summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
-rw-r--r--2015/meeting-09-20-AGM-2015.log230
1 files changed, 230 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/2015/meeting-09-20-AGM-2015.log b/2015/meeting-09-20-AGM-2015.log
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d16c3b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2015/meeting-09-20-AGM-2015.log
@@ -0,0 +1,230 @@
+Sep 20 15:00:25 * NeddySeagoon bangs the gavel to open the Gentoo Foundations Second try at the 2015 AGM
+Sep 20 15:00:35 <NeddySeagoon> Roll call
+Sep 20 15:00:56 * SwifT puts his hand up to show attendance
+Sep 20 15:00:57 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: quantumsummers
+Sep 20 15:01:03 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: I am here
+Sep 20 15:01:09 <_robbat21irssi> hi
+Sep 20 15:01:26 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: Did you ever do the research on what we talked a while back?
+Sep 20 15:01:52 <K_F> taking attendance only on trustees, or members in general?
+Sep 20 15:02:03 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: I tried, I can find nothing in the bylaws and nothing in the NM statutes
+Sep 20 15:02:47 * dilfridge listening
+Sep 20 15:02:47 <NeddySeagoon> K_F: That a second got at the AGM was quorate regardless of the turn out.
+Sep 20 15:03:15 <SwifT> K_F: quorum on trustees to check if we have a valid meeting
+Sep 20 15:03:55 <_robbat21irssi> i'm here with a very fussy toddler today
+Sep 20 15:03:58 <NeddySeagoon> We have neveg had a quorum of memeors. Ever. I propose we go ahead with a quorum of trustees, which we have now
+Sep 20 15:04:00 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: So do we have a basis for that? I don't remember that being used before.
+Sep 20 15:05:17 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: We have precedent. We have done it every AGM so far
+Sep 20 15:05:44 <SwifT> NeddySeagoon: with you, Betelgeuse and me we have quorum, not? and with _robbat21irssi we have the same for the new team, right?
+Sep 20 15:05:49 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: What I remember for previous AGMs is that the new Trustees just take over.
+Sep 20 15:06:37 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: thats it. Its _robbat21irssi opportunity to ensure we ace in good shape before he takes his seet
+Sep 20 15:07:13 <NeddySeagoon> With the tree trustees we have, I propose we rum the 2015 AGM
+Sep 20 15:07:23 <NeddySeagoon> run*
+Sep 20 15:07:49 <NeddySeagoon> If we delay again, its not going to get any better
+Sep 20 15:08:19 <NeddySeagoon> dabbott: could you texn matt please
+Sep 20 15:08:20 <_robbat21irssi> let's do it
+Sep 20 15:08:33 <NeddySeagoon> SwifT: Betelgeuse ?
+Sep 20 15:08:38 <SwifT> i'm here
+Sep 20 15:08:43 <SwifT> ok
+Sep 20 15:08:53 <NeddySeagoon> Lets do it ...
+Sep 20 15:09:03 <_robbat21irssi> my only concern regarding not being in good shape, is that quantumsummers seems to be absent in his treasurer duties
+Sep 20 15:09:07 <dabbott> please do :)
+Sep 20 15:09:23 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: Noted
+Sep 20 15:09:37 <dabbott> I called Matt last month, he never called me back
+Sep 20 15:09:48 <NeddySeagoon> Who is logging the meeting ? dabbott its usually you
+Sep 20 15:09:56 <dabbott> I got it
+Sep 20 15:09:59 <_robbat21irssi> regular AGM business first; then new business at the end
+Sep 20 15:10:10 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: works for me
+Sep 20 15:10:16 <NeddySeagoon> Officer Reports
+Sep 20 15:10:21 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: So can you clarify what's going on. So this is a AGM which only Trustees have voting rights in and rights to participate fall on the Trustees from the now term to end?
+Sep 20 15:13:12 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: The only business where the mewbers vote has already been transacted. Thats the vote for new trustees. _robbat21irssi was elected unopposed. Its done this way instead of at the AGM because of the problews you have seen attempting to have an AGM that complies with the NM statuate.
+Sep 20 15:13:34 <dabbott> Betelgeuse: this is the final meeting for the old trustees, so you are still an official, the new trustees take over at the end of this meeting
+Sep 20 15:13:46 <NeddySeagoon> That says we need not be in the same room but must all be able to hear (voice) one another
+Sep 20 15:14:22 <NeddySeagoon> Thats from a time when loudspeaker phones wer new
+Sep 20 15:14:26 <NeddySeagoon> brb
+Sep 20 15:15:02 <Betelgeuse> dabbott: Yes a Trustee meeting is fine. I doubt they can replace an AGM though.
+Sep 20 15:15:54 <dabbott> Betelgeuse: who is they?
+Sep 20 15:16:15 <dabbott> The new trustees?
+Sep 20 15:17:47 <Betelgeuse> dabbott: My guess is that the new Trustees came into affect at the end of the previous try for the AGM with no quorum
+Sep 20 15:17:53 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: Do you think that the members quorum will improve with further delay.? It never has over the last 8 years
+Sep 20 15:18:36 <dabbott> This meeting is mainly for the officer reports, and you can accept them or not, its your choice, but you should get a chance to voice your concerns etc
+Sep 20 15:19:31 <NeddySeagoon> Members hawe already had the opportunity to elect new trustees.
+Sep 20 15:19:40 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: ?
+Sep 20 15:19:51 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: I don't think so but I don't see how it relates to what I am talking about
+Sep 20 15:20:11 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: Then I am missing your point
+Sep 20 15:20:24 <dabbott> NeddySeagoon: I think his question is about when the new trustees take over, not about the members
+Sep 20 15:20:53 <Betelgeuse> My point is that we can have a) trustee meetings b) members meeting. I object to having a member meeting where trustees stand in for the members.
+Sep 20 15:21:24 <rich0> NeddySeagoon: I'd think that the trustee terms would be set by date. While we normally try to have the AGM before the new trustees take over, if it gets delayed then the new trustees would just take over. Not a big difference in this case with only one new trustee.
+Sep 20 15:21:40 <rich0> Betelgeuse: I don't think we're having a member meeting per-se.
+Sep 20 15:21:44 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: How do we have an AGM ever then ... but I see your point
+Sep 20 15:22:18 <rich0> In any case, I've never seen a corporation whose AGM wasn't presided over by the existing directors/etc.
+Sep 20 15:22:29 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: Yes I don't see it ever happening.
+Sep 20 15:22:49 <dabbott> We talked about this before and with irc meetings we would never get enough members, we have a hard time geting trustees to show up
+Sep 20 15:22:58 <rich0> And certainly at my employer's last AGM they didn't have a majority of the shareholders in the room. That would probably be hundreds of thousands of people.
+Sep 20 15:23:02 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: Unless we actively communicate people that their participation is required to make a decision.
+Sep 20 15:23:16 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: this is the second opportunity for a members meetitg and we hawe 16 members present voices+ops.
+Sep 20 15:23:25 <rich0> Betelgeuse: you can't get a majoriy of members to vote in a two week period.
+Sep 20 15:23:35 <rich0> Let alone attend an IRC meeting at a specific day and time.
+Sep 20 15:23:41 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: We provided the legally required notice
+Sep 20 15:23:55 <rich0> imo, the trustees should just proceed, but that's just imo
+Sep 20 15:24:02 <Betelgeuse> rich0: The Finnish system requires a quorum of member as a default which makes things easier.
+Sep 20 15:24:27 <rich0> Betelgeuse: we're not in Finland, but if we required a membership quorum we probably would never have a meeting, and we'd probably have to disband
+Sep 20 15:24:38 <rich0> I don't see how that helps us
+Sep 20 15:24:46 <SwifT> do we need to do this discussion right now? what's the point to do so? perhaps the discussion about it can be held on gentoo-nfp so we can continue with the agenda right now?
+Sep 20 15:24:49 <Betelgeuse> rich0: Then we should change the bylaws to lower the threshold.
+Sep 20 15:24:52 <rich0> SwifT: ++
+Sep 20 15:24:52 <SwifT> unless there's an objection related to this
+Sep 20 15:25:04 <rich0> Betelgeuse: I suggest you take that up on the list. By all means propose it.
+Sep 20 15:25:16 <dilfridge> just fyi
+Sep 20 15:25:16 <dilfridge> Section 3.2. Annual Meeting ... A meeting of the members shall be held annually...
+Sep 20 15:25:16 <dilfridge> Section 3.9. Member Quorum ... 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
+Sep 20 15:25:19 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: So does NM Law. But the law does not make members show up. The law requires no more than 13 months between one AGM and the next too.
+Sep 20 15:25:57 <dilfridge> but I also think this is unrealistic
+Sep 20 15:26:09 <NeddySeagoon> We can run the AGM with the people we have or delay further. Rock ... hard place.
+Sep 20 15:26:55 <NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: thats NM statut...
+Sep 20 15:27:02 <rich0> Would it make sense to just make the ballots for trustees a proxy statement as well.
+Sep 20 15:27:29 <rich0> I think that might be how corproations do it. When i elect directors I'm actually appointing some secretary to be my proxy at the meeting to cast my votes.
+Sep 20 15:27:34 <NeddySeagoon> Ialso recall somethung about a second meeting was quorate regaless ... but I can't find it.
+Sep 20 15:27:40 <_robbat21irssi> I'd like to motion the following: This discussion is taken to the NFP, with the formal question of: "The bylaws shall amended introduce a reasonable provison for holding member meetings with the actual quorum turnouts historically seen"
+Sep 20 15:27:42 <rich0> So, then we have a quorum if 1/3rd of the members vote, etc.
+Sep 20 15:28:18 <NeddySeagoon> rich0: We use concordant voting on ,pecker. Same as the council
+Sep 20 15:28:23 <rich0> _robbat21irssi: ++ I think it is pointless to argue over whether the current meeting meets a provision that no meeting in the history of the foundation ever met.
+Sep 20 15:28:26 <_robbat21irssi> The discussion definetly needs to take place, but this is neither the time nor place for it.
+Sep 20 15:29:05 <_robbat21irssi> put it to the NFP list, come up with wording, announce it on the legally required foundation-announce list, have a vote, matter closed if passed
+Sep 20 15:29:09 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: Agreed
+Sep 20 15:29:10 <Bircoph> Betelgeuse> rich0: Then we should change the bylaws to lower the threshold. — ++ As I see now AGM have little difference from a monthly meating aside from enrolling new trustees.
+Sep 20 15:29:24 <NeddySeagoon> Bircoph: That would be illegal
+Sep 20 15:29:51 <_robbat21irssi> Bircoph: the AGM must also include the required reports
+Sep 20 15:29:53 <_robbat21irssi> legally
+Sep 20 15:29:59 <Bircoph> ok, thanks
+Sep 20 15:30:08 <NeddySeagoon> Section 3.9. Member Quorum ... 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 is the minim from NM law
+Sep 20 15:30:35 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: I see NM law saying: "In the absence of any such pro- vision, members holding one-tenth of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter to be voted upon represented in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum."
+Sep 20 15:30:56 <rich0> I agree with _robbat21irssi - I suggest taking that debate offline, and maybe talking to a lawyer for advice. I doubt most corporations in NM have 1/3rd of their stockholders show up in a room annually.
+Sep 20 15:31:09 <dabbott> as said before corperations must use some sort of proxy system
+Sep 20 15:31:36 <NeddySeagoon> Hmm. we have 12 today
+Sep 20 15:31:45 <SwifT> yes, I think there's enough for a good discussion on the mailinglist, but we're not going to find a common solution and agreement in this meeting afaics
+Sep 20 15:31:59 <NeddySeagoon> Yes - lets take the debate offline.
+Sep 20 15:32:01 <dabbott> yes lets move on
+Sep 20 15:32:08 <SwifT> i suggest to move forward, and people who object to the legality of this meeeting can voice it on the mailinglist
+Sep 20 15:32:09 <NeddySeagoon> Wtah of todays AGM ?
+Sep 20 15:32:25 <_robbat21irssi> let's continue with the AGM business
+Sep 20 15:32:26 <SwifT> continue like we've always done
+Sep 20 15:32:41 <NeddySeagoon> ok.Officer Reports
+Sep 20 15:32:41 <SwifT> we can bikker over the legality (and the purpose of fighting it) on the mailinglist
+Sep 20 15:32:55 <NeddySeagoon> Presidents Report ...
+Sep 20 15:33:24 <NeddySeagoon> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:2015_Presidents_Report I presume everyone has read it?
+Sep 20 15:34:01 <NeddySeagoon> Comments, questions before its put to the vote ?
+Sep 20 15:34:17 <SwifT> no comments from me
+Sep 20 15:34:37 <NeddySeagoon> Comments from members ?
+Sep 20 15:34:38 <_robbat21irssi> no comments
+Sep 20 15:35:21 <NeddySeagoon> I motion that the presidents report is adopted as is
+Sep 20 15:35:36 <SwifT> same
+Sep 20 15:35:50 <NeddySeagoon> Vote please
+Sep 20 15:35:53 <_robbat21irssi> aye
+Sep 20 15:35:58 <NeddySeagoon> aye
+Sep 20 15:35:59 <SwifT> aye
+Sep 20 15:36:01 <Betelgeuse> aye
+Sep 20 15:36:22 <NeddySeagoon> The presidents report is adopted.
+Sep 20 15:36:28 <NeddySeagoon> Secretarys Report
+Sep 20 15:36:42 <NeddySeagoon> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:2015_Secretary_Report
+Sep 20 15:37:08 <NeddySeagoon> Comments and questions to the secretary
+Sep 20 15:38:07 <NeddySeagoon> I motion that the Secretarys Report is adopted as is
+Sep 20 15:38:13 <SwifT> aye
+Sep 20 15:38:25 <NeddySeagoon> aye
+Sep 20 15:38:35 <_robbat21irssi> aye
+Sep 20 15:38:48 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: ?
+Sep 20 15:39:02 <Betelgeuse> aye
+Sep 20 15:39:36 <NeddySeagoon> Now the hard one. The Treasuers Report.
+Sep 20 15:39:45 <NeddySeagoon> I don't have a link
+Sep 20 15:39:50 <_robbat21irssi> (can we hurry up to new business, fussy kid, but I have important stuff for any-of-other-business)
+Sep 20 15:40:01 <SwifT> afaik, there isn't one :(
+Sep 20 15:40:04 <SwifT> (again)
+Sep 20 15:40:06 <NeddySeagoon> We need to hold this over
+Sep 20 15:40:20 <_robbat21irssi> to the best of my knowledge, quantumsummers has not publically provided the treasurer report since 2012
+Sep 20 15:40:25 <_robbat21irssi> there was a non-public version of the 2013 report
+Sep 20 15:40:32 <dabbott> We can't go another year like this
+Sep 20 15:40:34 <_robbat21irssi> this is the nature of my any-other-business
+Sep 20 15:40:50 <NeddySeagoon> Trustee Election Welcome on board _robbat21irssi and SwifT and thank you to Betelgeuse for your 2 years an a trustee
+Sep 20 15:40:51 <dabbott> please lets move on
+Sep 20 15:41:16 <_robbat21irssi> last year, I became the assistant treasurer to help matthew prepare reports
+Sep 20 15:41:21 <dabbott> Betelgeuse: yes thanks been great getting to know you
+Sep 20 15:41:23 <_robbat21irssi> he provided most of the historical date
+Sep 20 15:41:26 <_robbat21irssi> *data
+Sep 20 15:41:44 <_robbat21irssi> but not the direct access I asked for, to get current data from our bank accounts
+Sep 20 15:41:58 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: That was your elecndon platform if I remember correctly
+Sep 20 15:42:17 <_robbat21irssi> i would like to request that the board consider a new treasurer
+Sep 20 15:42:25 <_robbat21irssi> therein is a slight concern
+Sep 20 15:42:36 <_robbat21irssi> by law, is the treasurer required to be a US citizen?
+Sep 20 15:42:46 <_robbat21irssi> i think they are
+Sep 20 15:42:47 <Betelgeuse> Thanks everyone. All the best to the new Trustees.
+Sep 20 15:43:02 <SwifT> Betelgeuse: thank you too
+Sep 20 15:43:02 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: Can that be an adenda itom for the next meeting?
+Sep 20 15:43:12 <SwifT> _robbat21irssi: I don't know if they need to be US citizen
+Sep 20 15:43:12 <NeddySeagoon> Thank you Betelgeuse
+Sep 20 15:43:42 <NeddySeagoon> SwifT: They need to operate a US bank account.
+Sep 20 15:44:09 <_robbat21irssi> and some of the IRS filings require SINs etc (yes, i'm aware of the ITIN option, but it's messy)
+Sep 20 15:44:12 <SwifT> NeddySeagoon: it would be good if we, by the next meeting, have figured out if the treasurer needs to be a US resident/citizen or not
+Sep 20 15:44:24 <_robbat21irssi> so, to put it to points:
+Sep 20 15:44:46 <NeddySeagoon> SwifT: It would be good if its all done and dusted by the next meeting
+Sep 20 15:44:49 <_robbat21irssi> 1. the foundation needs a new, attentive treasurer. I am willing to prepare numbers for them, but I can't be the primary US bank account access holder
+Sep 20 15:45:05 <_robbat21irssi> 2. we need to find out legally if the treasurer needs to be a US citizen
+Sep 20 15:45:30 <_robbat21irssi> 3. we need to get the access information from matthew
+Sep 20 15:46:11 <NeddySeagoon> We only have matt and dabbott who as US citizens
+Sep 20 15:46:14 <Betelgeuse> I quickly checked that this didn't have anything http://www.sos.state.nm.us/uploads/files/Corporations/ch53Art8.pdf
+Sep 20 15:46:21 <Betelgeuse> However, there might be requirements elsewhere
+Sep 20 15:46:32 <_robbat21irssi> lastly, in his absence, I'm going to prepare pro-forma financial reports for the missing years
+Sep 20 15:46:33 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: I suppose the bank could move to Canda ?
+Sep 20 15:46:52 <rich0> Just a comment - the treasurer doesn't have to be a trustee, if you can find another volunteer you can trust?
+Sep 20 15:46:59 <_robbat21irssi> NeddySeagoon: then we need to file US and Canadian taxes possibly ;-)
+Sep 20 15:47:23 <NeddySeagoon> Good point :(
+Sep 20 15:47:37 <NeddySeagoon> rich0: True.
+Sep 20 15:47:44 <SwifT> _robbat21irssi: I agree with your sum-up. Do you think point 2 (legality) is something to ask through our lawyers (which also have been triggered through quantumsummers iirc)
+Sep 20 15:47:51 <NeddySeagoon> rich0: is than an offer?
+Sep 20 15:48:23 <NeddySeagoon> SwifT: I think we just ask the bank
+Sep 20 15:48:24 <SwifT> or dabbott, did you interact with the lawyers? I know your name comes up on a couple of documents
+Sep 20 15:48:29 <rich0> NeddySeagoon: If you're really desperate. I fear that I won't do it justice, but if it becomes essential to the health of the foundation I might.
+Sep 20 15:48:51 <_robbat21irssi> #2 possibly, but thank you for noting we also need to be able to contact the lawyers in the absence of matthew
+Sep 20 15:48:56 <SwifT> NeddySeagoon: I don't think "the person who has access to the accounts" and "gentoo foundation treasurer" need to be the same (although it would be good if they are)
+Sep 20 15:49:09 <NeddySeagoon> SwifT: True.
+Sep 20 15:49:13 <rich0> I suggest tabling that for now. But, if you need my help it might be available.
+Sep 20 15:49:39 <rich0> SwifT: true, I'm sure my employer's CFO isn't the guy signing checks
+Sep 20 15:49:44 <NeddySeagoon> Lates take the treasurer issue outside of the meeting
+Sep 20 15:49:59 <_robbat21irssi> i will take this matter, with more detail, to the NFP list, and CC matthew so we can securely store the account details in the financial repo that I started
+Sep 20 15:50:19 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: that works.
+Sep 20 15:50:22 <SwifT> ok
+Sep 20 15:50:42 <_robbat21irssi> it's good to know the rest of the trustees agree in principle
+Sep 20 15:51:12 <NeddySeagoon> WE cannot affort to miss our filings in November
+Sep 20 15:51:15 <dabbott> If you need me for anything, let me know
+Sep 20 15:51:29 <NeddySeagoon> dabbott: You can count on it
+Sep 20 15:51:37 <NeddySeagoon> moving on
+Sep 20 15:51:37 <_robbat21irssi> i'll have the pro-forma financial reports by next meeting
+Sep 20 15:51:40 <SwifT> indeed, we have two filings by November 15th iirc (irs and the new mexico standing or something like that)
+Sep 20 15:51:42 <dabbott> I can do the NM filing, did that last year
+Sep 20 15:52:01 <NeddySeagoon> Cleanup ...
+Sep 20 15:52:02 <_robbat21irssi> what financial reports were included in the last filings?
+Sep 20 15:52:15 <NeddySeagoon> Date of Next Meeting - 18 Oct 2015 19:00 UTC
+Sep 20 15:52:25 <dabbott> never did see a 990 filing, he said he did it
+Sep 20 15:52:44 <_robbat21irssi> Oct 18th works for me
+Sep 20 15:53:02 <NeddySeagoon> SwifT: ?
+Sep 20 15:53:11 <SwifT> Oct 18 works for me as well
+Sep 20 15:53:35 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: you are excused Oct 18th :)
+Sep 20 15:53:56 <Betelgeuse> I tried to look at who the law, articles of incorporation or bylaws say approves annual reports but came empty. Any ideas?
+Sep 20 15:54:11 <NeddySeagoon> Any other business?
+Sep 20 15:54:25 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: Its the AGM - Meeting of members.
+Sep 20 15:55:00 <Betelgeuse> NeddySeagoon: Yeah but what's the legal basis?
+Sep 20 15:55:02 <SwifT> no other business from me
+Sep 20 15:55:15 <NeddySeagoon> Betelgeuse: The members have recorse in the Action without a meeting bylaw and statuat
+Sep 20 15:55:47 <NeddySeagoon> _robbat21irssi: I guess you are done with AoB ?
+Sep 20 15:56:06 <_robbat21irssi> yes
+Sep 20 15:56:10 <_robbat21irssi> i raised it already
+Sep 20 15:56:11 <NeddySeagoon> Responsibilities .. dabbott that will be you
+Sep 20 15:56:25 <NeddySeagoon> Open Floor ...
+Sep 20 15:56:40 <dilfridge> just for the record, as a foundation member I fully support robbat2's initiative
+Sep 20 15:56:40 <dilfridge> that we need a new, active treasurer
+Sep 20 15:56:54 <NeddySeagoon> dilfridge: Thank you
+Sep 20 15:57:02 <_robbat21irssi> ok, i'm going for my kid now
+Sep 20 15:57:05 <_robbat21irssi> bye
+Sep 20 15:57:13 <SwifT> bye _robbat21irssi
+Sep 20 15:57:31 <kensington> dilfridge++
+Sep 20 15:57:33 * NeddySeagoon bangs the gavel to close the meeting
+Sep 20 15:58:01 <NeddySeagoon> Thank you all
+Sep 20 15:58:07 <SwifT> thank you too