On Thursday, April 03, 2014 00:00:01 Andrew Buczko wrote: > My suggestion for improvement: You (the Moderator) is to only direct the > meeting as far as topics / questions / consensus / voting goes. IF the > moderator has a topic / question / consensu / vote then the moderator shall > do so as a member and wait his or her turn. > > Not to pick on you Torie but: > What I saw at the last meeting was more like "Torie Time" then a meeting. > as Moderator Torie got to give input after every turn. The moderator should > have to wait in the Que, just like everyone else.
I totally agree. I feel terrible whenever I contribute to discussion, but at the same time I feel disenfranchised that I can't contribute. If I do, *please* just jump in and tell me to shut up. I'd like to figure out some mechanism of doing all this that doesn't involve coming to a Tuesday meeting. > > PS, What is the short form of consensus? Conseed, conside, consensu, give > in? Well, consensus is the short form of "the willing consent of everyone". Not sure if it can really get much shorter. > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Torrie Fischer <[email protected]>wrote: > > On Wednesday, April 02, 2014 17:39:03 Omar Rassi wrote: > > > but what about over 50? Is it the same? is it different? > > > > what does any of this have to do with my original post > > > > I wasn't asking to talk about member dues or bureaucratic fantasies.. I > > was > > looking for feedback on last night's meeting and suggestions to improve > > it. > > > > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 5:21 PM, a l <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The procedure, as written, for removal of board members if the > > > > membership > > > > > > is under 50 looks pretty well spelled out "... A majority of the > > > > membership..." Which as Chris pointed out a while back is defaulted > > > > to > > > > 51%. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Andrew L > > > > > > > > On Apr 2, 2014 4:41 PM, "Omar Rassi" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> From what I gathered since the very beginning of Synhak, the spirit > > > >> of > > > >> how Synhak is structured is such that the Membership decides how > > > > things > > > > > >> should be. The board exists to help support what the members want to > > > > do > > > > > >> and > > > >> achieve. Its important to remember that the bylaws also allow for the > > > >> membership to remove any or all board members without cause, (Chapter > > > >> 6.3.3): > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> *6.3.3. Removal of Directors * > > > >> > > > >> Any or all directors may be removed without cause if: > > > >> > > > >> * In a corporation with fewer than 50 members, the removal is > > > > approved by > > > > > >> a majority of all members. > > > >> > > > >> * In a corporation with 50 or more members, the removal is approved > > > >> by > > > >> the members. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> So both Torrie and Justin are correct. A board meeting must be called > > > > to > > > > > >> make adjustments to the schedule of membership dues but the > > > >> membership > > > >> must > > > >> first reach consensus on what that new schedule should be. The board > > > >> creates resolutions without the membership deciding if that's what > > > > they > > > > > >> want might cause the membership to second-guess their board. > > > >> > > > >> Also, as a side note, the bylaws do need to be updated with the > > > > current > > > > > >> address as it still lists 21 West North as the principal office and > > > > there > > > > > >> isn't a clear difference between the less than/more than 50 members > > > >> procedure for Removal of Directors. Time for me to write an email to > > > >> Champions@ > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Torrie Fischer > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >>> On Wednesday, April 02, 2014 15:42:45 Justin Herman wrote: > > > >>> > Just a point of order... > > > >>> > > > > >>> > Per the Bylaws, Section 5.3, the membership does not decide the > > > > dues, > > > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>> > board does. > > > >>> > > > >>> Right, but it would be a Very Bad Idea to not get consensus on what > > > > is > > > > > >>> reasonable. > > > >>> > > > >>> > Each member must pay, within the time and on the conditions set by > > > > the > > > > > >>> > board, the dues, fees, and > > > >>> > assessments in amounts to be fixed from time to time by the board. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > So a champion needs to call a board meeting. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > (PS: I am in support of having a senior discount as suggested by > > > >>> > > > >>> Philip and > > > >>> > > > >>> > interested in talking about family discounts) > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Torrie Fischer > > > >>> > > > >>> <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >>> > > Last night's meeting seemed to go alright, though less good than > > > >>> > > last > > > >>> > > week's: > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > * It devolved into a series of back and forth Q&A sessions > > > > between > > > > > >>> two > > > >>> > > > >>> > > people > > > >>> > > waaaay too often > > > >>> > > * Nobody had anything they wanted to bring up after we talked > > > > about > > > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>> > > wall > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > I'd like to discuss two improvements to the meeting. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > First, a stack-watcher. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > The role of the stack watcher would be to catch who raises their > > > >>> > > hand > > > >>> > > first > > > >>> > > and ensure that everyone gets a chance to speak in the order > > > >>> > > that > > > >>> > > > >>> they > > > >>> > > > >>> > > want > > > >>> > > during discussion. When listening to discussion, I'm trying to > > > > keep > > > > > >>> an eye > > > >>> > > > >>> > > on > > > >>> > > the notes on the screen, watching for raised hands, making sure > > > > that > > > > > >>> > > nobody > > > >>> > > talks for too long, and trying to remember the stack of topics > > > > that > > > > > >>> we're > > > >>> > > > >>> > > discussing (i.e., start on the wall, move down into ventilation, > > > >>> > > > >>> move down > > > >>> > > > >>> > > into moving the furnace, move back up to ventilation, back up to > > > > the > > > > > >>> wall, > > > >>> > > > >>> > > down to ceiling height, etc). > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > It'd be super cool if someone could play stack watcher next > > > >>> > > week. > > > >>> > > > >>> Just > > > >>> > > > >>> > > keep a > > > >>> > > list of who is speaking when on a whiteboard. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > Second, a programmed agenda. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > Philip and I were talking about this, regarding the fact that > > > >>> > > > >>> membership > > > >>> > > > >>> > > dues > > > >>> > > and senior rates haven't been brought up yet. This also ties in > > > > with > > > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>> > > recent discussion about a proposal that had been brought up > > > > before > > > > > >>> and was > > > >>> > > > >>> > > still open for discussion, but nobody brought it to the meeting. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > I'd like to request that everyone adds topics that they want to > > > > see > > > > > >>> > > discussed > > > >>> > > or consensed upon to the next meeting's agenda before Saturday > > > >>> > > > >>> night. That > > > >>> > > > >>> > > provides a few immediate benefits: > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > * Everyone knows what we'll be talking about in advance > > > >>> > > * Nobody has to go check the proposals page to figure out what > > > > needs > > > > > >>> to be > > > >>> > > > >>> > > talked about > > > >>> > > * The meeting can progress along a lot smoother > > > >>> > > * We don't end up like last night where we talk briefly about > > > >>> > > the > > > >>> > > few > > > >>> > > issues > > > >>> > > that anyone remembers to bring up while other issues aren't > > > >>> > > > >>> considered > > > >>> > > > >>> > > * If what you want to talk about isn't on the agenda, you can be > > > >>> > > > >>> free to > > > >>> > > > >>> > > not > > > >>> > > show up if you don't want to, safe in the knowledge that you > > > > won't > > > > > >>> get > > > >>> > > > >>> > > screwed > > > >>> > > over because your voice wasn't heard > > > >>> > > * Proxies can be stated more concretely than "Hey, if we talk > > > > about > > > > > >>> this, > > > >>> > > > >>> > > here's my opinion" > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > To avoid any kind of competition, I'd like to have the list of > > > >>> > > topics > > > >>> > > projected on the screen (since it'd already be in the meeting > > > > minute > > > > > >>> > > template > > > >>> > > that gets edited), and we collectively decide on what we want to > > > >>> > > > >>> discuss. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > Also related to the crosspost from noisebridge-discuss@, I am > > > >>> > > > >>> looking into > > > >>> > > > >>> > > building various decision making plugins for Spiff which we can > > > > then > > > > > >>> use > > > >>> > > > >>> > > to > > > >>> > > completely remove all this proposal discussion from the meeting > > > > and > > > > > >>> put > > > >>> > > > >>> > > everyone on a solid footing instead of giving such a *huge* > > > >>> > > > >>> advantage to > > > >>> > > > >>> > > those > > > >>> > > who have the free time to show up on a Tuesday at 7PM. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > Thoughts, please! > > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ > > > >>> > > Discuss mailing list > > > >>> > > [email protected] > > > >>> > > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > >>> > > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>> Discuss mailing list > > > >>> [email protected] > > > >>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> Discuss mailing list > > > >> [email protected] > > > >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Discuss mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
