15:01:08 <amrith> #startmeeting openstack-swg
15:01:08 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Aug  2 15:01:08 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is amrith. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:01:10 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:01:12 <amrith> #chair dhellmann
15:01:13 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_swg'
15:01:14 <openstack> Current chairs: amrith dhellmann
15:01:18 <dhellmann> #chair gothicmindfood
15:01:18 <amrith> #chair gothicmindfood
15:01:18 <openstack> Current chairs: amrith dhellmann gothicmindfood
15:01:20 <openstack> Current chairs: amrith dhellmann gothicmindfood
15:01:20 <ttx> o/
15:01:23 <amrith> #chair ttx
15:01:23 <openstack> Current chairs: amrith dhellmann gothicmindfood ttx
15:01:25 <shamail> hi everyone
15:01:27 <gothicmindfood> o/
15:01:30 <amrith> #chair everyone
15:01:31 <openstack> Warning: Nick not in channel: everyone
15:01:33 <openstack> Current chairs: amrith dhellmann everyone gothicmindfood ttx
15:01:41 <amrith> :)
15:01:41 <shamail> lol amrith
15:01:42 <gothicmindfood> :)
15:01:44 <amrith> g'morning all
15:01:52 <amrith> dhellmann, said he'd be 30m late
15:01:52 * gothicmindfood has to board a last minute flight today at 1530
15:02:00 <amrith> I have to leave shortly
15:02:04 <gothicmindfood> look at us busy folks
15:02:06 <ttx> fun
15:02:08 <amrith> let's get started and I'll hand off to someone
15:02:15 <ttx> if anyone is left
15:02:23 <amrith> #agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/SWGMeeting
15:02:25 <gothicmindfood> amrith: can I request we bump up my agenda item so I can do it before I board?
15:02:39 <dhellmann> yes, let's start with gothicmindfood
15:02:41 <amrith> gothicmindfood, you are up ...
15:02:43 <amrith> #topic [gothicmindfood] Update on the potential for the next training session at ZingTrain
15:02:47 <gothicmindfood> sweet
15:02:52 <ttx> dhelmwas just 2 min left after all
15:03:12 <gothicmindfood> so - some not-great news - the foundation has declined to fund the next round of leadership training at zingtrain until their next fiscal year
15:03:16 <dhellmann> my overlapping meeting was rescheduled at the last minute, so I'm here
15:03:26 <johnthetubaguy> when is the next fiscal year?
15:03:40 <gothicmindfood> so unless we can find some alternative funding, I believe we won't be able to do another training until next year
15:03:42 <ttx> I think it's aligned on the regular year
15:03:48 <gothicmindfood> ttx: it's the regular year, right?
15:03:52 <gothicmindfood> yup
15:03:59 <johnthetubaguy> thats refreshingly simple
15:04:10 <dhellmann> ok. we're always going to have folks who haven't gone through the training, so I think we're going to have to figure out how to make this work anyway
15:04:15 <gothicmindfood> we *could* attempt to find alternate sources of funding
15:04:24 <shamail> Do we know what the cost is per attendee? (this would allow us to ask around)
15:04:44 <gothicmindfood> for 10 people it's $12,500, and it's $500 per person after that
15:04:51 <shamail> Thanks gothicmindfood
15:04:54 <ttx> could we popose one where the cost is fully supported by attendees ? A bit unfair I realize...
15:05:24 <ttx> but some companies have training budget where they wouldn't have sponsoring budget or travel budget
15:05:38 * jroll shows up late
15:05:48 <gothicmindfood> ttx: it might make sense - it also helps when we have folks directly advocating with their companies for it
15:06:18 <gothicmindfood> ttx: I'm more concerned that the timeline there is so tight too, though, that we might want to plan on this happening later no matter what
15:06:21 <ttx> but then maybe it's just simpler to target early 2017 and start negociating for 2 in 2017
15:06:29 * gothicmindfood has to let zingtrain know soon if we want to keep those sept 14-16 dates
15:06:52 <gothicmindfood> ttx: exactly. I was also wondering if I could get pledges from foundation member companies for $$ dedicated to training
15:06:59 <gothicmindfood> kind of like a match for what the foundation is giving
15:07:00 <johnthetubaguy> well, if we did this every year, that seems a good way to keep caching new interested folks, and having a little of overlap if wanted, etc
15:07:13 <amrith> gothicmindfood, I think it is going to be unlikely unless you can get something done in the next week or so, right?
15:07:23 <dhellmann> not to devalue the experience, but as I said, we're going to have to figure out how to deal with communicating about the training with folks who haven't been through it at some point, so maybe we need to bump up the priority on that
15:07:49 <gothicmindfood> amrith: yeah, unless there are enough people who want to go who wan to go to bat for their companies footing their own cost in the immediate, I'm not sure we're going to make it for September.
15:08:10 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: that's very true. I also think a lot of this is about meeting folks in person to talk through the themes here
15:08:21 <amrith> to dhellmann's point, we're going to customize the things we learned a fair amount. So we should be in a position before long to look towards having our own spin on this whole thing, where the training is something we do internally, our own passport, etc.,
15:08:39 <dhellmann> gothicmindfood: sure. and we have other in-person meetings where we can "self train" or whatever you want to call it
15:08:40 <amrith> before long ~ famous last words
15:08:51 <gothicmindfood> :)
15:09:22 <gothicmindfood> ok, so it sounds like there's an understanding here that we won't be able to do more training til next fiscal year. I can work on some money-making schemes for the budget until then, and will ask for help here if/when I need it
15:09:38 <dhellmann> ++
15:09:40 <gothicmindfood> but we'll postpone, and I'll start to hunt for jan/feb/march dates that are open for the zingtrain folks
15:09:50 <amrith> thx gothicmindfood
15:10:05 <gothicmindfood> cool. Thanks for understanding everyone, and I'm sorry we couldn't make it happen before Barcelona!
15:10:15 <dhellmann> and in the mean time we can continue to work on how to share what we learned
15:10:24 <shamail> Thanks gothicmindfood!  I look forward to it next year.
15:10:26 <gothicmindfood> I should say - ZingTrain offers seats in public courses that cover a lot of the themes in our trainings, so if you're interested in those, you can buy into them
15:10:39 <gothicmindfood> pm me privately and I can send you links/do intros
15:10:59 <johnthetubaguy> dhellmann: I think quickly describing why we want to do each thing, is good practice anyways, so it might not be too bad
15:11:07 <dhellmann> johnthetubaguy : right
15:11:27 <dhellmann> I mean, the vast majority of the community affected by any change will not have been through the course
15:11:37 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, +1
15:11:50 <amrith> are we good to move on?
15:11:51 <gothicmindfood> any other questions about this before we change topics? we have a lot to cover today
15:12:00 <johnthetubaguy> agreed more folks who are advocates for change, the better, but I think this works
15:12:01 <dhellmann> let's keep going
15:12:11 <gothicmindfood> #topic What is our meeting schedule, again?
15:12:21 <amrith> gothicmindfood, I'll check the log later and see if there's anything else that people want
15:12:28 <dhellmann> someone please tell me the ics file is correct now. :-)
15:12:35 <gothicmindfood> :)
15:12:37 <amrith> So, dhellmann I'd like to announce that the ICS file is now good
15:12:43 <dhellmann> \o/
15:12:46 <amrith> ttx has the action item to find us a second meeting date
15:12:47 <gothicmindfood> I'm cool with holding the belief with you all that this is an odd week
15:13:01 <amrith> the etherpad has all the details about what went wrong (I'm a big fan of post-mortems)
15:13:05 <dhellmann> gothicmindfood : this is openstack. all weeks are "odd"
15:13:12 <amrith> after all, if we don't learn, we make the same mistakes again and again.
15:13:16 * johnthetubaguy giggles
15:13:20 <gothicmindfood> but yeah - ttx can you not make this time? should we try to move this to Fridays?
15:13:21 <dhellmann> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/iRMqOBSHQj
15:13:30 * gothicmindfood throws grenades on our happy meeting time
15:13:38 <amrith> friday's don't work for a lot of people (sabbath)
15:13:47 <gothicmindfood> ah, yeah, I remember that now
15:13:51 <amrith> fine with me, flavio already made that point
15:13:52 <gothicmindfood> also, it's saturdays for aussies
15:13:54 <ttx> I have another meeting concurrently to this one
15:13:58 <ttx> (staff call)
15:14:04 <ttx> which is difficult to move around
15:14:04 <gothicmindfood> ttx: ah okay.
15:14:10 <ttx> so I multiplkex right now
15:14:18 <amrith> ah, anyway. dhellmann I'd like to switch to #2 so I can go catch a plane
15:14:24 <dhellmann> ++
15:14:27 <amrith> #topic Should we recommend to the TC that they adopt the consensus model
15:14:34 <ttx> gothicmindfood: so, doable but clearly suboptimal
15:14:37 <amrith> I posted an etherpad
15:14:37 <flaper87> o/
15:14:38 <johnthetubaguy> did we agree a time for even weeks?
15:14:39 <amrith> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/JQeiUOtnlV
15:14:44 <ttx> in most cases the call ends early though
15:14:46 * flaper87 sorry he is late
15:14:57 <amrith> johnthetubaguy, there was a doodle in #0's etherpad
15:14:59 <gothicmindfood> johnthetubaguy: our meeting sounds like it's in flux
15:15:00 <amrith> anyway, back to #2
15:15:18 <amrith> I'd like to see if we can get enough progress to propose a consensus model to the TC
15:15:21 <amrith> for its consideration
15:15:32 <amrith> someone posted great comments in that etherpad (can't identify, no name).
15:15:36 <amrith> whoever it was, thanks
15:15:40 <ttx> we have a number of things on the oven already, maybe not optimal timing
15:15:43 <johnthetubaguy> thats me
15:16:08 <amrith> thx johnthetubaguy
15:16:17 <amrith> so, if others could review and post comments/updates
15:16:25 <amrith> I'll review later and propose a review for TC
15:16:29 <amrith> at the appropriate time
15:16:35 <shamail> The current model is lazy consensus right?  Is the delta identified in the proposal?
15:16:36 <ttx> oh nice, I'll review that etherpad
15:16:41 <ttx> shamail: no
15:16:53 <amrith> I'm going to be meeting mordred tomorrow so I will make sure to make him aware of this
15:16:54 <gothicmindfood> johnthetubaguy: those are great comments
15:16:55 <ttx> shamail: current default model is majority vote
15:17:18 <ttx> we use lazuy consensus for things that are not deemed as requiring a formal vote, following house rules
15:17:20 <amrith> with that, if there are no questions for me; I'd like to mosey on to the airport. I did my action items.
15:17:33 <shamail> thanks ttx, I was under the incorrect impression that not voting implied consensus
15:17:35 <amrith> I see that dhellmann did his (extra-atc's)
15:17:41 <gothicmindfood> thanks amrith! safe flight!
15:17:53 <dhellmann> yes, I think we're covered on all of the actions from last week
15:17:54 <amrith> we need to get a meeting time for the next week (odd, even, whatever ...)
15:17:55 <ttx> http://governance.openstack.org/reference/house-rules.html
15:17:57 <dhellmann> thanks, amrith
15:17:57 <flaper87> amrith: safe flights
15:18:07 <amrith> thanks all ... I'll read scrollback later
15:18:11 <amrith> #unchair everyone
15:18:12 <openstack> Current chairs: amrith dhellmann gothicmindfood ttx
15:18:14 <amrith> #unchair amrith
15:18:15 <openstack> Current chairs: amrith dhellmann gothicmindfood ttx
15:18:47 <dhellmann> ok, do we want to talk more about the proposal here or do folks want time to read it before we discuss it?
15:18:48 <gothicmindfood> I thought we were cool having meetings every other week?
15:18:56 * amrith exits stage right
15:18:57 <dhellmann> yeah, that's what I thought, too
15:18:59 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: I'm planning on reading that later and commenting on etherpad
15:19:01 <ttx> every other week is fine by me at this stage
15:19:11 <ttx> aligned wit hthe time investment I can make
15:19:15 <johnthetubaguy> works as a starting point
15:19:15 <dhellmann> ok, so let's move on to the next topic then
15:19:26 <ttx> dhellmann: yes, I need to read and comment on that etherpad
15:19:32 <flaper87> every other week works for me too
15:19:44 * flaper87 hasn't read the etherpad either
15:19:48 <gothicmindfood> #topic Continue review items short list from last meeting
15:19:49 <johnthetubaguy> my main comments for the etherpad were about making the more async rather than purely meeting based process
15:19:53 <dhellmann> I'm going to reorder again because I think 4 will be quicker
15:19:58 <johnthetubaguy> otherwise, I largely like the idea
15:20:02 <dhellmann> #topic Discuss any documents that are available for review
15:20:09 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/349068 describe a process for managing community-wide goals [dhellmann, et al]
15:20:10 <gothicmindfood> There are 4 reviews(?) I think
15:20:18 <gothicmindfood> oh, we're gonna do docs
15:20:29 <dhellmann> there has been a lot of discussion of that one on the ML. I'd like some folks from this group to chime in.
15:20:36 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/349069 add ocata goal "support python 3.5" [dhellmann]
15:20:43 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/349070 add ocata goal "switch to oslo libraries" [dhellmann]
15:21:02 <ttx> So I was a bit surprised by the initial reaction, a lot of people read "top-down design" when dhellmann meant "release themes taht would be awesome to reach cross-project"
15:21:04 <dhellmann> those two are specific goal proposals based on the list we came up with during our discussion in Ann Arbor
15:21:22 <ttx> s/themes/goals/
15:21:27 <dhellmann> yes. I would appreciate help clarifying that.
15:21:43 <ttx> "small release goals that would be awesome to collectively complete"
15:21:46 * flaper87 is catching up with that thread too (was off yday and friday)
15:22:02 <jroll> so I think part of the reaction is because we haven't defined what happens to a project that doesn't get these things done
15:22:06 * gothicmindfood only briefly saw that thread and didn't realize it was going that way
15:22:13 <jroll> and people could be concerned the answer is "kick them out"
15:22:14 <ttx> I'll reply to the thread
15:22:23 <jroll> which is scary, understandably
15:22:57 <gothicmindfood> jroll: good point.
15:23:08 <dhellmann> jroll : sure. I thought our conclusion to that was basically that choosing not to work on community goals was choosing to not be part of the community.
15:23:57 <dhellmann> I had been planning to wait for mordred's list of principles before posting the goals stuff, but I started worrying about us having enough time to agree on the actual goals, much less the process.
15:24:05 <jroll> dhellmann: sure, but it isn't direct in that resolution, so maybe fear of the unknown?
15:24:07 <dhellmann> maybe if I'd waited that part would be more clear
15:24:13 <johnthetubaguy> thing is, that feels like top down enforcement, rather than building consensus as a community around the goals, which I think is the intent here (apart from my miss-use of the word consensus)
15:24:16 <shamail> dhellmann: that was how I intrepreted as well… but uncertain on whether the goals would be strict or could someone justify why they couldn’t make it happen.  Resources fluctuate, etc.
15:24:52 <jroll> dhellmann: or, projects are concerned they legitimately won't get it done and will get kicked out because they're not good at being organized or whatever, not because they were opposed to the goal
15:25:36 <johnthetubaguy> so not to confuse, but that discussion about new projects could play into this here
15:25:56 <johnthetubaguy> everyone gets a bit of time to get their house in order, if it takes too long, you get kicked out?
15:26:46 <dhellmann> this isn't about kicking people out though. it's about building a culture of establishing common goals and working toward them.
15:26:47 <ttx> I agree that it would have been better to not have those two discussions in parallel, which is why I kicked that can down the road, but Doug was feeling optimistic and picked up the can :)
15:27:19 <gothicmindfood> johnthetubaguy: one of the tensions we identified in training was the idea that the expectations of what it means to be an openstack project haven't really ever been made explicitly clear
15:27:48 <johnthetubaguy> gothicmindfood: yeah, agreed with that
15:28:09 <gothicmindfood> and I think pretty much everyone understands that as those discussions are had they'll be difficult, and people will get pissed.
15:28:28 <shamail> Agreed dhellmann, would it be an option to emphasize that this is a pilot with goals that are already in-flight and to start change in the culture… We could also highlight that in the future, we will have ways to discuss goals as well before publishing?
15:28:44 <johnthetubaguy> so we can separate them, but maybe we just need to be clearer about they why we are doing this stuff? and get people bought into that vision
15:28:52 * jroll is sad the goals already proposed haven't helped steer the discussion away from "but what if the TC forces me to do X that I disagree with?!"
15:29:03 <gothicmindfood> johnthetubaguy: right, I think right now we're starting with 'here are the goals/work' and we don't have the vision yet
15:29:03 <dhellmann> shamail : I really thought I covered all of that in the proposal, but if it's not clear I'll take suggestions for expanding on it.
15:29:09 <shamail> The objective is to set some goals to establish the pattern of being goal-oriented… the process can be refined and noone is being penalized for now
15:29:20 <dhellmann> jroll : right, that's why I put all 3 patches up together
15:29:20 <gothicmindfood> and that might make it hard to be more inspiring, and it sounds more... dictatorial
15:29:22 <johnthetubaguy> I think everyone wants to pull together better as a cohesive platform, and this is a great idea to help get there
15:29:45 <ttx> posted a comment on that thread
15:29:56 <shamail> dhellmann: I understood it based on reading your responses in the review and ML.. I am not sure if everyone has gone through it yet so an updated summary might be beneficial to some
15:30:19 <dhellmann> shamail : there are no penalties. Projects that are part of the community will prioritize community goals. Projects that choose not to do that are expressing that they do not want to be part of the community. That's a choice, not something being forced on them.
15:30:36 <johnthetubaguy> hmm, re-reading the why is there, its somehow not jumping out at me though, curious
15:30:45 <shamail> +1, incorrect phrasing on my part.
15:31:08 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: ++
15:31:08 <jroll> dhellmann: right, so I think we need to be explicit about the 'no penalties' thing, people are worried TC wants to remove projects
15:31:57 <dhellmann> jroll: ok. Is my phrasing from above good? I can add that to a new draft where I fix some of the typos, too.
15:32:53 <ttx> dhellmann: I still think it's too negative. See my phrasing on the ML thread answer
15:33:14 <jroll> dhellmann: I think you'll get some "what does not being part of the community mean?", which will start another conversation about what level of non-cooperation is required to start considering moving a project out of the tent
15:33:30 <ttx> Not participating in common goals is not something that automatically gets you out, it's a sign you're not playing by the community rules, which adds up to other signs imho
15:33:38 <gothicmindfood> isn't that a conversation that has to happen, though?
15:33:47 <ttx> so I'm not even sure we need to mention project removal or anything
15:34:15 <flaper87> ttx: I agree that we shouldn't mention it
15:34:21 <dhellmann> ttx: ack, I'll incorporate that
15:34:22 * flaper87 kinda caught up
15:34:40 <jroll> gothicmindfood: totally - do we want to block this goals thing on it?
15:34:53 <jroll> ttx: completely agree with that
15:34:54 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: is it fair to say that this is about driving cross project cooperation and openstack cohesiveness, and that it's not the mandate of goal-setting to decide which projects stay and go in the community - that's the job of the TC on a larger level?
15:35:12 <dhellmann> gothicmindfood: that's also a good way to put it
15:36:03 <ttx> There are a lot of things in the naughty/nice list
15:36:18 <gothicmindfood> that participating in cross-project goals is an indicator of commitment to the community, but isn't meant as some kind of trojan horse to oust projects simply based on meeting or participating?
15:36:20 <ttx> and there is already a mechanism to expell projects that have too much in the naughty column
15:36:30 <ttx> I don't think we need anything specific there
15:36:34 <gothicmindfood> ttx is openstack santa, clearly
15:36:46 <gothicmindfood> :)
15:37:00 <ttx> just call them community-wide goals and let them infer the price for being gratuitously resisting
15:37:00 <gothicmindfood> ttx: I think, if people are bringing it up in those reviews, that clarifying might help
15:37:05 <gothicmindfood> because it seems like they already think that
15:37:45 <dhellmann> gothicmindfood : do you want to post your comments to the ML or review?
15:37:54 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: I will do both :)
15:38:00 <dhellmann> good, thanks
15:38:07 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: are you planning on covering the review in today's TC meeting?
15:38:10 <johnthetubaguy> maybe removing the comment in here for now, helps remove this debate? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/349068/1/reference/new-projects-requirements.rst
15:38:14 <jroll> ttx: I'm just concerned letting people hypothesize is what leads us to the current situation with people panicking
15:38:21 <ttx> well, we can mention that "while being a sign that you don't align with the rest of openstack on common goals, refusal to prioritize common goals will not in itself trigger removal of the tent"
15:38:25 <jroll> or letting people infer, rather
15:38:27 <johnthetubaguy> jroll: I have a similar worry
15:38:28 <dhellmann> it's not on the agenda, but ttx mentioned that we might cover it in open discussion as a preview
15:38:38 <gothicmindfood> ttx: I think that's a good way to put it
15:38:43 <ttx> if we have free time
15:38:51 <dhellmann> right, "might"
15:39:09 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: okay, I may not have time to comment til later this evening, then, just wanted to know if it was expected by today's meeting
15:39:30 <dhellmann> gothicmindfood : understood, no rush
15:39:38 <dhellmann> folks, please also look at the specific goals and the template and give some feedback on whether those have the right level of detail
15:39:54 <dhellmann> we'll adjust them over time, but if there's anything obviously missing it would be good to add it now
15:40:11 <dhellmann> is there anything else to say on this topic, or should we move on to our short-list reorg?
15:40:19 <johnthetubaguy> did we discuss having a tag to track completion of some of these goals?
15:40:37 <dhellmann> the goal documents themselves have the completion tracking info built in
15:40:57 <johnthetubaguy> true, I guess that could be per goal
15:41:03 <ttx> johnthetubaguy: that's a pretty bad idea. Tags have to be useful downstream, not a tool for tracking community alignment
15:41:12 <ttx> They are meant to help people using openstack
15:41:42 <johnthetubaguy> ttx: true, I was thinking about py3.x support too much
15:41:45 <ttx> Not sure if users care that we remove oslo copypasta, it's just payinng down tech debt
15:41:55 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, agreed with that one
15:42:12 <johnthetubaguy> its also a your done if its not present thing, which is an odd one
15:43:01 * gothicmindfood has to get going soon, to board the plane
15:43:06 <gothicmindfood> do we want to move onto our fun list?
15:43:10 <dhellmann> ok, let's switch while we have time to make some progress on the organizational work
15:43:17 <dhellmann> #topic Continue review items short list from last meeting
15:43:24 <dhellmann> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/swg-short-list-deliverables
15:43:38 <dhellmann> after the meeting last week I did a little more reorg to split out some things from the massive outline format
15:43:38 <shamail> could there just be a generic ‘implements community goals’ tag?  This would show consumers that a project is a good community citizen (which also reflects its health similar to diverse-affiliation)
15:44:00 <dhellmann> we left off on what is now line 89
15:44:21 <dhellmann> shamail : we would need some objective measurement for that
15:44:54 <dhellmann> I think the item about consensus can move up under "open questions". agreed?
15:45:19 <ttx> yes
15:46:02 <dhellmann> I think line 96 is a duplicate of mordred's principles document, isn't it?
15:46:14 <dhellmann> if not a 1:1 dupe, at least part of it
15:46:40 <jroll> ++
15:46:43 <johnthetubaguy> does anyone have the link to that doc handy, I lost it
15:46:58 <dhellmann> I can't find the relevant section in this doc either
15:47:00 <jroll> it wasn't ready for public when it was posted here
15:47:08 <dhellmann> oh, nm, I see it
15:47:15 * jroll digs for it
15:47:50 <dhellmann> line 101 is part of the consensus discussion
15:47:51 <jroll> johnthetubaguy: PM'd
15:48:27 <dhellmann> line 103 seems like another group discussion topic?
15:48:55 <jroll> hm
15:49:04 <jroll> I thought when we discussed it, we said that's ok
15:49:23 <gothicmindfood> yeah, I thought that was part of the next effort: consensus stuff
15:49:28 <jroll> if people vote for folks that say "the vision is wrong, I want to be TC so I can fix it", so be it?
15:49:50 * gothicmindfood would like to move that "consensus stuff" be the official review title for amrith 's governance patch :)
15:49:54 <dhellmann> so that's an answered question?
15:50:07 <jroll> that's how I understood it, but someone added it here, so idk?
15:50:09 <gothicmindfood> dhellmann: it feels like a cross between consensus and principles that mordred is working on
15:50:15 <ttx> jroll: tricky if we want shared vision and consensus decision making
15:50:26 <jroll> ttx: indeed, it makes it difficult
15:50:35 * gothicmindfood added a little passport comment below this one
15:50:37 <dhellmann> someone write something on line 107 about how that's resolved :-)(
15:50:39 * gothicmindfood has to board her flight now
15:50:39 <dhellmann> :-)
15:50:42 <jroll> ttx: so maybe needs some thought
15:50:45 <gothicmindfood> (will read backscroll)
15:50:46 <dhellmann> gothicmindfood : safe travels
15:50:46 <gothicmindfood> :)
15:50:48 <flaper87> gothicmindfood: safe flights
15:51:08 <jroll> gothicmindfood: enjoy \o
15:51:13 <ttx> Zingerman's solves it by coopting new members and have them agree on the vision before they even consider joining, so they can apply consensus decision making after that
15:51:26 <ttx> Wouldn't work if their business line leaders were elected
15:51:43 <ttx> or worse, if their overall leadership was directly elected
15:51:47 <dhellmann> that's right
15:52:00 <dhellmann> so move it back to open questions
15:52:04 <dhellmann> ?
15:52:09 <ttx> so this is why we might not be able to replicate that
15:52:10 <jroll> I think I captured this discussion there
15:52:47 <dhellmann> yes, at this point I think it's safe to say it needs more discussion, even if that's just to clarify that we anticipate issues if we have a huge turnover in the tc or something
15:52:50 <ttx> so I think this needs to remain open question at this stage
15:53:05 <dhellmann> let's focus on organizing and not answering each question for now
15:53:27 <dhellmann> lines 118 and 128 look related
15:53:35 <jroll> +1
15:53:36 <dhellmann> and like an open question
15:54:36 <dhellmann> line 131 is related to the blc proposal above, and I don't think it adds anything so how about we just delete it?
15:55:14 <dhellmann> lin 132 seems like an expanded version of the blc question
15:55:24 <ttx> yeah
15:55:29 <dhellmann> did we talk about anything other than blc when this came up?
15:55:39 <dhellmann> blogging or email or anyting?
15:56:05 <ttx> I think it was general
15:56:30 <ttx> like 'too many people ignore how the TC works and what it's supposed to do and what it does'
15:56:34 <dhellmann> ok,  I have no idea what line 135 refers to. Was that about goals?
15:56:52 <ttx> I think it was for change in general
15:57:05 <ttx> but happy to remove those lines
15:57:40 <dhellmann> lin 137 looks like it could go under line 79
15:57:49 <ttx> yes
15:57:58 <dhellmann> or vice versa
15:58:47 <dhellmann> line 141 is done
15:59:04 <dhellmann> line 146 is the same as goals, right?
15:59:38 <dhellmann> almost out of time
16:00:05 <jroll> 147 == 47
16:00:06 <dhellmann> the rest of these all seem to be open discussion items
16:00:16 <dhellmann> ah, yes
16:00:35 <jroll> yeah, the rest do look like open items
16:00:41 <dhellmann> the new 147 is a thing we were going to propose but need to think about more
16:00:42 <jroll> is 151 the same as 120?
16:01:03 <dhellmann> uyes, I think so
16:01:09 <jroll> cool
16:01:20 <jroll> woo, made it with only one extra minute \o/
16:01:28 <dhellmann> leading!
16:01:33 <ttx> thnaks dhellmann
16:01:33 <dhellmann> ok, let's clear the room
16:01:35 <dhellmann> thank you everyone!
16:01:43 <dhellmann> #endmeeting