in the business part of the early formation of SoylentNews but I thought they chose a PBC because it was much simpler than an NFP. Is that correct?
[21:12:01] <kolie> It was easy for them to do given their current knowledge and bought time to delay doing what they really wanted but didn't understand.
[21:12:02] <mechanicjay> Fnord666: that was the claim. An epic can kick.
[21:12:19] <janrinok> FNord, I have heard the same but that doesn't mean it is true today
[21:12:20] <Deucalion> Yes. NFP was the aim but hurdles too high, PBC was the outcome. At least that is how it was relayed.
[21:12:35] <Fnord666> Thanks and agreed re the difficultys
[21:12:50] <kolie> PBC's are interesting and seperate the interest of the corporation from empowering shareholders - to being beholden to its BENEFIT in its mission statement.
[21:13:25] <kolie> Its how the board can claw back shareholders who don't act in the interest of the PBC.
[21:13:45] <kolie> Most corps are beholden to shareholder interest.
[21:13:48] <janrinok> what we should do is look at what we actually do, and find the best match IMO
[21:13:51] <kolie> Yeop.
[21:14:04] <kolie> We have ideas on what might fit - the pros and cons need to be sorted for our specific intent.
[21:14:25] -!- aristarchus [aristarchus!~aristarch@138.199.qu.zis] has joined #governance
[21:14:26] <kolie> Do we want to make any specific rulings on this discussion or set this matter aside?
[21:14:27] <mechanicjay> I'm not saying the PCB couldn't work, but not leaning into it was the big fail. Other big fail was not actually pursuing the NFP as intended.
[21:14:37] -!- mode/#governance [+r #governance] by kolie
[21:15:19] <kolie> Good point mechanicjay.
[21:15:33] <janrinok> without expert advice I cannot make a decision. If we are not experts then we need somebody who knows more than we do
[21:15:48] <requerdanos> as far as action, if anyone here is in communication with separatrix, they might volunteer to make contact and see what they can come up with
[21:15:54] <kolie> I can reach out to him.
[21:15:57] <janrinok> kolie has
[21:15:58] <kolie> I can call him right now if you'd like.
[21:16:12] * Bytram waves hand and notices he has too much backscroll. skips all backscroll and is now at current time, hoping that somebody can get me up to date!
[21:16:19] <janrinok> not required for today - but for the future certainly
[21:16:56] <kolie> I texted him asking if he's willing to advise this committee in the future.
[21:17:06] <mechanicjay> Not that I'm volunteering him, but I think audioguy has a lot to offer in this area as well.
[21:17:07] <janrinok> But at the end of the day we need to be sure that the advice is good
[21:17:10] <kolie> Any specific points you'd like to relay?
[21:17:14] <Bytram> janrinok: how long ago did the meeting start?
[21:17:24] <janrinok> 45 minutes
[21:17:48] <Bytram> THVM!
[21:17:53] <janrinok> just sit back and listen unless you have a point you need to make
[21:18:16] -!- mode/#governance [+o Bytram] by Deucalion
[21:18:20] <Fnord666> Kolie - The specific discussion would be the possible types of business entities that might suit our needs and the pros/cons of each.
[21:18:22] -!- mode/#governance [+o cmn32480] by Deucalion
[21:18:27] <kolie> Ok so do we want to table this or motion for some action?
[21:18:34] -!- mode/#governance [+o audioguy] by Deucalion
[21:18:52] <kolie> Bytram, noting your late particpation.
[21:19:16] <Fnord666> I'm assuming that so far we are talking about US business entities. Do we have any resources for the same sort of domain knowledge from other locales?
[21:19:21] <Bytram> kolie: I left a bunch of comments in #chillax -- please see them somtime toon
[21:19:27] <janrinok> Can I suggest an action on kolie to contact separatrix and seek his participation, 2, brief separatrix on what we are looking for at the next meeting
[21:20:00] <requerdanos> kolie has agreed to contact separatrix, I don't think we need to vote on that?
[21:20:24] <janrinok> If kolie agrees, I propose an action on kolie,,,,,,,, as above
[21:20:31] <kolie> I will do so.
[21:20:35] <kolie> It doesn't require a vote.
[21:20:46] <janrinok> it needs to be recorded though
[21:20:50] <kolie> I can relay whatever we'd like just note it - I suggested you'd like him to advise us.
[21:20:58] <kolie> He said yes.
[21:21:03] <requerdanos> I've got it under "discussion"
[21:21:10] <janrinok> requerdanos, thx
[21:21:27] <Fnord666> Hopefully audioguy is willing to provide his insight as well.
[21:21:32] <kolie> Ok - any other things we'd like to set as action items re this discussion or table it?
[21:22:38] <Fnord666> Do we want to also query the community at large in the meta to see if there are any experts willing to advise us?
[21:23:02] <kolie> I think it would be wise to query the community on this - at the very least to show we are open.
[21:23:07] <janrinok> willing to prove their expertise or will any AC do?
[21:23:13] <kolie> We may get some pro bono law out of it.
[21:23:47] <kolie> I don't think we'd let out selves get taken for a piss - but we'd have to see what comes of it.
[21:24:04] <janrinok> OK
[21:24:12] <aristarchus> OK
[21:24:24] <kolie> ari please remain silent for the meeting.
[21:25:05] <kolie> Any other points of business then?
[21:25:21] <janrinok> nothing more from me
[21:25:34] <Fnord666> Nothing from me
[21:25:42] <kolie> Let's discuss potential next meeting points, tbd in this channel as people review the scroll.
[21:26:47] <kolie> 2030 any day is good for me, but I will defer to everyone involved to make this as convienient and inclusive as possible. We can do alternating EU/US times or whatever we'd like to make sure this goes well and has the best turnout.
[21:26:58] <janrinok> We are stil talking in vague terms. We need to identify a firm plan and start along that path to achieve it
[21:27:30] <kolie> We need someone to own the task of figuring out the entities and structure.
[21:27:51] <janrinok> does it have to be a working day - there will always be some who cannot be here. But I understand the reluctance to spoil weekends
[21:27:52] <kolie> Or several people agree to compare notes and do the leg work there.
[21:28:32] <janrinok> well choose one of those options and make sure that we all know that is what we are doing
[21:28:43] <kolie> Let's do this - do we know how we want the organization to function, roughly?
[21:29:08] <kolie> Perhaps we figure that out, and then determine, which vehicle fits that best and it's operations.
[21:29:15] <janrinok> Yes we do - I'm not sure that you are thinking along the same lines though. No offence intended
[21:29:25] <kolie> I'm not thinking anything.
[21:29:31] <Bytram> I suggest collecting all the discussion topics tn one place (nere) and start from *that*
[21:29:36] <kolie> I'm getting consensus and going for that
[21:30:10] <janrinok> we used to have a management group of Deucalion and Team Leaders. They managed all the day-to-day running of the site
[21:30:29] Deucalion changed topic of #governance to: SoylentNews Governance Committee - Meeting In Progress | This channel IS logged and publicly displayed here https://logs.sylnt.us
[21:30:41] <janrinok> It worked, and the various groups could get on with their particular tasks
[21:30:51] <kolie> Ok so we need to draft that up and formalize it.
[21:31:12] <janrinok> It is in the existing documentation.
[21:31:42] <kolie> Does anyone here wish to prepare a rough draft of the existing material for review and consideration going forward?
[21:32:09] <janrinok> I will accept that task
[21:32:33] <kolie> Ok noted.
[21:33:04] <kolie> Anything else to consider before we call it?
[21:33:23] <Deucalion> I need to clarify the whole "CEO" thing. As far as I was concerned it was just seat warming as NC was needing to step away at the time for reasons I forget after all these years and "someone" had to be CEO within the PBC or somesuch. I was volunteered.
[21:33:50] <Deucalion> It was never CEO says do X Y Z
[21:33:57] <janrinok> I wasn;t suggesting that you had to have the same role - just that the MG worked from what I could see
[21:34:16] <janrinok> we always worked with discussion and agreement
[21:34:50] <janrinok> Any Board that we have only provides direction
[21:35:01] <Deucalion> I only waded in when asked to break the occasional - someone make a damn choice scenario
[21:35:07] <audioguy> Sorry,, sometimes when you try toforce yor schedule to body just rebels.
[21:35:42] <audioguy> I judt read the scollback
[21:35:49] <kolie> I move to end the meeting - I think we've handled all the official business here.
[21:35:51] <Deucalion> janrinok, correct, Board gives direction, executives within the corp execute...
[21:36:13] <mechanicjay> I move to let audioguy add comments based on scrollback before calling it.
[21:36:18] <Deucalion> agree
[21:36:26] <Fnord666> audioguy - anything to add before adjourning?
[21:36:30] <audioguy> Lets see,talk for 5 minutes, ask for a vote on wherther pbc or new entitity, THEN discuss it? I smell a rat.
[21:37:04] <audioguy> I thought we were tasked with 'exploring' that?
[21:37:26] <Deucalion> No decisions have been made or voting done :/
[21:38:39] <kolie> Do we have a specific proposal or motion to discuss?
[21:39:12] <Deucalion> mechanicjay, made a motion
[21:39:14] <mechanicjay> right the charge of this committee as I understand it is to present a plan forward to current board. It's been made clear that the board isn't keen on patching the current org. So it doesn't seem prudent to spend a lot of time on that front.
[21:39:27] <audioguy> Sorry eys still blurry, Thought saw a vote on that, reading too fast.
[21:39:28] <kolie> Audioguy can talk hes on the committee.
[21:39:50] <Deucalion> ?
[21:39:56] <kolie> I don't know that there is any benefit to keeping the PBC around - and there is a lot of downside.
[21:40:44] <kolie> I don't know why we would consider it when the board/share holders have already said they are fine with newcorp.
[21:40:44] <audioguy> I want ro know WHT the board is so seton creating a new entity instead of just handing over control.
[21:40:58] <kolie> They don't want the liability from the changes.
[21:41:04] <audioguy> I have yet to hear a good reason.
[21:41:05] <kolie> A new entity shields them completely.
[21:41:24] <audioguy> If they give up theor stol and their positions they will hae no liability.
[21:41:28] <janrinok> because they don't have to do anything
[21:42:00] <Fnord666> And shields the new entity from any liability they might have entered into, correct?
[21:42:17] <kolie> Well you aren't there lawyer so that's what they are saying and I can't articulate specifically what the fear is but I can say that from a liability stand point - a new seperate entity is ideal.
[21:42:21] <audioguy> Of which they claim thewre is NONE so what S the problem?
[21:42:25] <kolie> Fnord666, it goes both ways.
[21:42:39] <Fnord666> thanks.
[21:42:52] <audioguy> Fine, lets hear their lawyers anyalisis.
[21:42:54] <kolie> It's possible that members of new org find/have/create some issue relating to the past.
[21:42:56] <mechanicjay> Yeah, I like it from the point "It goes both ways" It shield SN from any future claim one of the current owners may have
[21:43:09] <kolie> They want to close it out both ways.
[21:43:25] <kolie> It's the cleanest, clearest, final seperation I can think of.
[21:43:30] <mechanicjay> *or their decedents -- which is a shitshow which played out many times
[21:43:31] <kolie> I can't think of anything better tons of positive there.
[21:43:31] <requerdanos> I personally would like to see a new entity formed as the path of least resistance out of the current situation.
[21:43:47] <kolie> Shall we vote on it or leave it as a gentlemans discussion?
[21:44:19] <janrinok> What exactly is the proposal that we are voting on?
[21:44:30] <kolie> I'm just keeping it going does anyone have a propsal?
[21:44:30] <audioguy> I want the bopard to answer my questions.
[21:44:31] <janrinok> spell it out
[21:44:41] <kolie> audioguy, send me your questions - I will submit them verbatim to the board.
[21:45:14] <audioguy> For one things, if we are going to form a new entity, I see no reasn to do itunder thier direction.
[21:45:57] <janrinok> I would like our costs to be met by the existing funds
[21:46:07] <kolie> Do it under any direction you like, I will run it by them.
[21:46:19] <audioguy> In any case I wantt o see solid arguments why we cannot just take over the PBC, it is faster than trying to make a new emtity, and especially a NFP.
[21:46:27] <kolie> Whatever you do - and prepare - I will submit.
[21:46:39] <kolie> We've given several pros of not taking over the PBC.
[21:46:44] <kolie> What's the benefit of keeping it?
[21:47:02] <kolie> Submitting corporate papers doesn't take long.
[21:47:02] <janrinok> kolie - you asked if we should vote - pse spell out what the vote is agreeing to.
[21:47:14] <kolie> I was asking if anyone had a proposal to vote on.
[21:47:18] <kolie> I don't.
[21:47:34] <kolie> https://pasteboard.co
[21:47:41] <requerdanos> audioguy, why not put together something about what it would look like to keep the PBC, and we will also keep exploring creating a NFP, and the committee can vote on what to choose when the time comes?
[21:47:45] * mechanicjay has to leave for another meeting in about 3 minutes
[21:47:48] <kolie> The PBC doesn't wish to assumbe the liabilities associated with the changes.
[21:47:50] <kolie> That's their answer.
[21:47:53] <audioguy> The benefits of keeping it are it resolves the situaton much faster.
[21:48:15] <kolie> We are done with official business, let's do this in chat and agenda for the next meeting. motion to end the meeting.
[21:48:21] <audioguy> And we can makes decisions abut changing the form of a new corp later.
[21:48:30] <janrinok> There are actions on kolie (2) and janrinok (1). Deucalion and kolie will also tThere are actions on kolie (2) and janrinok (1). Deucalion and kolie will also find out Matt_'s intentions too. find out Matt_'s intentions too.
[21:48:46] <audioguy> Who gave you the authority to decide we are done?
[21:48:52] <janrinok> kbd errors - sry
[21:48:53] <kolie> I'm putting it to vote.
[21:49:04] <kolie> Do you have an item for official discussion?
[21:49:22] <mechanicjay> If the board is hostile to that course of action, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to pursue it. If we can take the time now to spin up the corporate structure we've always wanted, its a bit win.
[21:49:38] <audioguy> I want to continue the present discussion a bit longer
[21:50:00] <kolie> Ok noted though I feel this can be in here and not tie people up officially till we close out.
[21:50:20] <kolie> No second so let's talk.
[21:50:33] * mechanicjay is leaving now due to a prior commitment
[21:50:34] <Bytram> HEY!!! It is difficult for me to read, made MUCH WORSE with types! Please correct spelling mistakes before you press enter!
[21:50:40] <audioguy> If we are going to create anew structure, again, I see no reasn to do it under their control. Lets just go off and do it.
[21:50:54] <Bytram> stroke--
[21:51:43] <audioguy> I still have yet to hear a good argument for not keeping the pbc until this is over. You talked about lawyers? Have they lawyered up? I wa hoping to avoind that.
[21:51:55] <kolie> Motion that you go off and do whatever and then submit to me for approval by the current PBC.
[21:52:29] <kolie> Any seconds?
[21:52:31] <janrinok> kolie - sorry, but why do we have to go through you?
[21:52:38] <kolie> You don't.
[21:52:40] <audioguy> Exactly
[21:52:43] <Deucalion> Not seconded
[21:52:53] <kolie> The board has made it a part of the organisational of the PBC and has agreed to this path.
[21:53:09] <kolie> They are making it hard to go back on the route.
[21:53:12] <Deucalion> How so and where?
[21:53:14] <janrinok> kolie - we do things by agreement. Not by being told what to do. Please change that attitude
[21:53:18] <kolie> You can do whatever - this isnt led by me or them.
[21:53:23] <audioguy> WE were to explore this. Our recommendation may be different.
[21:53:26] <kolie> I'm just gathering consensus.
[21:53:33] <kolie> Right.
[21:53:39] <kolie> Explore it.
[21:53:53] <requerdanos> audioguy, what is the summary of your concernns? I am having trouble following it exactly. I ask for the record.
[21:54:03] <kolie> janrinok, I haven't told anyone what to do afaik.
[21:54:16] <Deucalion> Well kolie, you cant't say " this isnt led by me or them " right after " then submit to me for approval by the current PBC. " --- come on now, consistency
[21:54:24] <audioguy> OK, my concerns.
[21:54:28] <janrinok> "submit it to me" is a direct command
[21:54:33] <kolie> Well the committee was formed to give them a propsal.
[21:54:48] <audioguy> 1. Setting up a NFP will be much more complex because of the tax business.
[21:55:15] <kolie> Submit it to me acting as chair of the committee for their consideration - its not a command just a proposal.
[21:55:23] <audioguy> 2. I see not reason if people are negotiating in good faith there wouldbe a need to lawyer up
[21:55:37] <janrinok> I would love NC to simply step down - but I don't see him doing that for some strange reason. He wants to go but he is the only persons stopping it.
[21:55:41] <audioguy> 3. It looks like a delaying tactice.
[21:55:45] <kolie> They don't want the liability - ambigious liability.
[21:55:56] <audioguy> 4. The board is not engaing with us in discussion.
[21:55:57] <kolie> I certainly understand their viewpoint.
[21:56:23] <janrinok> If we move forward, do we create another PBC (easier) or a NFP?
[21:57:12] <audioguy> 5. It is still not clea WHY they are SO determined to keep control of the PBC. We could strart a new org and they could just decide to not do what they said they would do.
[21:57:36] <kolie> You'd have to anyways if you can't come to an agreement with them.
[21:57:37] <audioguy> 6. It FEELS like something is being hiddn from us.
[21:57:53] <janrinok> They will not give us what already exists - although it would greatly simplify everything. We don't know why - but that is their position.
[21:58:30] <kolie> They will give you everything the PBC holds and owns. They don't want the legal entanglement of all the changes in a corp they are tied to with liability as such.
[21:58:43] <janrinok> So - if they will not discuss things with us, which path do we take?
[21:58:48] <kolie> I think it's being vastly overstate and overcomplicated with this blanket suspicion.
[21:58:52] <requerdanos> ok, thanks. All noted.
[21:59:08] <audioguy> I can be convincec - but I need to hear actual concrete reasons why the board cannot simply hand over control by giving back their share and resiging, Theplan kolie and I discussed - all together in a pakage 1 vote package - would work.
[21:59:26] <kolie> audioguy, do you move we submit that to the board?
[21:59:28] <audioguy> If they don;t thinks so I want to hear very good reasons why.
[21:59:50] <audioguy> We are still discussing.
[22:00:08] <audioguy> Other may have questions.
[22:00:13] <audioguy> Others
[22:00:16] <janrinok> NC could step down tomorrow for ill health reasons, and we could move forward with what we have, changing things as we do so.
[22:00:36] <audioguy> Its largely a matter of trust.
[22:01:02] <kolie> Did you see the email I posted from matt earlier?
[22:01:08] <janrinok> But they have said that they will not do that
[22:01:11] <audioguy> I have no plans to sue anybody. I'd just as soon drop this now and we go off andrestart with a new name.
[22:01:27] <kolie> just because you dont doesn't mean there isnt liability otherwise.
[22:01:28] <audioguy> Than deal with that level of nonsense.
[22:01:46] <audioguy> Fine . Exactly WHAT?
[22:02:00] <kolie> Well, any claims made by any third party against the pbc.
[22:02:21] <audioguy> Are they afreadwe are going to sie them? Wecan put a clause inour agreement that makes that inoperable.
[22:02:25] <audioguy> sue
[22:02:55] <audioguy> But we are told there AREno third party claims. Which is the truth?
[22:03:03] <kolie> users of the site?
[22:03:14] <kolie> Any person which the PBC may have harmed.
[22:03:21] <kolie> Anyone making any claim against the PBC ever.
[22:03:35] <kolie> You go to mcdonalds and get coffee on you and sue them because its too hot.
[22:03:44] <chromas> But starting a new corp somehow removes that possibility?
[22:03:45] <kolie> Which is why matt is being weird about it.
[22:03:49] <kolie> He has his own shit to protect.
[22:03:54] <chromas> Also the McDonald's thing was fake news
[22:03:57] <kolie> His liability is tied to what's in the PBC now.
[22:04:02] <audioguy> Oh, come on. Sure. its also possible aliens will come among us and save all humanity.
[22:04:04] <kolie> He as an officer and shareholder has had full say in that.
[22:04:15] <kolie> Ok well I understand a man protecting what he has - even a slim chance.
[22:04:23] <kolie> Because that's how liability works in the us.
[22:04:33] <kolie> He could be held liable or brought to court on frivolous shit.
[22:04:34] <audioguy> Exactly how, if he hlds no stock and is not aboard member?
[22:04:41] <kolie> He did - and all that can be challenged.
[22:04:57] <kolie> People looking to get money will go for the people with it.
[22:05:01] <kolie> And find ways to draw those lines.
[22:05:14] <chromas> They haven't done it so far
[22:05:17] <audioguy> So could any of us for anything at any time. You can't make reasonable decisios if you are that fearful.
[22:05:19] <kolie> matt_ isn't going to leave any potential loose ends like that.
[22:05:28] <kolie> But you can shield yourself legally as well as possible.
[22:05:36] <requerdanos> the situation we are in, for whatever reason, is that the shareholders are supporting SN to move to governance under a new organization and are not supportive of a reorganization of the old organization. Even if the reason is aliens, that's where we are.
[22:05:55] <janrinok> I feel we are going backwards. I am as frustrated as AG, but they gave their response at the Board meeting by simply ignoring the agenda and cutting the meeting short. We have to start moving without their cooperation.
[22:05:57] <kolie> I see no reason to convince them they are wrong when we have a low friction path - that has TONS of benefit - that they will support.
[22:06:26] <kolie> You don't want their old beat up dysfunctional shell. Make a new strong one from the start with clear seperation.
[22:06:33] <kolie> It protects you as well from their claims.
[22:06:34] <audioguy> Fine, we just leave and start out own organization under a differet name and to hell with trying to work with the presnt baord. How does that help him?
[22:06:49] <kolie> They will give you everything and you don't need to do that?
[22:07:05] <requerdanos> the idea is we take the opportunity to start our own organization under the same name.
[22:07:05] <janrinok> It helps us if we can keep the domain name and the community
[22:07:50] <audioguy> YOu are talking in generalities, as ussual. Vague. GEt specific. And idMatt is so concerned with this,lets have him come here and hear his concerns directly and work things out.
[22:08:00] <kolie> Why we are keeping this in an official meeting is beyond me. All of this can be discussed right in this channel and we can vote appropriately at the next meeting - if you even care to do so.
[22:08:19] <kolie> I'm not being vague - the concern is the vague liability claims that are possible.
[22:08:23] <kolie> That's specific.
[22:08:25] <audioguy> Sure sounds ok/
[22:08:55] <audioguy> No one isthreatening to sue om our side.
[22:09:09] <kolie> That isn't the concern.
[22:09:13] <audioguy> Not any staff and not any users have made such threats.
[22:09:39] <kolie> There could be down the road - that possibility alone is problematic - I'm thinking more from the users side than organizationally.
[22:09:54] <audioguy> WE put a hld harmless clause in out agreement to put a damper onsuch things.
[22:09:55] <kolie> And I agree its slim but thats their concern just relaying that.
[22:10:11] <kolie> You can't prevent third parties from making claims, only those that agree to it.
[22:10:33] * Bytram skips ahead from 18:03:03 --- please type CAREFULLY!
[22:10:33] <janrinok> It is now Saturday for me and I am in bed. I can not stay here in this discussion for evermore.
[22:10:50] <kolie> Vote to close out the official meeting as such.
[22:11:04] <kolie> We aren't voting here - nothing needs the official capacity.
[22:11:12] <requerdanos> if that's a motion, I second it
[22:11:15] <kolie> aye.
[22:11:16] <audioguy> And HOW, exactly does that change where we formnew or take control of present? Any suit would beover PAST behavior.
[22:11:22] <requerdanos> aye
[22:11:37] <janrinok> aye
[22:11:39] <Fnord666> aye
[22:11:42] <audioguy> aye
[22:11:43] <Deucalion> aye
[22:11:46] <kolie> Motion passed.
[22:11:51] <kolie> I do have to go thank you all involved.
[22:11:52] <Bytram> AYE
[22:11:55] <Deucalion> Proposed next meeting dates
[22:12:00] <kolie> I think audioguy is on point and this shouldn't be dropped.
[22:12:04] <janrinok> we can carry on the discussion....
[22:12:06] <chromas> I move that we start a new meeting and move the assets of the old meeting over to the new one
[22:12:19] * Deucalion spanks chromas
[22:12:21] <kolie> Figure out the next date in here and I'm good whatever it is.
[22:12:27] <audioguy> ha ha
[22:12:41] <chromas> oh wait, do you have to pound the gavel before I talk?
[22:12:46] <chromas> or does Deucalion spanking me count?
[22:12:54] <kolie> I'd pay to see that meeting.
[22:12:54] Deucalion changed topic of #governance to: SoylentNews Governance Committee - Next Meeting TBC | This channel IS logged and publicly displayed here https://logs.sylnt.us
[22:12:59] <Fnord666> Only if he spanked you with a gavel.
[22:13:01] <janrinok> but be quick - I am exhausted
[22:13:03] <requerdanos> how long do we want to wait between meetings, like a weekly thing, or less regularly?
[22:13:19] <Fnord666> I was thinking the same time next week?
[22:13:43] <audioguy> I like the weekly thing, forces us to organize a bit.
[22:13:46] <Deucalion> I'm OK with that.
[22:13:48] <kolie> im out - peace - im good with any meeting time determined.
[22:13:52] <audioguy> yes
[22:14:02] <audioguy> Same time next week.
[22:14:04] <Deucalion> audioguy, is 20:30 UTC OK with you?
[22:14:06] <janrinok> OK with me - but I will try to stay and continue the discussion here now.
[22:14:07] -!- aristarchus has quit [Quit: aristarchus]
[22:14:10] <kolie> And its really to officialyl document and refocus - the real work is in between and side convos before we convery again.
[22:14:26] <audioguy> No but it is the only compromise that works for ll.
[22:14:27] <Fnord666> So Friday, August 11th 2023 @ 2030 UTC
[22:14:49] <Fnord666> ??
[22:15:01] <requerdanos> that's what I've got
[22:15:01] <janrinok> that's what I understand
[22:15:18] Deucalion changed topic of #governance to: SoylentNews Governance Committee - Tentative Next Meeting Friday Aug 11th 20:30 UTC | This channel IS logged and publicly displayed here https://logs.sylnt.us
[22:15:24] <audioguy> I am trying to move my schelude earlier, but I have been buring the candle both ends and it s thus difficult at the moment.
[22:15:29] <Bytram> OK 1 week from today
[22:15:38] <Deucalion> audioguy, what;s your TZ?
[22:15:44] <Deucalion> ref UTC?
[22:15:51] <chromas> -7
[22:15:53] <audioguy> -7
[22:16:08] <audioguy> west coast of us PDT
[22:16:10] <Deucalion> Sucks - middle of the working day.
[22:16:23] * chromas lives just north of audioguy
[22:16:28] <Deucalion> Would it be better on a Saturday?
[22:16:39] <audioguy> Yes,, the problem is I am actually on something like Chinese time :-)
[22:16:55] <chromas> do they work on Saturdays?
[22:16:58] <audioguy> Day does not matter to me,just time
[22:17:54] <audioguy> I don't know, I still can't figure out how they work upside down.
[22:18:13] <chromas> I heard they have nets for that
[22:18:38] <Deucalion> I'm on - when the bastards drag me out of bed at dead of sleep hour to rush out and replace something that clearly wasn't critical in some DC with a security guard with an attitude hours right now.
[22:18:57] <janrinok> If we are going to discuss things can we start - otherwise I will be snoring....
[22:19:14] <audioguy> Yes.
[22:19:22] <Deucalion> OK - are we continuing actual discussion?
[22:19:48] <chromas> I wasn't clear on how exporting assets from the pbc and shutting it down is better for their liability than them just handing it off and stepping down
[22:20:30] <audioguy> I thinks we should do some more talking about this in another place. And maybe have amore clear agenda for meetings, use them tofocus onstuff already witten down.
[22:20:37] <janrinok> audioguy - what you say makes perfect sense, but they are not prepared to do it. chromas, I'm not sure it does but that is what they believe.
[22:20:58] <audioguy> I can submit a list of questions to them.
[22:21:03] <chromas> I propose we star the Church of Soylentology
[22:21:12] <audioguy> But we can go ondoing this forever.
[22:21:20] <janrinok> we have discussed the agenda problem. It will be published at least 24 hours in advance of future meetings
[22:21:27] <Deucalion> requerdanos, for the record - I have actioned my action from the meeting just closed and sent an email to matt_ as discussed.
[22:22:14] <audioguy> I see it more as we work on things during the week, and what we were working on is what we have final discussion/vote on.
[22:22:45] <Bytram> SO when is our next meeting -- Saturday?
[22:23:08] <janrinok> Friday Aug 11 at 2030 UTC
[22:23:09] <audioguy> Doesn;t matter to me what day.
[22:23:44] <Bytram> janrinok: OK, thanks!
[22:24:18] <chromas> Bytram: it's in the channel topic too, just in case you forget later
[22:24:46] <janrinok> OK, what else can be discuss now?
[22:24:56] <janrinok> we*
[22:25:26] <audioguy> One thing is that the certs will expire on Aug 12.
[22:25:52] <audioguy> Should we just let the present owners eal wit that?
[22:25:53] <Bytram> chromas: That can be easily changed and there might have been a change under discussion
[22:26:02] <janrinok> what tz is that triggered by ? UTC?
[22:26:21] <audioguy> I thinkUTC but not sure.
[22:26:55] * Bytram departs from the meeting -- personal business
[22:26:59] <janrinok> It might occur during our next meeting :)
[22:27:12] <requerdanos> One thing we can discuss is that I don't know how--not a clue--to publish to our wiki. I can publish these minutes (once typed) as a meta, but that's the extent of my publishing knowledge. Anyone can post them in a wiki and/or train me on same?
[22:27:22] <chromas> "I move that we execute acme.sh. All in favor, say aye"
[22:27:41] <requerdanos> I am a big fan of ./certbot-renew --auto
[22:27:49] <audioguy> Problem: we no longet have it sinstalled
[22:28:01] <chromas> okay, let's argue over which script for the next five minutes ;)
[22:28:02] <Deucalion> audioguy, I think the last renewal was done by NC. Prior to that it was you doing it.
[22:28:08] <janrinok> There might be problems that acme.sh can;t cope with in our current setup - leave that for the current staff!
[22:28:30] <audioguy> we have I think certbot installed now
[22:28:47] <janrinok> kolie's problem
[22:29:12] <Deucalion> I thinkj even LE recommends acme.sh over certbot now... I wouldn;t know why.
[22:29:50] <audioguy> requerdanos, the earlier decisionwas to publish in journals
[22:29:52] <Deucalion> It's everyone's problem if it's not renewed.
[22:30:53] <requerdanos> Okay, I can publish them to a journal--that sounds good--but I don't know how to work the wiki.
[22:31:08] <audioguy> Which wiki?
[22:31:20] <Deucalion> wiki not twiki
[22:31:27] <requerdanos> yeah that would be one of my first questions. The wiki talk kind of caught me off guard :)
[22:31:48] <audioguy> We had generally beenswitchingover to twiki for various reasons.
[22:31:49] <Deucalion> Oh my.... you got "volunteered" hard there :D
[22:32:18] <Deucalion> audioguy, we always had wiki for public facing info and twiki for internal tech.
[22:32:27] <audioguy> Yes,
[22:32:47] <Deucalion> We're talking about publishing the agenda / minutes etc of this governance committee for the community to see
[22:32:58] <audioguy> Staff internal notes
[22:34:08] <audioguy> Then the choice is something like a journal, or on kolies install of the wiki which he controls on staging. Under this crcumstance I would vote for the journal.
[22:34:41] <audioguy> I did ask we set up a specific user for a journal for this stuff.
[22:35:15] <audioguy> I voluteered to do the working one, we need one for final stuff,still awaiting a volunteer
[22:35:28] <audioguy> Maybe requerdanos ?
[22:35:43] <Deucalion> I'd vote for a public wiki vs a journal on one person's user account. Better yet - a governance page on the main site. Could it be a Nexus?
[22:35:50] <janrinok> he is going to be busy!
[22:36:35] <Bytram> Why not BOTH? Publish to wiki *AND* journal? Just make one of the read-only
[22:36:36] <Deucalion> audioguy, requerdanos volunteered to be the governance committee secretary. We need to support them to do the job
[22:37:07] <Bytram> s/the/them/
[22:37:10] <janrinok> Deucalion, can I think on that, It sounds OK but I have a nagging doubt about it that I cannor put my finger on...
[22:37:23] <audioguy> Well part of secretry jon is keeping notes. So where does he want to do that?
[22:38:09] <audioguy> He has the job, let him decide
[22:39:02] <requerdanos> journal + wiki sounds fine to me on the strength of more is better. I just don't have the knowledge or the access to the wiki
[22:39:58] <Deucalion> requerdanos, the public wiki should be open to register to. Or at least it used to be.... god knows what state it is in these days.
[22:39:59] <audioguy> Since kolie is in control of that maybe ask him. But we will thenm be encouraging the users to use his stuff.
[22:39:59] <janrinok> OK, is there anything else I can contribute to or can I go to sleep yet?
[22:40:17] <audioguy> Go sleep, you can catch up later
[22:40:58] <janrinok> goodnight guys, see you over the w/e!
[22:41:07] <requerdanos> peace janrinok , sleep well
[22:41:46] <janrinok> Another full day of a music festival tomorrow (and Sunday!)
[22:42:13] <janrinok> 5 4 3 2 1 gone
[22:43:01] <Deucalion> LOL..... I clicked the Wiki link from the front page, got https://wiki.staging.soylentnews.org - clicked Log In..... Internal error Special Page.... that's fucked.
[22:43:18] <Bytram> janrinok: sleep fast and well, my friend!
[22:43:21] <audioguy> Ok, next plan? :-)
[22:43:53] <Deucalion> Perhaps just Journal it for now requerdanos - at least it'll be somewhere :D
[22:43:55] <Bytram> NOW I am gone. laters!
[22:43:59] <audioguy> I need to update people on some things elsewhere
[22:44:10] <Deucalion> Night Bytram
[22:44:16] <Deucalion> Night janrinok
[22:44:18] <requerdanos> goodnight bytram
[22:44:31] <audioguy> I think I will stop here and go write.
[22:44:55] * Deucalion also calling it a night
[22:45:02] <audioguy> Sorry again about being so late. In certain states alarms do not help me wake up.
[22:45:32] <Deucalion> I know that feeling. I set three alarms now in different parts of the room :D
[22:45:43] <Deucalion> I can turn them off whle asleep
[22:46:09] <audioguy> Eventually they stop :-)
[22:46:15] <requerdanos> I have requested an account on https://wiki.staging.soylentnews.org
[22:46:22] <audioguy> OK.
[22:46:30] <Deucalion> I have mine set to repeat every 10mins FOREVER
[22:46:37] <Deucalion> And they get louder
[22:46:53] <Deucalion> I can still sleep through them
[22:50:47] <audioguy> I can sleep through them for anhour I can sleep through themuntil my body gives me back control, whenever that is.
[22:50:53] -!- mode/#governance [-r #governance] by Deucalion
[22:52:46] <audioguy> I'll get there eventually (moving up sleep cycle)
[22:52:55] <audioguy> I'm off
[22:53:03] <Deucalion> laters
[23:05:56] * chromas also gets internal error on login page