PNC 9/19/12

Agenda PNC MEETING

09/19/2012 21:00h EDT

IRC: irc.pirateirc.net

Room: #pnc

Wiki: http://www.pirate-party.us/wiki/PNC_9/19/12

Attendees

Members of the PNC

Attending=

Kyle DeVore, OR
Erik Zoltan, Massachusetts
Francis Klein, WI
Bradley Hall, Florida
Zacqary Adam Green, NY
Jarod Smith, GA

Excused

Unexcused

Washington
California

Probation

At Large Members of the PNC

Eric Fromm, OR
Cullen Matthews, IL
Caleb Langeslag, Minnesota
KBenjamin sauerhaft coplon ,pa

Officers of the PNC

Lindsay-Anne Brunner, NY, Acting Captain

Acting QuarterMaster

Amanda Johnson, MI

Proceedings

Meeting opened at: 9:09 -pm EDT by

Meeting chaired by
Secretary for this meeting is Amanda Johnson, Caleb Langeslag (took over at ~10:49pm CST)
Quorum is established: Members 6 out of 8 present
Logging Enabled: Yes

Review of previous minutes

http://www.pirate-party.us/wiki/PNC_9/12/12

Reports

Short report of the board members

Massachusetts

Had a table at the freedom ralley, handed out tons of flyers
Seeing Gregory Engles in October

Washington

Oregon

New Rep, Fromm

Georgia

Florida

Working on NSH2

New York

New member that wants to run for Mayor
Might meet with someone from the local occupy group

California

Wisconsin

Maintaining growth
Progress on website
Working at forming a student org via U of W at Madison

Short Report From Committees

IT Committee

Website planning

Bylaws Committee

Convention Committee

Agenda Items

Proposed Rewording for Core Value 6 in the Pirate Constitution.
- "We are a post-ideological values-based meritocracy. We place all options on the table. We choose a specific approach because the available evidence shows that it is the best way to promote our values. We do not make decisions based merely on tradition, popularity, authority or political expediency."

- - Massachusetts wishes to note that this wording does not in any way exclude affirmative action. Core value 7 is about equality. If discrimination exists or has existed, and if affirmative action is the most effective way to level the playing field, then we should use it because it works. If some other approach works better, then obviously we want to know what that is.

- - - 5 for, at large for

Another core value was proposed by California and the PNC came up with the following proposed wording.
- "We stand for a government that promotes social institutions necessary for the empowerment, health, and well-being of all people."

- - Decided that this would wait until California could attend a meeting

An amendment was proposed that would change the existing language about the requirements for Captain and Officers. Article IV, Section 2, Item 1.
- "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, if one exists, or actively involved in Pirate politics if it does not."

motion: amend that item to the above text. This amendment requires a 2/3 majority per Article VII Section 1.

- - Motion to change amendment language to: "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, or actively involved in Pirate politics if no state party exists."

- - - 4 for, 1 abstain, at large for
    - motion passes

- - Motion to pass amendment:

- - - 5 for, at large for

- - (motion passes

Massachusetts proposes that Amanda Johnson of Michigan be appointed Quartermaster until such time as elections are held for permanent officers.

- Motion to table the vote to the next meeting

- - 4 for,at-large for

Massachusetts proposes that the PNC choose to interpret Article III, Section 4 to mean that an observer state can apply for probationary status as a stepping stone to a future application for full membership. It is OK if this is a discussion item rather than a motion.

- There was a consensus to put this at the beginning of next weeks meeting

AOB

Next meeting: TBA at 9PM EDT
Meeting closed: 12:36am

Logs of the Meeting

[21:08] *[@kusanagi] aight, i guess i'm running this.
[21:08] *[@kusanagi] time is 9.08 EDT, starting pnc meeting
[21:09] *[HariSeldon] kusanagi, I'm representing WI in the bosun's place. This is Francis Klein, treasurer of the PPWI
[21:09] *[@kusanagi] rollcall
[21:09] *[+Zacqary] Zacqary Adam Green, NY

03*[21:09] * kusanagi sets mode: +v HariSeldon

[21:09] *[+MrSquared] Kyle DeVore, OR
[21:09] *[+mildbeard] Erik Zoltan, Massachusetts
[21:09] *[+HariSeldon] Francis Klein, WI
[21:09] *[+Rush] Bradley Hall, Florida
[21:09] *[+Fromm] Eric Fromm, OR
[21:09] *[CullenMatthews] Cullen Matthews, IL
[21:10] *[@kusanagi] Who is the OR rep for tonight
[21:10] *[@kusanagi] ?

03*[21:10] * passstabAndChat (~AndChat23@32.164.vjj.xz) has joined #pnc

[21:10] *[+MrSquared] I am
[21:10] *[@kusanagi] Ok

03*[21:10] * kusanagi sets mode: -v Fromm

[21:11] *[@kusanagi] jarod_,

03*[21:11] * CalebL*[laptop] (~CalebLang@07-920-454-510.dhcp.dlth.mn.charter.com) has joined #pnc

[21:12] *[@kusanagi] no response.. ah well
[21:12] *[@kusanagi] is the acting qm in? sacha?
[21:12] *[+jarod_] Jarod Smith, GA
[21:13] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Caleb Langeslag, Minnesota
[21:13] *[@kusanagi] Agenda is in the topic. we're 6/8 tonight, quorum has been met

[21:13] *[sacha] Amanda Johnson, Michigan sorry

[21:14] *[@kusanagi] are you qm tonight?\

03*[21:14] * jarod (~yaaic@82-84-518-549.pools.spcsdns.net) has joined #pnc

[21:14] *[@kusanagi] oh, Lindsay-Anne Brunner, NY
[21:14] *[@kusanagi] oops
[21:14] *[passstabAndChat] KBenjamin sauerhaft coplon ,pa
[21:15] *[@kusanagi] Ok, state reports
[21:15] *[@kusanagi] mildbeard, what's doing in MA?

[21:16] *[sacha] Yes I am acting QM tonight

[21:16] *[+mildbeard] This weekend we had a table at the Freedom Rally which was a cannabis legalization rally. MAPP has a pro-legalization policy.
[21:16] *[+mildbeard] We handed out every one of our fliers. My 10-year-old son Reilly handed out most of them. For some reason people were more willing to take them from a kid.
[21:17] *[+mildbeard] I steered him clear of the cloud in the middle of the crowd.
[21:17] *[@kusanagi] haha
[21:17] *[+mildbeard] We're planning to see Gregory Engels of the German Pirate Party in late October. He'll be in the area on personal business.
[21:17] *[+Rush] Where?
[21:18] *[+mildbeard] Those are the most important things that come to mind for MA.
[21:18] *[+mildbeard] I think he's working in Boston area? Not exactly sure.
[21:18] *[+mildbeard] He gave a talk last year when he was in town.
[21:18] *[+Rush] I've met him before, he's pretty cool
[21:18] *[@kusanagi] ooh, that sounds interesting
[21:20] *[@kusanagi] WA is out, so MrSquared how's ORPP?
[21:20] *[+MrSquared] Well, I've got a new member who is going to be filling in for me when I cannot attend the meetings
[21:20] *[+MrSquared] Say hi to Fromm
[21:20] *[@kusanagi] hi Fromm
[21:20] *[+Rush] Hi Fromm
[21:21] *[Fromm] Hey guys
[21:21] *[+MrSquared] and thats about it for this week
[21:21] *[@kusanagi] ok,cool
[21:23] *[@kusanagi] Rush, FLPP update
[21:24] *[+Rush] Nothing really. An owl showed up at FLPP HQ and wanted to be our mascot today. Still working on NSH2, thinking of doing a solo Pirate book for my own nefarious deeds. We've not been as active as I would like
[21:26] *[+Rush] That's all
[21:26] *[@kusanagi] ok, cool
[21:27] *[@kusanagi] Zacqary, what's happening with nypp

03*[21:27] * AndChat|2386 (~AndChat23@166.197.xor.jx) has joined #pnc

[21:28] *[+Zacqary] New York's got a lot of meetings on our schedule. I met with Josh Lafazan last week, an 18-year-old who got elected to my local school board. He's still remaining independent, but I got him interested. So we have a good, successful contact.

02*[21:29] * passstabAndChat (~AndChat23@32.164.vjj.xz) Quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)

[21:29] *[+Zacqary] We have a new member who wants to run for mayor of New York City.
[21:29] *[+Zacqary] And she's a Ph.D. So that's credibility.
[21:29] *[itspara] GOOD
[21:29] *[+Zacqary] I'll arrange a meeting with her when Travis is here next week.
[21:29] *[@kusanagi] also
[21:30] *[@kusanagi] part of the ny update
[21:30] *[+Zacqary] Also probably going to meet with someone from a local Occupy group interested in running for a Town Supervisor position.
[21:30] *[@kusanagi] from previous endeavors I've made the acquaintence of Tony Ortega, the editor in chief of the Village voice
[21:31] *[@kusanagi] I shot him an email after hearing from mutual acquaintences he may be interesed in the Pirates
[21:31] *[@kusanagi] still waiting on a reply though, but that's happening
[21:32] *[+Zacqary] So that's it, I think.
[21:32] *[@kusanagi] yep
[21:33] *[@kusanagi] Cali is out, so HariSeldon, how have things been in WI?

02*[21:33] * AndChat|2386 (~AndChat23@166.197.xor.jx) Quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)

[21:34] *[+HariSeldon] for WI, we have been working on the server for our website, and there is a light at the end of the tunnel, so it looks like we will be on an improved server system within a week. Otherwise, we are maintaining our growth on both twitter, facebook, and google plus. Our most prioritized project, currently, is the active pursuit of resources with which to form a student organization at UW madison. We project that this will gain us a la
[21:34] *[+HariSeldon] W madison. We project that this will gain us a large group of volunteers. However, because of the way funding cycles work at Uw madison, we might not be able to get help with a student org until next semester. I am continuing to attend what events i can at the capitol and tell people about PPWI.
[21:34] *[+HariSeldon] that's it.
[21:35] *[+HariSeldon] oh... sorry about the overlap.
[21:35] *[+HariSeldon] cut and paste fail
[21:35] *[@kusanagi] happens
[21:37] *[@kusanagi] awesome
[21:37] *[@kusanagi] ok
[21:37] *[@kusanagi] IT, CalebL*[laptop] how's that moving
[21:37] *[@kusanagi] for committees

03*[21:38] * passstabAndChat (~AndChat23@107.227.kg.uz) has joined #pnc

02*[21:38] * +jarod_ (webchat@68.66.mh.twl) Quit (Quit: Web client closed)

[21:39] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Well, nothing in specific to emphasize. Some of us are intending on planning how to restructure the website, but there hasn't been a formal meeting in regard of such yet
[21:39] *[@kusanagi] is there a date planned?
[21:39] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Not quite yet
[21:39] *[+Zacqary] (Brb, my client got bugged)

02*[21:39] * +Zacqary (~chatzilla@74.108.vw.itx) Quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 *[Firefox 15.0.1/220905151427])

03*[21:40] * Zacqary (~chatzilla@74.108.vw.itx) has joined #pnc

[21:42] *[@kusanagi] ok
[21:42] *[@kusanagi] Zacqary, bylaws committee update?

02*[21:43] * passstabAndChat (~AndChat23@107.227.kg.uz) Quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)

[21:43] *[Zacqary] Nothing to report. I've been taking a break from it.
[21:44] *[@kusanagi] ok
[21:44] *[@kusanagi] anyone here from the convention committee?
[21:47] *[@kusanagi] anyone?

06*[21:47] * @kusanagi listens for crickets.

[21:48] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Silly committees, they just keep dying. All they need is a little love. D:
[21:49] *[@kusanagi] i suppose
[21:49] *[@kusanagi] onward to the agenda items
[21:49] *[@kusanagi] Item 1: Proposed Rewording for Core Value 6 in the Pirate Constitution.
[21:50] *[@kusanagi] we started to talk about this last week
[21:50] *[@kusanagi] mildbeard, since this was MA's proposal, would you like to take the floor?
[21:50] *[+mildbeard] OK sure.
[21:51] *[+mildbeard] California had objected to the wording of core value 6. We tweaked the wording to make it better.
[21:51] *[+mildbeard] "We are a post-ideological values-based meritocracy. We place all options on the table. We choose a specific approach because the available evidence shows that it is the best way to promote our values. We do not make decisions based merely on tradition, popularity, authority or political expediency."
[21:52] *[+mildbeard] The substance of the objection by California was that they felt the core value would prevent a PIrate from supporting affirmative action.
[21:52] *[+mildbeard] The new wording is designed to make it clear that we want to use the best possible method to promote core value 7 (equality) and that affirmative action would be fine if it's the best way.
[21:52] *[+mildbeard] That's all I have really.
[21:54] *[@kusanagi] ok
[21:54] *[@kusanagi] does anyone want to make a motion?
[21:54] *[@kusanagi] And I apologize for being a bit slow in typing tonight
[21:55] *[Zacqary] Motion to pass this amendment?
[21:55] *[@kusanagi] anyone wish to second?
[21:55] *[+mildbeard] sure second

03*[21:56] * passstab (~coplon@xx.pirate) has joined #pnc

02*[21:56] * jarod (~yaaic@82-84-518-549.pools.spcsdns.net) Quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)

[21:57] *[+mildbeard] Does anyone have any discussion, objections, anything?
[21:57] *[@kusanagi] so, that we need a vote on. any additional debating on this, or are we good?
[21:57] *[@kusanagi] lol
[21:57] *[+mildbeard] I'd like to move that any state be allowed to talk.
[21:57] *[Zacqary] Second
[21:58] *[CalebL*[laptop]] So, what we the specific changes? (before/after)?
[21:58] *[CalebL*[laptop]] what were*
[21:59] *[+mildbeard] OK here's the old wording.
[21:59] *[+mildbeard] We are a post-ideological meritocracy. Policy and decision-making must be based on evidence and scientific reasoning. The approach that works best, or the person who does the best job, must be chosen over the alternatives. Where possible, we avoid making decisions or selecting leaders based on tradition, popularity, authority or ideology.
[22:00] *[+mildbeard] And again, here's the new.
[22:00] *[+mildbeard] "We are a post-ideological values-based meritocracy. We place all options on the table. We choose a specific approach because the available evidence shows that it is the best way to promote our values. We do not make decisions based merely on tradition, popularity, authority or political expediency."
[22:] *[+mildbeard] Also, I should point out that we require a 3/4 majority to amend or add core values.
[22:] *[@kusanagi] just was going to type that
[22:] *[@kusanagi] thank you
[22:02] *[CalebL*[laptop]] What is the addition of 'values-based' intended to emphasize, it feels a little redundant, somewhat (I'm possibly quite picky)

[22:03] *[sacha] it is to change it from the previous scientific emphasis i believe

[22:03] *[CalebL*[laptop]] ahh, alright
[22:04] *[+mildbeard] California had objected to the word "meritocracy" because they felt it would exclude affirmative action. Here we're trying to say we're talking about how to promote our values, rather than about hiring decisions or something else.
[22:07] *[@kusanagi] is that all on discussion?
[22:07] *[CalebL*[laptop]] I have no further questions on my part
[22:08] *[passstab] what do we think of s/our/American ?
[22:08] *[+mildbeard] You mean "promote American values"?
[22:08] *[passstab] aye

[22:09] *[sacha] ummmm no

[22:09] *[sacha] I would be against that

[22:09] *[+mildbeard] Well, I think we're trying to promote the values of the Pirate Party.
[22:10] *[+mildbeard] Some people would say that intellectual property is an American value. After all, it's in the Constitution.

02*[22:10] * Fromm (webchat@75.148.uo.nyt) Quit (Quit: Web client closed)

[22:10] *[CalebL*[laptop]] but also intended to be a balance to the public domain as well
[22:11] *[passstab] there is more to American values then the constitution
[22:11] *[Zacqary] Actually, I'd argue that your payright system is in the Constitution and intellectual property is a misreading of it.
[22:11] *[+mildbeard] lol
[22:11] *[passstab] it would be similar to what the religious right did
[22:11] *[+mildbeard] If we say "American" values, then I'm worried that we'll get into a fight over what that means.
[22:12] *[passstab] maybe we should
[22:12] *[+mildbeard] If we are talking about the values of the Pirate Party, then it's less controversial because we're specifically defining what our values are in the Constitution.
[22:12] *[@kusanagi] personally, i would prefer pirate values.
[22:13] *[Zacqary] If we keep "our" will that be tolerable? I just want to get this thing passed already.
[22:13] *[Zacqary] We can always change it later.
[22:13] *[CalebL*[laptop]] I would agree that referring to 'American values' as being too vague
[22:13] *[passstab] ok, just throwing stuff out there
[22:13] *[CalebL*[laptop]] It's fine
[22:14] *[+mildbeard] I think "our" is OK because we've defined them explicitly. But I want to make sure there aren't any objections we haven't addressed, because I'd rather get it right slowly than get it wrong quickly.

[22:14] *[sacha] why can we not just leave it at values?

[22:14] *[sacha] we are spelling out our values... in the core values

[22:15] *[Zacqary] "We choose a specific approach because the available evidence shows that it is the best way to promote our values." is the point of contention, sacha.
[22:15] *[passstab] i'm fine with it
[22:16] *[passstab] it was a bad time to bring it up, i'm sorry
[22:16] *[Zacqary] No problem.
[22:16] *[+HariSeldon] that's ok, ideas are always wecome
[22:16] *[Zacqary] That's what discussion is for.
[22:17] *[+mildbeard] I'm glad we got a criticism!

[22:19] *[sacha] No, it is a good idea and a good point to bring up

[22:20] *[+mildbeard] Is there anything else, or are we ready to call the question?
[22:21] *[+HariSeldon] ready
[22:21] *[+mildbeard] I'd like to move to vote.
[22:21] *[@kusanagi] Ok
[22:21] *[Zacqary] Second
[22:21] *[@kusanagi] and seconded
[22:22] *[@kusanagi] Voting on Change to CV6 fromWe are a post-ideological meritocracy. Policy and decision-making must be based on evidence and scientific reasoning. The approach that works best, or the person who does the best job, must be chosen over the alternatives. Where possible, we avoid making decisions or selecting leaders based on tradition, popularity, authority or ideology. to "We are a post-ideological values-based meritocracy. We pla
[22:22] *[@kusanagi] ce all options on the table. We choose a specific approach because the available evidence shows that it is the best way to promote our values. We do not make decisions based merely on tradition, popularity, authority or political expediency.". we need 4.5 ayes to pass.
[22:22] *[Zacqary] Aye
[22:22] *[+HariSeldon] aye
[22:22] *[+mildbeard] aye
[22:23] *[+MrSquared] aye
[22:23] *[passstab] aye
[22:23] *[CalebL*[laptop]] aye
[22:23] *[@kusanagi] ping Rush

03*[22:23] * kusanagi sets mode: +v Zacqary

[22:23] *[+Rush] oh hi
[22:23] *[+Rush] let me read
[22:24] *[+Rush] aye
[22:24] *[@kusanagi] 2 more min, CullenMatthews, itspara CalebL*[laptop]
[22:24] *[itspara] Hrmm?
[22:24] *[itspara] Where are we?
[22:24] *[itspara] Oh, ok
[22:25] *[itspara] Aye

[22:25] *[sacha] we should have 4.5 by now if mrsquared is oregon

[22:25] *[+MrSquared] i am
[22:26] *[@kusanagi] we do

[22:26] *[sacha] So it will be 4 for, at large for so like a vote of 5... unless at large each counts as .5 rn

[22:26] *[@kusanagi] vote called
[22:26] *[@kusanagi] no, it's an average
[22:27] *[@kusanagi] right?
[22:27] *[+mildbeard] Who'd have ever thought that Pirate math would be so complicated?
[22:27] *[@kusanagi] doesn't matter, it was unanimous
[22:27] *[@kusanagi] amendment passed
[22:27] *[+HariSeldon] yay

[22:27] *[sacha] so then it is 5

[22:27] *[@kusanagi] 5.5

[22:27] *[sacha] we change it to .5 in the bylaws cuz averaging sucks

[22:27] *[sacha] no just 5 I believe

[22:27] *[sacha] wait what

[22:28] *[@kusanagi] 5 member states voted
[22:28] *[@kusanagi] then at-large

[22:28] *[sacha] at large if more than one person

[22:28] *[sacha] is one full vote

[22:28] *[+mildbeard] so 6?

[22:28] *[sacha] it just gloms together, yeah so 6

[22:29] *[sacha] I only had four member states though :/

[22:29] *[@kusanagi] NY, MA, OR, WI, FL

[22:29] *[sacha] unless is the hari person WI?

[22:29] *[@kusanagi] yes

[22:29] *[sacha] okay nvm, that through me

[22:29] *[+HariSeldon] yep

[22:29] *[sacha] k so 6

[22:29] *[@kusanagi] so it passes yay
[22:30] *[@kusanagi] agenda item 2
[22:30] *[@kusanagi] CAPP proposed a new CV
[22:30] *[@kusanagi] Another core value was proposed by California and the PNC came up with the following proposed wording.
[22:30] *[@kusanagi] "We stand for a government that promotes social institutions necessary for the empowerment, health, and well-being of all people."
[22:31] *[+mildbeard] I would like to move that we table this proposal until such time as California is here to explain their thinking.
[22:31] *[+HariSeldon] second

02*[22:31] * +Rush (4c6ad209@khueo3.mibbit.com) Quit (Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client)

[22:32] *[+mildbeard] I like it, but they really are the driving force and it would be unfair to talk about changes to the wording or anything without them.
[22:32] *[@kusanagi] we're now at 4 member states, so please no one else leave lmao
[22:32] *[@kusanagi] As do I.. but they really should be here for it

[22:32] *[sacha] When trais gets back he can ask them what is going on

[22:33] *[sacha] i'll drop a line to the ones i have on my fb

[22:33] *[@kusanagi] I'll pop over an email as well later
[22:33] *[@kusanagi] more pestering the better
[22:34] *[@kusanagi] anyway
[22:34] *[@kusanagi] next item
[22:34] *[@kusanagi] An amendment was proposed that would change the existing language about the requirements for Captain and Officers. Article IV, Section 2, Item 1.
[22:34] *[@kusanagi] Doesn't say who proposed it.. mildbeard was thgat you?

[22:34] *[sacha] yes it was

[22:34] *[+mildbeard] I think it was a group effort.

[22:34] *[sacha] all were mildbeard

[22:35] *[+mildbeard] But yeah.
[22:35] *[+mildbeard] The objection was that we would be limiting officers.

[22:35] *[sacha] limiting the pool of officers to be a bit more specific

[22:35] *[+mildbeard] RIght.
[22:36] *[@kusanagi] okay
[22:36] *[+mildbeard] Now it says "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of a Pirate Party based in a Member State of the PNC."
[22:36] *[+mildbeard] So neither Sacha nor Travis could be an officer.
[22:36] *[@kusanagi] Well, Travis could, as he's also WAPP
[22:37] *[@kusanagi] but that's a weird thign
[22:37] *[+mildbeard] So my proposed wording was "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, if one exists, or actively involved in Pirate politics if it does not."

[22:38] *[@kusanagi] okay
[22:38] *[@kusanagi] any debate?
[22:38] *[+mildbeard] I should say that Zacqary was the one who first pointed out this issue to me.

[22:39] *[sacha] Me and Travis were talking about it too and I talked to QuazarGuy about it as well so i think a few people saw it as a potential issue

[22:39] *[+HariSeldon] i move to vote
[22:40] *[CalebL*[laptop]] I would say it should be slightly reworded at the end, to flow better
[22:41] *[+mildbeard] What would you suggest, CalebL*[laptop]?
[22:43] *[CalebL*[laptop]] "if one exists," could perhaps be removed.

[22:43] *[sacha] hmm I think that is important

[22:43] *[CalebL*[laptop]] and replace "if it does not" with "if there isn't an active State Pirate Party"?

[22:44] *[sacha] or

[22:44] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Anyone is free to try a shot
[22:44] *[+mildbeard] So "...a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, or actively involved in Pirate politics if none exists." Would that be OK?

[22:44] *[sacha] yeah, I like it

[22:45] *[+HariSeldon] you might want to say "if not state party exists"
[22:45] *[+HariSeldon] *no
[22:45] *[+mildbeard] kusanagi, can we accept a wording change as a friendly amendment?
[22:46] *[+HariSeldon] in other words, "...a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, or actively involved in Pirate politics if no state party exists."

[22:46] *[sacha] then state party is redundent the second time imo

[22:46] *[@kusanagi] sure, mildbeard
[22:47] *[+HariSeldon] i know... but otherwise it sounds to me like pirate politics could cease to exist.
[22:47] *[+mildbeard] I'm OK with either wording, anyone else have an opinion?
[22:47] *[CalebL*[laptop]] I side with HariSeldon's revision
[22:47] *[@kusanagi] yeah, working on it
[22:47] *[CullenMatthews] what about changing if no state party exists, a candidiate must be an active member of their state pirate party or in an active at large state?

[22:48] *[sacha] No, I think active in party politics is good

[22:48] *[sacha] in my opinion, feel free to disagree

[22:49] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Although, could 'active in Pirate politics' be considered too vague?
[22:49] *[+HariSeldon] i think that it's not particularly vague.
[22:50] *[+HariSeldon] it lets the pnc have a basis for bringing up objections to a canidacy
[22:50] *[+HariSeldon] but it puts no limiting factors on the would be candidates.

[22:50] *[sacha] I agree with HariSeldon I think that we want this to be vague because honestly

[22:51] *[sacha] we can set out the rules for the party assuming it will grow

[22:51] *[+mildbeard] Well, remember that the candidate still has to get a majority of votes to be elected.

[22:51] *[sacha] because we have no knowledge that it will

[22:51] *[+mildbeard] So if there's really something wrong with someone's candidate, then everyone will just vote against them.
[22:51] *[+mildbeard] candidacy*
[22:51] *[+mildbeard] So I agree, a little vague is OK.
[22:52] *[@kusanagi] I agree there.
[22:53] *[passstab] maybe get rid of the activity requirement altogether?
[22:53] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Any revision idea of your own kusanagi, or are you in agreement with the revision being discussed?
[22:53] *[@kusanagi] I was working on it, then HariSeldon got it
[22:54] *[passstab] (provided you aren't in an active state)
[22:55] *[+mildbeard] So is this what we're talking about? "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, or actively involved in Pirate politics if no state party exists."
[22:56] *[@kusanagi] yes
[23:00] *[Brendan] question
[23:00] *[@kusanagi] Go ahead
[23:00] *[+mildbeard] OK then I move that we vote.
[23:00] *[+mildbeard] whoops sorry
[23:00] *[Brendan] why don't you just make it that they need to be nominated by a member state
[23:00] *[Brendan] it can then be anyone, as long as the board of that state nominates
[23:00] *[Brendan] and the state need not be limited to nominate a single person
[23:00] *[@kusanagi] That's in the bylaws, iirc
[23:00] *[Brendan] they could nominate unlimited persons.

[23:] *[sacha] is that in the bylaws?

[23:] *[+mildbeard] There's a section on Nomination.

[23:] *[sacha] I don't remember that :/

[23:] *[sacha] i'll have to re-read

[23:] *[+mildbeard] http://www.pirate-party.us/wiki/Pirate_National_Committee_%28PNC%29/Constitution#Section_3:_Nomination
[23:] *[Brendan] then I'd say membership of a state is a non-issue if nomination is done by a state board.
[23:] *[+mildbeard] We could amend that section but it would require a separate amendment.
[23:] *[Brendan] because I'd trust a member of the PNC to be able to make the appropriate decision on who to nominate.
[23:] *[@kusanagi] Brendan, I agree.
[23:02] *[+HariSeldon] good thinking.
[23:02] *[+mildbeard] Can we leave the amendment to Section 2 (Eligibility) as it is, and entertain a separate amendment to section 3 (Nomination) at a future date?
[23:04] *[@kusanagi] We could.
[23:04] *[@kusanagi] Would you all be okay with that?

[23:04] *[sacha] I would rather not amend the second

[23:04] *[sacha] i think the language is fine as it requires a member state to second a self nomination

[23:05] *[+mildbeard] well, Section 3 could be interpreted to mean that an observer state can second the nomination.
[23:06] *[+mildbeard] but it seems to me like that is a whole separate can of worms.
[23:06] *[@kusanagi] yeha
[23:06] *[Brendan] I love ambiguous wording
[23:06] *[@kusanagi] yeah
[23:06] *[Brendan] kill ambiguous wording in the document asap.
[23:06] *[Brendan] constitutions need to be as unambiguous as possible
[23:07] *[+mildbeard] Heh, personally I love "flexible" wording in the constitution.
[23:07] *[Brendan] then you need bylaws to specify wtf the constitution was meant to say, lol
[23:07] *[+mildbeard] right
[23:07] *[@kusanagi] Brendan, bylaws are in-progress

[23:07] *[sacha] I just do not think it is a big deal

[23:08] *[Brendan] I get into this argument with another PPAU member all the time about whether a constitution should be prescriptive or not

[23:08] *[sacha] like mildbeard pointed out, it is an election

[23:08] *[sacha] the best person will win

[23:08] *[sacha] Why limit the pool

[23:09] *[+mildbeard] I think I'd like to call the question if nobody objects.
[23:10] *[+HariSeldon] no objections here
[23:10] *[+mildbeard] move to vote
[23:10] *[+HariSeldon] second
[23:10] *[+MrSquared] second
[23:11] *[@kusanagi] ok
[23:11] *[@kusanagi] voting on leaving to Section 2 (Eligibility) as it is, and entertain a separate amendment to section 3 (Nomination) at a future date
[23:11] *[+mildbeard] hold on that wasn't my motion.
[23:12] *[+mildbeard] I wanted to leave the proposed wording change of section 2 as it is, and we can leave the proposed change of section 3 for another time.
[23:12] *[+mildbeard] I still want to change section 2 to read "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, or actively involved in Pirate politics if no state party exists."
[23:12] *[+mildbeard] But I can see that I was not being clear.
[23:12] *[@kusanagi] I'm sorry
[23:13] *[+mildbeard] np my bad
[23:13] *[@kusanagi] I got confused somewhere, sorry. XD
[23:14] *[@kusanagi] ok, so voting on leaving the proposed wording change of section 2 asis, and leaving the proposed change of section 3 for a later date

03*[23:14] * Brady (~Grizzly@PirateParty/US/Member) has joined #pnc

[23:15] *[sacha] brady we are voting on

[23:15] *[sacha] "ok, so voting on leaving the proposed wording change of section 2 asis, and leaving the proposed change of section 3 for a later date"

[23:15] *[Brady] Brady Dibble, Washington
[23:16] *[+HariSeldon] for reference, proposed wording change of sect. 2 : "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, or actively involved in Pirate politics if no state party exists."
[23:16] *[Brady] Abstain

[23:16] *[sacha] also ping itspara hariseldon mildbeard zacqary caleb*[laptop] passtab

[23:16] *[+mildbeard] aye
[23:16] *[+HariSeldon] aye
[23:16] *[CalebL*[laptop]] aye
[23:16] *[+Zacqary] Aye
[23:16] *[+MrSquared] aye
[23:17] *[@kusanagi] CullenMatthews
[23:17] *[itspara] Aýe
[23:17] *[CullenMatthews] aye
[23:17] *[passstab] Aye
[23:17] *[@kusanagi] and called
[23:17] *[@kusanagi] tally?

[23:18] *[sacha] 4 member states

[23:18] *[sacha] 1 abstain

[23:18] *[sacha] at large for

[23:19] *[@kusanagi] motion passes
[23:21] *[@kusanagi] ok
[23:22] *[+HariSeldon] sooo... does that mean we need to vote on the changed wording?
[23:22] *[+HariSeldon] or are we done with that agenda item
[23:22] *[@kusanagi] i think we still may need to vote on the change
[23:23] *[CalebL*[laptop]] after all, it was an amendment to a motion, I believe.
[23:23] *[@kusanagi] yes
[23:23] *[@kusanagi] the original issue is still up
[23:24] *[CalebL*[laptop]] So are we going to vote on the amended motion then?
[23:24] *[+HariSeldon] move to vote on the amended wording.
[23:24] *[CalebL*[laptop]] second
[23:24] *[+mildbeard] second
[23:24] *[+mildbeard] third
[23:24] *[CalebL*[laptop]] First! :P
[23:24] *[+HariSeldon] lol
[23:24] *[@kusanagi] haha
[23:25] *[@kusanagi] so, what was the proposed amend?
[23:25] *[+HariSeldon] "To be eligible to hold one of the positions set forth in Art. IV §1, a candidate must be an active member of their State Pirate Party, or actively involved in Pirate politics if no state party exists."
[23:25] *[@kusanagi] thank you
[23:26] *[+mildbeard] And that's Article IV, Section 2, Item 1.
[23:26] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Well, including of tabling the change for Section 3 to vote at a later date as well?
[23:26] *[+HariSeldon] we already did that, i think
[23:26] *[+mildbeard] Yeah, I think we already tabled section 3.
[23:26] *[@kusanagi] HariSeldon, yes, we did

[23:28] *[sacha] so now we vote...?

[23:28] *[@kusanagi] yes
[23:28] *[+HariSeldon] aye
[23:28] *[+mildbeard] aye
[23:29] *[+MrSquared] aye
[23:29] *[CalebL*[laptop]] aye
[23:29] *[+Zacqary] Aye
[23:29] *[passstab] Nea
[23:29] *[passstab] just kidding, aye
[23:29] *[CullenMatthews] aye
[23:29] *[Brady] Aye
[23:29] *[+mildbeard] neigh :)
[23:29] *[Brendan] a little hoarse.
[23:30] *[@kusanagi] hehe

06*[23:30] * +mildbeard slaps forehead.

[23:30] *[@kusanagi] called
[23:30] *[@kusanagi] tally

02*[23:32] * +HariSeldon (webchat@56-54-210-158.static.mdsn.wi.charter.com) Quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)

03*[23:33] * kusanagi sets mode: +v Brady

[23:33] *[@kusanagi] sacha?

[23:33] *[sacha] sorry

[23:34] *[sacha] 4 for

[23:34] *[sacha] at large for

[23:34] *[sacha] sorry 5 for

[23:34] *[@kusanagi] 4?

[23:34] *[sacha] brady doesn't have a +

[23:34] *[@kusanagi] yay

[23:34] *[sacha] it is confusing

[23:34] *[@kusanagi] he does
[23:34] *[@kusanagi] i just added it
[23:34] *[@kusanagi] amendment passed, hooray

03*[23:35] * HariSeldon (webchat@56-54-210-158.static.mdsn.wi.charter.com) has joined #pnc

[23:35] *[HariSeldon] sorry what happened?
[23:35] *[@kusanagi] amendment passed
[23:35] *[HariSeldon] my internet freaked on me

[23:35] *[sacha] lol

[23:36] *[@kusanagi] next item: Massachusetts proposes that Amanda Johnson of Michigan be appointed Quartermaster until such time as elections are held for permanent officers.
[23:36] *[@kusanagi] if i recall correctly, she has been appointed as acting q,
[23:36] *[@kusanagi] qm
[kusanagi] did jeff/quazarguy formally resign?
[Brady] Effectively.
[mildbeard] It was my understanding that nothing formal happened at all. Since Sacha has been doing all the work, she deserves to be recognized and get a * next to her name.
[sacha] my laptop is going to die
[sacha] i think
[sacha] sorry if it does
[Brady] I will formally resign on behalf of QuazarGuy(Jeffrey Talada - WA)
[kusanagi] perform cpr!
[HariSeldon] lol
[CalebL[laptop]] Lack of laptop charger, or?
[kusanagi] do we have any procedure to follow for resignatiion?
[sacha] charger is broken
[mildbeard] Don't make the same mistake as me. I recently tried to hot wire my coffee maker and nearly electrocuted myself.
[kusanagi] :O
[kusanagi] French press ftw. but back on topic
[kusanagi] If possible, I would like Jeff to email a resignation, to cover all bases.
[Brady] Understood.
[CalebL[laptop]] Trying to hotwire it so you can hijack it and drive off with it, or what? :P
[CalebL[laptop]] Or do you mean work on it while it was 'on'?
[mildbeard] I just needed some espresso REALLY BAD.
[kusanagi] lolol
[CalebL[laptop]] I fixed about two laptop chargers now. And remember, DRAIN THE CAPACITORS, CAPTAIN
[kusanagi] caffeine addictions ftw
[kusanagi] and iirc, aren't elections in about 2 weeks?
[kusanagi] on oct 3rd?
[CalebL[laptop]] Oy
[HariSeldon] brb
HariSeldon (webchat@56-54-210-158.static.mdsn.wi.charter.com) has left #pnc
[mildbeard] Well, let's table this issue for now. I will withdraw it if the elections really are going to happen on that date, but I can bring it up again if they are postponed.
[mildbeard] Anyone object to tabling so we can get an email from Jeff and Sacha can get her laptop in order?
HariSeldon (webchat@56-54-210-158.static.mdsn.wi.charter.com) has joined #pnc
kusanagi gives voice to HariSeldon
[MrSquared] sounds good to me
[CalebL[laptop]] We really need extensive planning within the next 3 days or so, if elections are that close
[kusanagi] and since sacha is gone, will someone step up as qm?
[kusanagi] CalebL[laptop], it may have been agreed on a week i was out
[CalebL[laptop]] Well, I believe I can assist with notes, I suppose
[kusanagi] thank you
[kusanagi] so, tabling issue 4, are there any concerns
[kusanagi] ?
[HariSeldon] tabling indef?
[HariSeldon] or just until next meeting?
[CalebL[laptop]] Until next meeting
[HariSeldon] k
[mildbeard] And really it depends on when elections are happening.
[HariSeldon] no concerns, then.
[kusanagi] can i get a motion for it?
[mildbeard] move to table
[CalebL[laptop]] second
[kusanagi] vote on motion to table agenda item 4 to next meeting
[mildbeard] aye
[CalebL[laptop]] aye
[Brady] Aye.
[HariSeldon] aye
[Zacqary] Aye
[kusanagi] ping MrSquared Zacqary
[kusanagi] passstab, itspara
[passstab] aye
[itspara] Abstain
[mildbeard] Sorry I have to drop.
mildbeard has quit (Quit: adios!!!)
[kusanagi] ok, called
[kusanagi] tally?
[kusanagi] just a moment for caleb, guys

03*[23:58] * Set by kusanagi!~kusanagi@vhmo-570-03-66-90.nycmny.fios.verizon.net on Wed Sep 19 21:08:09

[23:58] *[+MrSquared] aye

03*[23:59] * mildbeard (~erixoltan@hknv-28-026-620-99.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) has joined #pnc

[23:59] *[mildbeard] sorry about that

Session Time: Thu Sep 20 00:00:00 22

[00:00] *[@kusanagi] it's ok
[00:00] *[mildbeard] Toddler nightmare.
[00:00] *[@kusanagi] ah, night terrors..
[00:00] *[+MrSquared] redundancy

[00:00] *[Sacha] Sorry about my computer, it is better now. I'll need missing logs from someone

[00:03] *[CalebL*[laptop]] 4 for, at-large for
[00:04] *[passstab] i need go, good night

02*[00:04] * passstab (~coplon@xx.pirate) Quit (Remote host closed the connection)

[00:04] *[Sacha] What was the motion? To put in the agenda?

[00:05] *[CalebL*[laptop]] To table item 4 to the next meeting
[00:06] *[@kusanagi] so, motion passed
[00:06] *[@kusanagi] next up
[00:06] *[@kusanagi] 5. Massachusetts proposes that the PNC choose to interpret Article III, Section 4 to mean that an observer state can apply for probationary status as a stepping stone to a future application for full membership. It is OK if this is a discussion item rather than a motion.
[00:07] *[+Brady] This needs to be implemented in some fashion.
[00:07] *[@kusanagi] yes
[00:07] *[+HariSeldon] i like the idea a lot... do we have anyone from mass to talk about this?
[00:08] *[mildbeard] Yes
[00:08] *[+HariSeldon] i lost track of who left.
[00:08] *[mildbeard] http://www.pirate-party.us/wiki/Pirate_National_Committee_%28PNC%29/Constitution#Section_4:_Probation

02*[00:08] * Pharos (webchat@pvji-23-085-588-046.nycmny.east.verizon.net) Quit (Quit: Web client closed)

[00:08] *[mildbeard] We intended probationary status to be something that would happen to a member state when their pirate party no longer meets the requirements for full membership.
[00:09] *[+Brady] No representative?
[00:09] *[mildbeard] The question came up - what happens if an observer state is on the way to full member status but not there yet.
[00:09] *[+Brady] Is that supposed to be 'One'?
[00:09] *[+Brady] Oh, I see

03*[00:10] * Retrieving #pnc modes...

[00:10] *[mildbeard] Could that state apply to be a probationary state now, and apply for full membership later?
[00:10] *[mildbeard] I just wanted to get a feel for what people think about that.
[00:11] *[@kusanagi] Absolutely
[00:11] *[+Zacqary] I have to go, guys.
[00:11] *[+Zacqary] See ya.
[00:11] *[@kusanagi] have a good night

[00:11] *[Sacha] bye

02*[00:11] * +Zacqary (~chatzilla@74.108.vw.itx) Quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 *[Firefox 15.0.1/220905151427])

[00:11] *[+Brady] There should be official language alongside the first two points.

03*[00:11] * kusanagi sets mode: +v mildbeard

[00:11] *[+Brady] It only appears to apply to Member States falling from grace.
[00:12] *[+mildbeard] Point taken.
[00:12] *[+mildbeard] But do you think it's a useful idea?
[00:12] *[+Brady] Absolutely.
[00:12] *[@kusanagi] Me as well
[00:13] *[+mildbeard] k thanx

[00:13] *[Sacha] we may be able to amend it to just add a third point

[00:13] *[+Brady] That would probably be the quickest and most effective step.
[00:14] *[+MrSquared] i always thought probation had a negative connotation
[00:14] *[+mildbeard] Add a new 3 right after 2 and renumber the rest. Maybe change a few wordings that would seem to contradict it.
[00:14] *[+Brady] Not necessarily.
[00:14] *[+Brady] Newly hired employees can go through a short 'probationary' period.
[00:15] *[+MrSquared] ...adn if they mess up it usually ends in a swift termination
[00:15] *[+Brady] It does not have to have a negative connotation.
[00:15] *[+Brady] Though perhaps another term could be used...

[00:16] *[Sacha] I like probationary

[00:16] *[Sacha] because essentially it would give a prosepctive member state a chance to fully speak

[00:16] *[Sacha] which could be useful when voting on full member status

[00:16] *[Sacha] there is at least a month

[00:16] *[Sacha] so it would be a trial period

[00:17] *[+mildbeard] Well, Section 4 item 5 seems to say that after a month we have to make a decision 1 way or another.
[00:17] *[+mildbeard] Which we have failed to do in the one case where this has come up.
[00:17] *[+mildbeard] Sorry, items 4 and 5.
[00:18] *[@kusanagi] yeah.
[00:19] *[+mildbeard] Anyway, I just wanted this to be a discussion. I don't think we're ready to actually do anything with it.
[00:19] *[+Brady] It appears that everyone is in relative agreement.

[00:19] *[Sacha] yeah

[00:19] *[+Brady] Shall we motion to put this at the top of next weeks agenda?

[00:19] *[Sacha] Do we need a motion for that?

[00:20] *[+Brady] To "insert language into Section 4 explicitly detailing the process by which an observer state is recognized as a probationary state"?
[00:20] *[@kusanagi] no
[00:20] *[@kusanagi] it can go into the agenda without a vote, i believe
[00:20] *[+mildbeard] Can we just note in the minutes that that was the consensus?
[00:20] *[+mildbeard] What Brady said.
[00:21] *[@kusanagi] yes
[00:21] *[+HariSeldon] consent
[00:21] *[CalebL*[laptop]] You can fire me. D:
[00:22] *[@kusanagi] lol
[00:25] *[+Brady] Is that it for tonight?
[00:25] *[@kusanagi] pretty much
[00:25] *[@kusanagi] uh, for next week
[00:26] *[@kusanagi] I don't know what's happening for a meeting
[00:26] *[@kusanagi] travis will be in NY, and it's my anniversary with my fiance.

[00:26] *[Sacha] ....

[00:26] *[@kusanagi] there is a 95% chance that I won't be in

[00:26] *[Sacha] let's bother travis

[00:26] *[@kusanagi] Travis hasn't said what's happening yet

[00:26] *[Sacha] or not have a meeting

[00:27] *[+HariSeldon] yeah... don't bother with the pnc on your anniversary.
[00:27] *[@kusanagi] We probably won't have a meeting, but I'll get something concrete either way out by the 24th
[00:27] *[+mildbeard] well somebody already said we'd be voting on officers the week after that.
[00:27] *[@kusanagi] I did
[00:27] *[+HariSeldon] happy almost anniversary!
[00:28] *[@kusanagi] I'll prolly wind up duct-taping travis to a computer to run it
[00:28] *[@kusanagi] HariSeldon, thanks
[00:28] *[+mildbeard] Ooh, can you post a photo?

[00:28] *[Sacha] What....

[00:28] *[+HariSeldon] lol
[00:28] *[CalebL*[laptop]] So, shall the next meeting be the week thereafter?

[00:28] *[Sacha] when did we decide to vote on officers then?

[00:28] *[@kusanagi] mildbeard, there will be several photos of the torment

[00:29] *[Sacha] Waaay too soon

[00:29] *[Sacha] we haven't even finished by laws yet

[00:29] *[@kusanagi] it was in a discussion earlier this month

[00:29] *[Sacha] Yeah

[00:29] *[@kusanagi] i dunno, i wasn't there

[00:29] *[Sacha] we were going to do it today we were talking about

[00:29] *[Sacha] nothing concrete though, we'll need to make an exception this year or something

[00:30] *[@kusanagi] we're working out the kinks still
[00:30] *[@kusanagi] it's acceptable, really

[00:30] *[Sacha] to have a whole

[00:30] *[Sacha] to vote on officers or to wait and make an exception?

[00:31] *[@kusanagi] making an exception
[00:31] *[+mildbeard] I think so too.
[00:31] *[@kusanagi] it's been pretty crazy this month alone, so i find it acceptable
[00:32] *[@kusanagi] that decision doesn't lie with me though; i can only give my opinion

[00:33] *[Sacha] Will it be a captain decision or a vote you think?

[00:33] *[Sacha] oh crap I forgot to add my aob this week

[00:33] *[@kusanagi] vote.

[00:33] *[Sacha] last week I did: Put a due date on the bylaws committee

[00:33] *[Sacha] I think i'll spur some action

[00:34] *[@kusanagi] do you want to go over that now, or.?
[00:34] *[+mildbeard] How about a 10/3 due date?
[00:34] *[@kusanagi] sure

[00:34] *[Sacha] that sounds good to me

[00:35] *[@kusanagi] thgat seems to be all

[00:35] *[Sacha] Since you two are in here, should I just make my changes to officers and committees right in the document?

[00:35] *[Sacha] or should I put them in the comments?

[00:35] *[@kusanagi] comments
[00:35] *[@kusanagi] easier to see the changes

[00:35] *[Sacha] Idk because my original is what we seem to be editing

[00:35] *[+mildbeard] You mean for the amendments?

[00:35] *[Sacha] what do you think mildbeard?

[00:35] *[Sacha] No in the bylaws

[00:35] *[Sacha] in the working document

[00:36] *[@kusanagi] aight guys, next PNC meeting is either 9/26 or 10/3 at 9pmEDT/6PMPDT, either way i won't be in, so lol. have a good night

[00:36] *[Sacha] I want to completely change my officers duties to make it more in line with kusanagi's to seed along agreement

[00:36] *[Sacha] night :3

[00:36] *[+mildbeard] Well, I find all the comments to be confusing.
[00:36] *[@kusanagi] meeting closed at 12:36a

[00:36] *[Sacha] Yeah me too

[00:36] *[@kusanagi] geezus
[00:36] *[+mildbeard] Are we using piratenpad or are we using a google doc?
[00:36] *[@kusanagi] piratepad

[00:36] *[Sacha] Piratepad..

02*[00:36] * +MrSquared (webchat@65.182.wky.sjn) Quit (Quit: Web client closed)

[00:37] *[@kusanagi] that was long
[00:37] *[@kusanagi] i'm hungry
[00:37] *[CalebL*[laptop]] Don't we have to vote to adjourn? :P

[00:37] *[Sacha] I was thinking since the main doc was my draft, I could just make the changes in my draft without needing to put them in the comments but I wanted to check

[00:37] *[+HariSeldon] it was by brain wave consensus that we voted to adjour.
[00:38] *[+mildbeard] We lost quorum when MrSquared left.
[00:38] *[+HariSeldon] ah... that too.
[00:38] *[+mildbeard] So we can vote or not :).
[00:38] *[+HariSeldon] ok, bye then. see you next week probably!
[00:39] *[+mildbeard] adios
[00:39] *[+Brady] Shall we adjourn?
[00:39] *[+mildbeard] yes
[00:39] *[@kusanagi] yes
[00:39] *[CalebL*[laptop]] aye
[00:39] *[+Brady] Ah
[00:39] *[+Brady] AYe
[00:39] *[@kusanagi] lack of quorum
[00:39] *[+mildbeard] second
[00:39] *[@kusanagi] aye macarena
[00:39] *[+Brady] I see.
[00:39] *[+Brady] Well then, I must dash off into the night.
[00:39] *[+Brady] Thank you all for being amazing.
[00:39] *[CullenMatthews] aye