<@robbat2> ulm, antarus, prometheanfire, soap, antarus, dabbott, robbat2: meeting time [21:01] * ulm here * soap here here <@robbat2> antarus: I forecast FY2024 depreciation as ~$10k, assuming no capital purchases (they were done for the fiscal, and we paid no taxes this fiscal) [21:02] <@robbat2> somewhere I saw how to calculate efficiecny taking into account depreciation <@robbat2> but i'll have to dig it out I wrote the letter, but not an agenda [21:03] <@robbat2> did we have a general template for the old meetings somewhere? Let me see if I have the one from last year <@robbat2> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Meetings/2022/09 *** alexxy (~alexxy@gentoo/developer/alexxy) has quit: Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds. [21:04] <@robbat2> rollcall: present ulm, soap, antarus, robbat2 <@robbat2> absent: prometheanfire, dabbott, anarchy <@ulm> do we have a quorum of members? *** alexxy (~alexxy@gentoo/developer/alexxy) has joined channel #gentoo-trustees [21:05] *** ChanServ (ChanServ@services.libera.chat) has changed mode for #gentoo-trustees to +v alexxy do we need one? [21:06] <@robbat2> formally, the AGM is a meeting of members, not of trustees, and it supposed to have a qourum of members, unless waived <+dilfridge> Section 3.9. Member Quorum [21:07] <+dilfridge> Except as otherwise required by law, by the Certificate of Incorporation or by these Bylaws, one-third (1/3) of the members entitled to vote, represented in person, shall constitute a quorum at a meeting of members. <@robbat2> however, we have *never* had a sufficent qourum present for an AGM, in the history of the foundation <@robbat2> there are 78 members currently on the books, so we'd need 26 present [21:08] <+sam_> when was the last time membership was pruned? [21:09] <@robbat2> that's something I want to discuss here <@robbat2> after the old business parts <+sam_> ack we pruned it in June [21:10] but our pruning criteria isn't super effective <@robbat2> that was pre-election <@robbat2> anyway, by rough count, I think we have 22 members present <@robbat2> very fast hacky code <@ulm> "present" = in the channel? <@robbat2> yes, as in the channel <@robbat2> which kind of sucks in other ways <@robbat2> which is why... [21:11] <@ulm> that doesn't really mean they're actually present I mean I doubt it would count, even if we had the numbers so I'm not sure why we care <@ulm> anyway, no quorum <@robbat2> motion: agm to proceed without member quorum, to pass by qourum of old & new trustees aye <@robbat2> aye <@soap> aye <@ulm> yes [21:12] <@ulm> actually, who are old and new trustees? <@ulm> also, when and how have they been appointed? <@robbat2> (absents: anarchy, prometheanfire) <@robbat2> old: antarus, anarchy, prometheanfire, robbat2, soap [21:13] <@ulm> sorry to ask this, but the information is sort of hard to come by <@robbat2> (the formatting is terrible) <@robbat2> new: ulm, robbat2, prometheanfire, soap, (vacant) <@robbat2> [anarchy should have been up for re-election per terms, but we didn't get a candidate] [21:14] <@ulm> ok, so robbat2 and ulm have been elected this year <@ulm> prometheanfire and soap in 2022 then? <@ulm> or appointed w/o election? <@robbat2> for the motion purposes: unique set: antarus, antarus, prometheanfire, robbat2, soap, ulm (6); 4 ayes, 2 absent => majority pass I believe in 2022 (assuming you mean gregorian calendar) they were appointed [21:15] <@ulm> antarus and anarchy in 2021, so their term ends now? [21:16] correct <@ulm> thanks <@robbat2> double-checking all the above is good, and should probably happen out of band [21:17] <@robbat2> paperwork steps for the meeting: <@robbat2> 1. who's doing the formal logging? <@ulm> robbat2: there's twice antarus in your list above <@robbat2> good catch, one was supposed to be anarchy <@robbat2> since he's not in the channel my autocomplete failed [21:18] <@robbat2> paperwork 2: who's recording the minutes/motions <@robbat2> i'll take the minutes task, and nominate ulm, so we can make sure his access to commit them works ;-) <@robbat2> *nominate ulm for the logging <@ulm> logging like in irc log? [21:19] <@robbat2> yes, uploaded to the right place <@ulm> sure good cause I haven't tried commiting since I retire and my gpg key won't sign stuff cause it expired ;p <@robbat2> the previously posted agenda items from the email, as old business: <@robbat2> president's report <@robbat2> treasurer report <@robbat2> appointment of officers [21:20] <@robbat2> after that will be recurring task review & new business <@robbat2> anybody need amendments to that agenda, or shall we turn it over to antarus for the presidents report? [21:21] no [21:22] <@robbat2> (i'm making a meeting page in the meantime) [21:23] <@robbat2> antarus: the president's report please? https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTmOGiQMHOSzfU-jALMAFyARnv252R2SdXUekHUPdZ21njwzVJm58K5mnYM_vhiphZM6rx_dvVV_m1n/pub I tried to keep it brief, finances are in good shape, we continue to accrue cash. No particular problems in terms of operations from the money-side. [21:24] Nitrokey contacted us in May regarding a new contact for the nitrokey 3 [21:25] we have not yet responded (but it seems they are open to some kind of renewal in that relationship.) * dilfridge suggests that given the company's history no contract is signed until the nitrokeys are actually deliverable <+arthurzam> I also read that they aren't using the final firmware on those keys currently being delivered, so various promised capabilities weren't brought, and future upgrade would require somehow writing the new firmware [21:27] I do not plan on being on the board anymore and I retired from Gentoo in August of this year; I wish you teh best of luck in finding a fiscal sponsor. Any questions about the report (brief as it is) <+sam_> that doesn't agree iirc with what robbat2 said a week or two ago [21:28] what doesn't? <@robbat2> paperwork question: please submit a PDF/HTML version we can include in the archives, because I don't trust docs.google.com to exist forever I don't really intend to discuss the nitrokey contact at this exact moment I will email it to nfp later as pdf I think? I 'm not sub' anymore I'll email it to trustees@ <@robbat2> sam_: can you please clarify which part doesn't agree? <+sam_> [2023-07-31T19:40:29+0100] <@robbat2> and I propose to appoint antarus back to the board as one of the existing bank signatories, because we'll need all of them in the process of closing down accounts [21:29] <+sam_> [2023-07-31T19:42:10+0100] <+ulm> robbat2: that would require him not to retire? <+sam_> [2023-07-31T19:42:24+0100] <+ulm> according to section 5.2 of the bylaws? <+sam_> [2023-07-31T19:59:06+0100] <+ulm> robbat2: I have asked this before, is there a date and time for the AGM already? <+sam_> [2023-07-31T19:59:23+0100] <+ulm> and if not, should we fix them? <+sam_> [2023-07-31T22:47:52+0100] <@robbat2> we have not set an AGM datetime yet <+sam_> is that abandoned now? I'm happy to table the nitrokey discussion until later the intent isnt' to have at this point in the meeting. <@ulm> +1 I suggest that we figure out nitrokey later, not during this meeting <@robbat2> sam_: that's going to be covered in apointment of officers [21:30] <+sam_> right, okay, antarus brought it up now which is why I say <+sam_> happy to talk about it later though +1 [21:31] <@robbat2> i have no questions about the substance of the president's report; i have some remarks relevant to it that i'll cover as my treasurer report shortly I agree it doesn't match, it doesn' doesn't need to, we can work on the disagreement at the appointment time. <@robbat2> ulm, soap: if you have no questions, we can motion to accept the report [21:32] <@ulm> no questions to the president's report <@soap> no questions <@robbat2> motion: accept the president's report as written <@robbat2> aye <@soap> yes aye [21:33] <@ulm> yes <@robbat2> motion passes: 4 aye, 2 absent <@robbat2> treasurer's report: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Gentoo_Foundation_Finances_FY2023 [21:34] <@robbat2> i have some additional remarks that didn't fit there [21:35] <@ulm> what's the meaning of the various programs in section 1.5? <@ulm> i.e. Foundation / Infra / NONE? <@robbat2> "Program" in this context refers to a specific section of the business in the IRS classification stuff [21:36] <@robbat2> it can be a organization division, and/or a project/initiative division <@robbat2> e.g. in a much larger non-profit, a major fundraising program to buy real estate could be a project [21:37] <@robbat2> there should be at least programs in any non-profit: the operating tasks of the non-profit itself (Foundation in this case), and the "business" of the non-profit <@robbat2> in Gentoo's case, the "business" of the non-profit is things to support our open source mission, so mostly Infra costs to run the distro [21:39] <@robbat2> ulm: that answer it well enough? I should give you a tour of the finances repo that will help cover some more of that [21:40] <+dilfridge> ok so for us non-cpa's, may I try to summarize the tables and you tell me/us whether I see it correct? <@ulm> thanks, that answers it <@robbat2> *at least 2 progams in any non-profit <@robbat2> dilfridge: yes please <+dilfridge> "Statement of Financial Position" paragraph <@ulm> it's actually not much different from the system for a e.v. in Germany <@robbat2> (i'm not a CPA at all, the last accounting *course* I took was in high school) [21:41] <+dilfridge> left table (the large one), "Assets" is the sum over everything we "have" (either bought hardware or cash) <+dilfridge> minus the depreciation <@robbat2> left table: assets & contra-assets [Accumulated-Depreciation] [21:42] <+dilfridge> this is a "current state", the depreciation is accumulated over the past years, so purchase price - depreciation = rest value <+dilfridge> right table: apparently sums up expenses and income over several years, and then ends up with the current state described left <@robbat2> right table is liabilities & equity [21:43] <@robbat2> we have no liabilities (which is fantastic) <+dilfridge> (unclear is, which time range) <+dilfridge> the next part is "Statement of Activities" paragraph [21:44] <+dilfridge> this is fairly easy (to me) and describes income and expenses in the current financial year <@robbat2> retained earnings in a corporation would be the value that has NOT been taken out of the business (dividends to shareholders, repayments to investors etc) <@robbat2> correct on statement of activities [21:45] I thought we signed a contact with BCL libraries co-op, did we never execute it? (in terms of "we have no liabilities") <@robbat2> antarus: i'll cover that later k <@robbat2> dilfridge: continue [21:46] <+dilfridge> then, "statement of functional expenses" <+dilfridge> this is splitting up the expenses of the previous paragraph into subfields <@robbat2> breakdown of all expenses, by the IRS perscribed program system I wish the mail expenses separated email and check-cashing services; but I probably don't care enough to fix it ;p [21:47] er s/email/mail/ <+dilfridge> (foundation running costs, infra running costs, asset depreciation) <@robbat2> Statement of Cash Flows would be a similar breakdown of Income, it's not implemented in my financial statement report generator <+dilfridge> last is "Capital Assets", which is essentially an inventory <@robbat2> we have no investing or financing activities at this time (or ever to my knowledge), so it would be identical to the income above [21:48] <+dilfridge> not very readable but that doesnt really matter as long as someone knows what the numbers mean :o) <@robbat2> yes, inventory of what we own; needs some detailed auditing, esp of the stuff purchased for developers <@ulm> after what time are computers fully depreciated to a book value of 0$? [21:49] <+dilfridge> that's it from me <@robbat2> if you look at a previous year, the change-of-position section for capital assets gives you a detailed description: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Gentoo_Foundation_Finances_FY2022#Change_of_Position <+dilfridge> Assets:Capital:Computers:* 00.12 5 <@robbat2> ulm: 5 years for computers, per IRS MACRS rules <+dilfridge> I guess that ^ means 5 years? [21:50] <@robbat2> correct <@robbat2> ulm, soap, antarus: any further questions about the treasurer's reports? [21:52] <@soap> nope <@ulm> no no <@robbat2> prior to the motion; i'd like to note this report is pending approval by the tax accountant, per the comments at the top. [21:53] <@robbat2> that does not constitute CPA review, just approval for correctness for tax filing purposes <@robbat2> motion: approve the FY2023 treasurer report [21:54] <@robbat2> abstain (because I wrote the treasurer report) [21:55] <@ulm> yes yes <@soap> yes <@robbat2> outcome: passes, 3 aye, 1 abstain, 2 absent <@robbat2> additional remarks for FY2024: [21:56] <@robbat2> I know that we would *like* to wind up the foundation into a fiscal umbrella <@robbat2> to make that easier, we need to ensure that we don't have tax owing for FY2024 [21:57] <@robbat2> for that, our expenses must balance or exceed the income <@robbat2> fortunately that includes the contra-asset expense of depreciation [21:58] <@robbat2> based on present assets, my forecast is that FY2024 depreciation will be approximately $10k <+dilfridge> so, the depreciation will be lower <+dilfridge> yes <@robbat2> and our income is likely to be $16k again <@robbat2> so we have to make additional capital purchases of at least $6k we could also just remove the donation button ;) [21:59] <+dilfridge> cough <+dilfridge> let's replace some athlons ;) We had discussed in the past giving money to someone else (like the OSUOSL) although I'm not sure they have as easy of a donation method for our donors to use [22:00] <+dilfridge> that's something we could do at last resort [22:01] <@robbat2> yes, donating to another 501c3 non-profit is an option, but need to balance it carefully due to the tax credits anyway, just a remark don't need to sort it here. <@ulm> could we spend some money for bug bounties? [22:02] <@ulm> e.g. fix the e-mail archives? :) [22:03] <+dilfridge> YES PLEASE <@robbat2> yes, subject to working out the details for it <@robbat2> (buying stuff is easier than paying people) [22:04] <@robbat2> anything else, or we'll move on the discussion of the officers and open seat nope [22:05] <@robbat2> ok, officers: [22:07] <@robbat2> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Bylaws#Section_5.2._Qualification <@robbat2> At the minimum, we *MUST* have President, Secretary, Treasurer; The President & Secretary MUST NOT be the same person <@ulm> these need not be board members, correct? [22:08] <@robbat2> In addition to those roles we MAY have: Chair, Vice-Chair, Vice-President, Assistant Secretary, Assistant Treasure [22:09] <@robbat2> Only the Chair & Vice-Chair MUST be board members <@robbat2> e.g. Antarus can continue to be the president, even without being a trustee or foundation member [22:10] <+dilfridge> (assuming he isn't retired as developer) <+sam_> are you proposing that or giving it as an example? <@robbat2> that's as an example. The bylaws also don't require officers even be a developer [22:11] <@ulm> dilfridge: IIUC officers need not be devs <@robbat2> ulm: as a civil servant, can you summarize restrictions that prevent you from holding any officer roles? <@ulm> I'd have to apply for that role again with my employer [22:12] <@ulm> but I'd decline anyway, for lack of time, and also possible conflict of interest, because I'm president of Gentoo e.V. [22:13] <@robbat2> thanks [22:14] <@robbat2> also of relevance: we have the two distinct sets of bank accounts, with different signatories <@robbat2> set 1 has prometheanfire & antarus as signatory <@robbat2> set 2 has only dabbott left (further back tsunam & fmccor were also on it) [22:15] <@ulm> president and treasurer could be the same person? <@robbat2> in practice, the bank accounts basically require US citizens as signatories <@robbat2> yes, president and treasurer could be the same person I'm not entirely sure set 1 even has me on it (but it could) [22:16] <@robbat2> we need at least one of Secretary & President to be US citizens, for some paperwork signing purposes <@robbat2> to make the officer allocation easier: we need to fill the open trustee seat [22:17] <@robbat2> antarus: would you accept any appointment of the trustee seat, or an officer role, or do you intend to exit as much as possible? [22:19] I would decline even if appointed (sorry) <+dilfridge> I have the same limitation as ulm (for any official role I have to ask permission from my employer / the state of Bavaria) [22:20] appoint mattst88 ;) <+dilfridge> definitely not interested in becoming treasurer (robbat2 is doing that just great) [22:21] <@robbat2> yes, I intend to continue as treasurer unless anybody wants to oust me ;-) [22:22] (I need to get lunch soon, so I may need a 20m break to fetch it) <@robbat2> antarus: i have one specific request for you, since you're going to decline the appointments [22:23] <@robbat2> can you verify if you are still a signatory, and if you are, remain until such time we have have 2 other US citizens as signatories, or the accounts are closed? I will do the first part at least [22:26] <@robbat2> thank you [22:28] the answer appears to be no; I think last time I did this we got paper statements in teh mail I used to construct the financials (interest payments, etc.) <@robbat2> soap: are you subject to any restrictions about holding an officer role? [22:29] <@soap> no <@soap> or I dont think so => lunch, back in 20 <@soap> that said, I'm not keen on it either [22:30] <@robbat2> prometheanfire isn't here, so I can't badger him into taking a role <+dilfridge> (that's the point :o) <@robbat2> since we need a US citizen to sign paperwork, he's the only remaining choice other than the open seat <+dilfridge> we could ask maffblaster for secretary [22:31] <@soap> robbat2: oh, but I couldnt do it anyhow <@soap> I'm not a US citizen? <@robbat2> we need at least 1 of president/secretary to be US <@robbat2> doesn't need to be both <@ulm> robbat2: could you take on both president and treasurer roles? plus a US citizen as secretary? <@robbat2> yes, I could do that [22:32] <@ulm> so how does this work? are we to nominate and vote for each position separately? [22:34] <@ulm> or find all officers first, then vote on all at once? [22:35] <@robbat2> anything that fills the roles <@robbat2> historical logs show both processes have been done * ulm fears that we won't be able to fill all roles today <@robbat2> yes, it's functionally impossible to fill them during this meeting [22:36] <@ulm> I nominate robbat2 as president <@robbat2> i accept the nomination <@ulm> I guess someone other than robbat2 should move :) [22:37] * robbat2 pokes soap [22:38] <@ulm> motion: vote for Robin Johnson as President of the foundation <@soap> yes <@ulm> yes <@robbat2> yes [if I abstained it wouldn't pass] <@ulm> *sigh* [22:39] <@prometheanfire> o/ <@robbat2> oi! <@ulm> result: 3 aye, 3 absent <@ulm> ah! <@ulm> prometheanfire: please vote <@prometheanfire> I need to read back stuff <@ulm> motion is: vote for Robin Johnson as President of the Foundation [22:40] <@prometheanfire> yes <@ulm> 4 aye, 2 absent <@robbat2> motion passes <@ulm> ok, I also nominate robbat2 as treasurer [22:41] <@robbat2> prometheanfire: to catch you up here, we're sorting out the officers for the Foundation; I'd like to nominate you as Secretary, because we need a US citizen in that role <@robbat2> i also accept the nomination for treasurer <@prometheanfire> I can accept that [22:42] <@ulm> motion: vote for Robin Johnson as Treasurer of the Foundation <@soap> yes <@prometheanfire> yes <@ulm> yes <@robbat2> abstain [we have enough to carry it] <@ulm> 3 aye, 1 abstention, 2 absent [22:43] <@robbat2> motion passes <@ulm> motion passes <@ulm> congratulations :) <@robbat2> thanks <@ulm> so now you can continue chairing :) <@prometheanfire> robbat2: commiserations :P <@robbat2> I nominate prometheanfire (Matthew Thode) as Secretary <@prometheanfire> I accept the nomination for secretary <@robbat2> motion: vote for prometheanfire (Matthew Thode) as Secretary [22:44] <@robbat2> aye <@soap> yes <@ulm> yes <@prometheanfire> abstain <@robbat2> motion passes; 3 aye, 1 abstain, 2 absent <@robbat2> ulm's remark brings me to the optional officers [22:45] <@robbat2> we haven't had a formal Chair since NeddySeagoon resigned <@robbat2> do we need one, or are we happy to just run with ad-hoc chair? [22:46] <@prometheanfire> iirc the role for the chair was to lead meetings and set a direction? Or was that president? <@ulm> "The Chairman of the Board, if one is elected, shall preside at all meetings of the Board of Trustees and members and shall have such other duties and authority as may be conferred by the Board of Trustees." [22:47] <@robbat2> and under President: "If a Chairman of the Board is not elected, the President shall preside at all meetings of the Board of Trustees and members." <@prometheanfire> ok, mainly meetings, I'm ok either way (ad-hoc or not) <@robbat2> i'll skip it unless we want to propose somebody else as Chair; i just want efficent meetings [22:48] <@ulm> I'm also o.k. either way robbat2: is the quorum for these votes 6, even with the absent people? <+dabbott> I am here now if needed [22:49] <@ulm> I think for that role I wouldn't have to ask my employer again, board of trustees should cover it <@robbat2> dwfreed: I think it needs a close reading of the New Mexico corporate laws, if the quorum is new trustees/old trustees/both * dilfridge always wanted to know how an ad-hoc chair looks like ... https://labs.openai.com/sc/niyTuzmI1acmKrxyybATQBDz [22:50] <@robbat2> but I think for the motions, we would have passed here under all 3 variants robbat2: if quorum is 6, majority is 4 [22:51] not 3 <@ulm> 4 out of 6 were present, for both votes <@ulm> that's a quorum <@prometheanfire> we can vote yes instead of abstain <@ulm> but yeah, probably have to look up the law <@robbat2> does anybody feel we need the other optional officers per the bylaws? [22:52] <@robbat2> vice-chair, vice-president,assistent-treasurer, <@robbat2> assistant secretary <@prometheanfire> only thing would be someone for contacting outside umbrellas <@prometheanfire> not really needed though [22:53] <@robbat2> as president, I'd appreciate help with that, but you don't actually need to be an officer to take that on <@prometheanfire> we can take that on ad-hoc as a group <@robbat2> for the purpose of record keeping, and helping getting ulm up to speed [22:54] *** arisut_ (~none@gentoo/developer/alicef) has joined channel #gentoo-trustees [22:55] *** ChanServ (ChanServ@services.libera.chat) has changed mode for #gentoo-trustees to +v arisut_ <@robbat2> we have one additional officer, not perscribed by the bylaws. jmbsvicetto is the infra liason officer, as a check/balance on me also leading infra <@robbat2> i think he's on vacation presently [22:56] *** steils- (~steils@steils.org) has joined channel #gentoo-trustees <@robbat2> this brings us to the close of old business <@robbat2> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Meetings/2023/08#Old_Business *** mattst88_ (~mattst88@gentoo/developer/mattst88) has joined channel #gentoo-trustees [22:57] *** ChanServ (ChanServ@services.libera.chat) has changed mode for #gentoo-trustees to +v mattst88_ <@robbat2> for the open seat; if dilfridge will consider applying to his government, I'd like to offer the open trustee seat to him <@prometheanfire> I'm for that as well <@ulm> +1 [22:58] <+dilfridge> I'll submit the form tomorrow, if all goes well we should know in a week or two <@robbat2> that also sets the stage for the Council to have a majority on the among the new trustees, which will align well to the future umbrella replacing the foundation [22:59] <@robbat2> with: ulm, soap, dilfridge all being council <@ulm> dilfridge: if Bavaria is as quick as Rhineland-Palatinate :) <+dilfridge> hrhr *** sam__ (~sam@gentoo/developer/sam) has joined channel #gentoo-trustees *** ChanServ (ChanServ@services.libera.chat) has changed mode for #gentoo-trustees to +v sam__ <@robbat2> thank you dilfridge <+dilfridge> :] <@robbat2> one new business item to discuss: pruning the membership, post-election [23:00] <@robbat2> august 1st I had emailed trustees@ with a list of potential members to prune <@robbat2> who had not voted in the last 2 elections <@robbat2> it's 23 members on that list [23:01] <@robbat2> out of the 78 members in the foundation today *** sam__ (~sam@gentoo/developer/sam) is now known as sam_ [23:02] <@robbat2> does anybody see benefits to keeping them as member outright (e.g. organization size); or should we consider the pruning actions (outright, or only if they don't object in N days) <@ulm> last two elections were in 2021 and 2023, right? <@robbat2> yes [23:03] <@prometheanfire> I don't see benifets, if we need to disolve I think we active members to vote (I think...) <+sam_> just do it outright if they haven't voted in the last 2 [23:05] <+sam_> what prometheanfire said really <@ulm> I see no benefits of keeping them as members either <@ulm> these are all retired devs AFAICS <+sam_> in general (there's a few exceptions I can think of) tend not to remain engaged [23:07] <+sam_> +retired devs <@robbat2> motion: pruning of membership - 23 members to be removed for not voting in the last 2 elections; please vote with: aye-outright, aye-unless-objected, nay <@robbat2> aye-unless-objected (i'd give them 30 days in the email removing them) [23:08] <@ulm> aye-unless-objected <@ulm> (just to be friendly, shouldn't make much of a difference) [23:09] <@robbat2> prometheanfire, soap: your votes please *** maffblaster (~maffblast@gentoo/developer/maffblaster) has joined channel #gentoo-trustees *** ChanServ (ChanServ@services.libera.chat) has changed mode for #gentoo-trustees to +o maffblaster <@soap> aye-unless-objected <@robbat2> (prometheanfire: i'm giving you until :11:49, then i'll mark you absent again) [23:10] <@prometheanfire> aye <@prometheanfire> sorry, baby woke [23:11] <@robbat2> motion passes: 1 aye, 3 aye-unless-objected, 2 absent <@robbat2> any other new business before paperwork/boring stuff? <@ulm> no new membership applications? [23:12] <@robbat2> none [23:13] sorry, ran long <@robbat2> i'll ask again for new business after the paperwork stuff <@robbat2> - logging: ulm <@robbat2> - motions/minutes: robbat2 <@robbat2> activity tracker: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Activity_Tracker#Recurring_Activities <@robbat2> next up is tax filing, which i'll start w/ the tax accountant tommorow [23:14] <@robbat2> prometheanfire: as new Secretary, and *specifically* US citizen, you need do to the New Mexico Annual Report filing <@prometheanfire> yep [23:15] <@robbat2> your deadline is Nov 15th <@robbat2> that's all for required activities <@ulm> I cannot edit the foundation wiki pages BTW [23:16] <@robbat2> i'm NOT going to cover bugs at this meeting <@robbat2> maffblaster: as Foundation wiki editor, can you please note what we need to give ulm access <@robbat2> last item: meeting schedule <@robbat2> which I know ulm has opinions(TM) on <@ulm> yes, let's please have regular meetings again <@ulm> need not be monthly, but at least every two months would be good [23:17] <@ulm> can also be short if there's no/little business <+ajak> and remember: if all goes well, no more foundation meetings ever again! [23:18] <@ulm> I'd suggest on Sunday, after the Council meeting <@robbat2> ulm: i'll make you a deal: you track agenda items and i'll come to short meetings :-) <@ulm> I can do that <@robbat2> i'll have to maybe to that time slot, I don't know my schedule availability for that slot yet (it might have a recurring conflict) [23:19] <@ulm> k [23:20] <@ulm> suggest another time then? <@robbat2> after I know my conflict yes <@robbat2> (i have to wait for the school year to start and figure out the kids commitments for sept-dec) <@robbat2> ulm: do you want/need a motion to say we'll have regular meetings again? [23:21] <@ulm> yes, let's do that <@robbat2> motion: the Foundation Trustees shall have regularly scheduled synchronous meetings again (e.g. IRC), at least semi-monthly [2 months] [23:22] <+dilfridge> bimonthly <@robbat2> sorry [23:23] <@robbat2> motion: the Foundation Trustees shall have regularly scheduled synchronous meetings again (e.g. IRC), at least every 2 months <@robbat2> bimonthly may be twice a month because English sucks aye [23:24] <@prometheanfire> aye <@ulm> https://xkcd.com/1602/ <@robbat2> aye <@ulm> yes <+dilfridge> indeed, this is crazy <+dilfridge> OED: "twice a month or every two months" :O <@robbat2> soap: your vote please <@soap> yes <@robbat2> motion passes: 5 aye, 1 absent <@robbat2> ok, last call for new business that you want in the formal logs/minutes [23:25] <@robbat2> 2 minute timer starting now <@ulm> could I get the archives of trustees@ mail for the last 3 years? update on libraries contract and carbon60 hw? [23:26] <@robbat2> ulm: yes, but it will take some collating, I'll have to verify if there is a single place with it <@prometheanfire> I may have it all (local maildir) <@robbat2> antarus: the Carbon60 hardware is presently in my possesion, I've got it racked, and was hoping to reinstall it this coming week (i've got vacation) [23:27] <@prometheanfire> would need to be sure there's nothing specific to me, but all to, cc, bcc should be fine for a search <@ulm> robbat2: I just want to have it on record here, in case somebody would object to it <@robbat2> the Contract being referred to was a short-term plan I had put together: if we had to move the hardware on zero notice, without being able to move the services, I had a "nearby" home for the servers from their previous data center home [23:28] <@robbat2> so that I could feel safe in moving them with data intact, re-racking, and just updating IPs <@robbat2> since we got the breathing room, I took the safer route: erasing them before they left the Carbon60 building, and then taking them [23:29] <@robbat2> data therein was all of forums & bugs, which definetly included sensitive materials <@robbat2> it was only a short-term contract w/ the BC Libraries Cooperative, who are a former full-time employer of mine, I still do some consulting for them, and because of that consulting I knew they had some rackspace free temporarily [23:31] <@robbat2> it would have been at their cost basically <@soap> robbat2: are we done here? it <@soap> it's 30 min to midnight in CEST <@robbat2> i have no objections to ulm's email request <@robbat2> if anybody else objects to that, now is the time [23:32] no objections <@robbat2> antarus: does my answers regarding the hardware/hosting answer your question sufficently? yes [23:33] <@robbat2> thanks, then i'll declare this meeting over <@robbat2> may future meetings run shorter again <@robbat2> 2h33m [23:34] <@robbat2> not our longest meeting ever, getting there <@ulm> thank you for chairing [23:36]