Wiki location:

= Foundation Board Minutes for Tuesday, August 14th 2018, 15:00 UTC =

Next meeting date Tuesday, August 21 2018, 15:30 UTC

== Attending ==

 * NuritziSanchez
 * KatGerasimova
 * PhilipChimento
 * AllanDay
 * NeilMcGovern
 * RosannaYuen
 * FedericoMenaQuintero
 * CarlosSoriano
 * RobMcQueen

== Regrets ==

== Missing ==

== Agenda ==

 * URGENT: GUADEC 2019 Thessaloniki bid (Allan)
 * Private meeting minutes issues (Nuritzi)
 * Foundation hackfest planning (Allan)

== Minutes ==

 * GUADEC 2019 Thessaloniki bid
   * Neil has helped them rework the budget.
   * Philip: I already sent some questions to board-list. There's nothing
in my list that really blocks the bid, just some things I was wondering
   * Philip: The only thing in my list pertaining to the bid as given, is
the price of the lunches.
     * Kat: We'll check what the university includes for that price.
     * (The reply from the local team was that that was the standard price
for conference lunches, not university cafeteria lunches.)
   * Allan: A few items I don't understand in the budget:
     * The line item for keynote speakers, is that for travel?
       * Neil: keynote speakers usually get their flights expensed by the
     * The number for social events is high, do they come out of the main
budget or do we expect the local team to do fundraising for that?
       * Kat: We can also not have events if there's no room in the budget,
but that's not so nice.
       * Allan: In past GUADECs we've done specific fundraising for social
       * Neil: We can certainly try and fundraise for these.
     * Smaller items like gifts for the speakers, is that something we
normally do at GUADEC?
       * Kat: we have done them at least since 2010, budget permitting
   * Allan: Will they require a float? Do we need to preapprove any
immediate spending in order to book the venue?
     * Yes.
   * Nuritzi: Is 35k a good travel budget or should we be expecting larger?
This is our flagship conference and we should bring in people from other
places around the world, which would be more expensive.
     * Kat: We could also give all our interns full sponsorship for the
flights. That would require more travel budget as well.
     * Kat estimates that 20K is too low a budget; 30k minimum, 35k
expected, 40k-50k high.
       * Nuritzi: How about 40k expected?
     * Kat: In the past, on the travel committee, we did blog posts on the
numbers; in recent years we didn't do them, but I still have some drafts
from those years.
     * Nuritzi: We should prepare ourselves to increase this budget if
   * Federico: From the Code of Conduct committee, we would like all
subsequent conferences to use the new code of conduct, and we will provide
all the resources they need to implement it.
   * Nuritzi: Is there anything blocking our approving the bid in this
     * Kat: I would like to see the amount on the travel line updated.
     * Allan: That would have us approving the budget at a loss, so maybe
we can revisit it when we get more fundraising?
     * Neil: The numbers for fundraising now are my best guess as to what
will come in. Generally we should try to make a profit at GUADEC although
some years that might not happen.
   * Allan: What exactly are we approving? Just the "expected" column?
     * Neil: The whole thing; the different scenarios are linked to the
amount of money we raise.
   * Neil: One possible way forward, with the travel budget question, is to
approve the conference (float for the venue), start moving forward, and
approve the budget in a future meeting.
     * Kat: That might lead to the situation where we approve a budget that
the local team doesn't support.
     * Neil: It sounds like some people are not comfortable voting on the
whole budget.
     * Allan: Are we voting on increased travel amounts?
     * Philip: What are the consequences of increasing the travel budget if
there's no matching fundraising?
       * In that case we run the conference at a loss.
     * Rob: We can see if we can increase the baseline budget in a future
     * Kat: Propose to vote on the existing proposal, Allan sends questions
to Kat or the local team/travel committee, as appropriate.
   * Allan: The date is late for GUADEC, do we see that being a problem?
     * Rosanna: It's after school starts, so I'm not sure I'd be able to go.
     * Federico: ditto.
     * Carlos: For Summer of Code / Outreachy students it would be late,
after the internship ends.
     * Rosanna: Term might also have started by then, too.
     * Kat: Moving it earlier would be inconvenient for the local team, and
later is better for students.
       * Allan/Philip: Later is better, but not so late as to be after the
end of the internship.
     * Kat: There are two date options, we can wait 1-2 weeks to book the
venue if needed, but we should approve the bid. We can get back to them on
the dates after we get a better idea from the different parties involved.
     * Allan: So we would request that the local team investigate more date
     * Kat: These two are the options they've selected and investigated
   * '''VOTE''': Approve the original bid, the updated budget sent by Neil
with the understanding that we'll revisit the travel budget, and we'll seek
input on the dates before picking one
     * +1 unanimous
   * '''ACTION''' - Federico to contact the local team to make arrangements
for the Code of Conduct
   * '''ACTION''' - Kat to contact the local team to communicate the result
of the vote
   * '''ACTION''' - Kat to get input from interns on the dates
   * '''ACTION''' - Philip to ask the travel committee for a budget proposal

  * Private meeting minutes issues
   * Some background from Allan: This dates back to the last board, who
voted on the Events Code of Conduct. At the time, the minutes for that item
were marked as private. The reason was that we wanted to publish a more
finely crafted announcement rather than leaving it to be read in the
minutes. There was a delay in the finely crafted announcement. Fast-forward
to the current day, the minutes are still private, and Benjamin Berg has
requested that we publish them. The snag is that the minutes are labeled
"private", and not "private, to be published later." All but one of the
then-directors have given the okay to publish the minutes.
   * First issue to discuss: Do we want to publish those minutes or not?
     * Carlos: Did we contact the then-director?
       * Allan: I have pinged them, but I have not yet directly emailed.
       * Philip: Did the then-director dissent, or just miss the ping?
       * Allan: I don't know.
     * Kat: Can we contact the then-director now?
       * Allan: Yes.
     * Philip: Can we legally decide to publish the minutes without the
approval of the previous board?
       * Yes, but it would set a bad precedent, implying that anything we
decide is private can be undone by a future board of directors.
       * Kat: If we keep the minutes private because we don't want them
published before the announcement, then we should aim to publish them after
the announcement.
       * Carlos/Allan/Rob: This would really create an uncomfortable
situation for future private minutes.
       * Rob: However, in this specific case, the intent would seem to be
that this particular item were made public.
       * Neil: In general we are transparent, but some of the things people
have been asking for on the GitLab issue go too far. We are not a public
governing body.
     * Philip: I think the best course of action would be to email the
then-director and explain the situation.
     * Nuritzi: We should get the consent of the then-director even though
we're not legally obligated to do so.
     * General consensus.
   * Second issue to discuss: Creating a policy around how long to keep
minutes private after decisions are made.
     * Nuritzi: How about a process by which we mark our private meeting
minutes for publishing later and review them, say, monthly?
       * Neil: That's potentially a lot of work.
       * Carlos: If we do that, we could find ourselves in the same
situation again when the board of directors changes.
     * Philip: When we have a private discussion that can be made public in
the future, we can mark it at the time, and create a GitLab issue.
     * Allan: Each secretary should have some discretion in how this is
     * General consensus that a GitLab issue, preferably with a date or
condition for making the item public, is sufficient.
   * '''ACTION''' - Allan to follow up with the then-director
   * '''ACTION''' - Philip to define the process for private meeting minutes

 * Foundation hackfest planning
   * 17-19th October is the best option. If held in the UK, it works for
everyone. Let's move forward with these dates.
   * Allan: it might be getting a bit late to book a retreat-style venue.
   * '''ACTION''' - Allan and Kat to do some research on accommodation

== Actions ==

 * Federico - Contact the Thessaloniki GUADEC team to make arrangements for
the Code of Conduct
 * Kat - Contact the Thessaloniki GUADEC team to communicate the result of
the vote and the acceptance of the bid
 * Kat - Get input from GSoC / Outreachy interns on the proposed GUADEC
 * Philip - Ask the travel committee for a budget proposal
 * Allan - Follow up with the ex-director whose approval is needed to
publish the private minutes about the Events Code of Conduct.
 * Philip - Define a process for private meeting minutes.
 * Allan, Kat - Do some research on accommodation options for the
Foundation hackfest.
foundation-list mailing list

Reply via email to