Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOB] meeting reminder

2016-06-30 Thread Walter Bender
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 6:56 AM, Tony Anderson wrote: > Hi, Walter > > I hope Chris Leonard's report will include the present status of his > arrangements with the Conservancy (is he officially on board, has he been > paid his stipend for May or for June? I would also like

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOB] meeting reminder

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
Hi, Walter I hope Chris Leonard's report will include the present status of his arrangements with the Conservancy (is he officially on board, has he been paid his stipend for May or for June? I would also like the report to include the present status of the Nigerian project. In particular was

[IAEP] Simplified Version of A & B for Tomorrow's Meeting

2016-06-30 Thread Caryl Bigenho
Hi Folks, Many thanks to all of you who contributed ideas to "Motions A and B." Tony Anderson did a nice job of simplifying the language and I managed to do a little editing that allows us to combine A and B into a single motion, all dealing mainly with the proposed position of Finance Manager

[IAEP] [SLOB] meeting reminder

2016-06-30 Thread Walter Bender
We have a Sugar Labs oversight meeting on Friday, 1 July at 19:00 UTC (See [1]). Please join us on 1rc.freenode.net #sugar-meetring See [2] for the current list of agenda items. regards. -walter [1]

Re: [IAEP] IAEP Digest, Vol 99, Issue 115

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
Hi, Dave I posted no motion on June 4. According to standard rules of order, a motion must be 'moved' by a member of the Board. Making a comment is not a motion. Tony On 06/30/2016 06:00 PM, iaep-requ...@lists.sugarlabs.org wrote: Send IAEP mailing list submissions to

Re: [IAEP] [SLOB] meeting reminder

2016-06-30 Thread Sameer Verma
On Jun 30, 2016 3:08 AM, "Walter Bender" wrote: > > We have a Sugar Labs oversight meeting on Friday, 1 July at 19:00 UTC (See [1]). Please join us on 1rc.freenode.net #sugar-meetring > Typo. #sugar-meeting Sameer > See [2] for the current list of agenda items. > >

[IAEP] Motion: To replace existing bylaw for Finance Manager

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
Motion: To replace existing bylaw for Finance Manager from: The Finance Manager is an ex officio, non-voting officer taking care of Sugar Labs' Finance. Currently, this position is vacant. To: The Finance Manager shall be appointed by a majority vote of the Sugar Labs Oversight Board (SLOB) and

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOB] meeting reminder

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 30 June 2016 at 06:56, Tony Anderson wrote: > I hope Chris Leonard's report will include the present status of his > arrangements with the Conservancy (is he officially on board, has he been > paid his stipend for May or for June? I would also like the report to >

Re: [IAEP] Simplified Version of A & B for Tomorrow's Meeting

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 30 June 2016 at 10:57, Caryl Bigenho wrote: > > P.S. Re clause #2: there may be times when the financial data from the SFC > is not available at a meeting. The first item in the clause allows for > making updates and corrections from the previous meeting's data if it >

[IAEP] Motion: To append to existing bylaw for Finance Manager new procedures

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
Motion: To append to existing bylaw for Finance Manager new procedures for requesting, obtaining, and reporting use of Sugar Labs funds. All monetary distributions must be requested from Conservancy by the appointed Finance Manager according to the following guidelines: Expenses: - Expenses

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
Hi On 21 June 2016 at 23:00, Dave Crossland wrote: > The reason I am feeling frustration is that Adam, a board member, > asked me to administer the board's record of decisions on the wiki, > and my effort to do so has been fettered: reports of motion outcomes > are reported by the

Re: [IAEP] IAEP Digest, Vol 99, Issue 115

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
Dave, AFIK, it is true. Do you have any reference to show that the Sugar Labs Board has any different bylaws? I am new to the Board and so at some historical point, the normal rules of order could have been changed. The motion was not made by Sebastian, but by Walter. I think you need to

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 27 June 2016 at 10:55, Tony Anderson wrote: > Can you identify these motions. Most of the votes were cast at the meetings. > As far as I remember there were two email votes. Five motions have passed since I joined the project and I can only verify all 7 votes for 1

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
The following was my reply to Walter's request. Hi Walter, My intention was to vote in favor of the motion. Perhaps we need some standard way to vote so that it will be understood. Tony On 05/18/2016 02:01 PM, Walter Bender wrote: Please respond to this request for your vote today. If you

Re: [IAEP] IAEP Digest, Vol 99, Issue 115

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 30 June 2016 at 12:07, Tony Anderson wrote: > I posted no motion on June 4. > ... > Making a comment is not a motion. My apologies; you drafted it and I posted it in thread "Motion: to undertake a fund raising drive." and it was not seconded. > According to standard

Re: [IAEP] IAEP Digest, Vol 99, Issue 115

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
Hi Dave, I am new to the Board, but in most organizations they are specified in the bylaws (which I must confess I have never seen). In the absence, most organizations use Robert's Rules of Order. Tony On 06/30/2016 06:40 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: On 30 June 2016 at 12:07, Tony Anderson

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 30 June 2016 at 13:27, Tony Anderson wrote: > On 27 June 2016 at 08:42, Dave Crossland wrote: > > Hi Tony > > > > On 21 June 2016 at 23:00, Dave Crossland wrote: > >> Please provide me with 7 links to 7 emails on a public mailing list > >>

Re: [IAEP] Simplified Version of A & B for Tomorrow's Meeting

2016-06-30 Thread Caryl Bigenho
As the original proposer of the motion, I hope to see the version Tony and I have crafted be the version voted on tomorrow. I really appreciate the time and effort people have it into it, but I would like to see this "kiss" version be the one voted on. Caryl Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 30,

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Caryl Bigenho
Come on Dave! I trust the board members. If any of them were opposed I'm sure we would know about it by now. Let them do the job they were elected to do. Caryl Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 30, 2016, at 11:55 AM, Dave Crossland wrote: > >> On 30 June 2016 at 13:27, Tony

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 30 June 2016 at 17:01, Caryl Bigenho wrote: > Come on Dave! I trust the board members. If any of them were opposed > I'm sure we would know about it by now. Let them do the job they were elected > to do. You are welcome to volunteer as the board's secretary, the job

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
Dave I am really tired of these accusations. At the time that this motion was voted on, there had not been this hue and cry about voting on IAEP. There was no deliberate attempt for the votes to be made secretly behind the backs of the members. Why can you not accept that some of the votes

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 30 June 2016 at 18:06, Tony Anderson wrote: > Why can you not accept that some of the votes were not made to the IAEP > mailing list in error. You are opposing addressing this error but without explaining why. Please explain

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
Adam - sorry, caught again by the 'reply list' button. Tony On 06/30/2016 07:10 PM, Tony Anderson wrote: Hi, Dave Your motion has never been presented to the Board. I have no specific knowledge that all members oppose it. Your record of decisions includes many items that have never become

[IAEP] Voting on GPLv3 motion

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
Hi, Dave This is what I have been able to find regarding the GPLv3 motion. _At today's Sugar Labs oversight board meeting [1], we discussed the motion submitted by Sebastian Silva to finalize the transition from GPLv2 to GPLv3 for the Sugar core libraries (Sugar Activity developers are still

[IAEP] Yoruba I18n

2016-06-30 Thread Tony Anderson
At today's Sugar Labs oversight board meeting [1], we discussed the motion submitted by Chris Leonard to fund a program for translation of Sugar into Yoruba, one of the three main languages spoken in Nigeria. I second the motion and bring it to you in an email vote. Members of the oversight

Re: [IAEP] Voting on GPLv3 motion

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
On 1 July 2016 at 01:32, Tony Anderson wrote: > This is what I have been able to find regarding the GPLv3 motion. AWESOME! Thanks for posting these - I will update the Decision page with links to your emails and these results soon :)

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [Sugar-devel] A Better Idea...

2016-06-30 Thread Dave Crossland
Hi Tony On 1 July 2016 at 00:46, Tony Anderson wrote: > > Your motion has never been presented to the Board. I feel very frustrated with your proposition that members can not present motions to the board. You see, of the 6 motions that have passed since I joined the