Re: no SPI meeting remainder ?

From: MJ Ray <mjr(at)phonecoop(dot)coop>
To: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: no SPI meeting remainder ?
Date: 2006-11-26 17:21:23
Message-ID: 4569cd13.0l+sBxtWTOR2Wb/
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: spi-general

Neil McGovern <neilm(at)spi-inc(dot)org> wrote:
> meetings are currently held on the third tuesday of each month, at
> 19:00UTC, on #spi on

I'm confused because I thought that each meeting set the date of the
next meeting, apart from the Annual. Has third Tuesday been agreed
for all meetings until some date, or are meetings are on the third
Tuesday except when they're not?

> On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 12:01:38PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I notice that there was another proposal to transfer to
> > OSI before they become accountable to free software developers. Is
> > that why there was no announcement?
> Really MJ, WHY do you keep coming up with this stuff?

Do not send personal messages to mailing lists.

Answer the question.

> I see you're
> managing to inject your personal prejudices into simple questions, and
> turning them into accusations again.

I hope most noticed it was a question, not an accusation.

If you mean the "accountable" comment, that's not prejudice, it's
*post*judice[sic] - my understanding from the comments made last time
SPI's board discussed OSI, which I feel are reflected in the draft

Ian Jackson states the reason that he objects to this resolution is
that "SPI is a membership controlled organisation and OSI is a
self-perpetuating board. I don't think a self-perpetuating board is
an appropriate structure for this."

> Why would any resolution stop an announcement being sent out? You seem
> to be implying that the board have a hidden agenda.

Not at all. Don't jump to (wrong) conclusions. I thought it's
possible that this was controversial enough to mean that everything
got played exactly by the letter of the by-laws, rather than giving it
more publicity among the members.

What happened at the meeting? Did SPI give away the domain?

> I would suggest you
> call a special meeting to withdraw the board. From our by-laws, you
> require a request of one third of the membership. This means you need
> 126 members to agree with you.

Yeah, right(!) The last time 126 members attended a meeting was...?

I'm amazed that anyone is so willing to play with the nukes over
something like this, but if the only way to question SPI board strange
behaviour is that untouchable, that's quite bad.

> > Also, the logs and minutes for July 2005 seem to be missing. Where
> > are they?
> You mean these minutes, which were published at 2006-06-20 23:46 ?

I mean the non-draft approved version of that. Also, note that:

1. those minutes are not linked from

is not linked or even visible in the menu from
the section index
- it seems to appear only if you are in the meeting-minutes section!

3. the July 2005 minute links on all agendas from August 2005 to
March 2006 are 404 Not Found, whereas the July 2006 meeting that
apparently approved it doesn't link to anything.

In short: the navigation to that page is screwy, so I can't see why
asking where it was got such a hostile answer.

> > Finally, what is the expected path from for
> > members to find out about meetings? I resorted to playing 'guess the
> > URL' again.
> Follow the links.
> This hasn't changed since 2003.

Does its survival make it not a bug?

My Opinion Only: see
Please follow


Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-11-26 17:41:30 Re: no SPI meeting remainder ?
Previous Message Neil McGovern 2006-11-26 16:27:23 Re: no SPI meeting remainder ?