Re: [Spi-private] Publically viewable resolutions and increasing the visibility of board activity

Jimmy Kaplowitz <jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org> wrote:
> If we are to give more notice of meetings including the business that
> will be conducted at them, we clearly need to have a firm cutoff after
> which proposals received will be deferred to a future meeting. Otherwise
> members could have a reasonable complaint that new business was added
> to the meeting agenda too shortly beforehand for them to notice it. The
> two desires you express above, in other words, are contradictory.

Not at all. The board should defer anything obviously controversial
for more discussion, especially if it is a late item, but the item
should still be raised in the meeting. Maybe some small things need
not be held up for an extra month just by an arbitrary cutoff.

Why does the board seem to be against postponing some things, yet the
debian Spain trademark has been postponed many many times?

Why is this being turned into a choice between giving adequate notice
and making member contributions jump more hoops?

Government deals with intrusive and dangerous topics and yet many
government meetings allow contributions with hours of notice - or
less. For example, there's a public participation standing item at
tonight's council meeting. 15 minutes max of a ~120 minute meeting,
no notice required, no format required, but it's encouraged to make
clear any suggested actions. Why can't SPI allow at least that level
of participation?

Regards,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Somerset, England. Work/Laborejo: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
IRC/Jabber/SIP: on request/peteble.