Item 61. Board meeting minutes, 2/26/97 Rob Argy (ajax) Fri, Feb 28, 1997 (19:32). 248 lines, 44 responses. Board Meeting Minutes for Wednesday, February 26, 1997 1000. Meeting called to order at 7:45pm --------------------------------------- Six board members were in attendance, with one (Scott Helmke) absent. Attendees: Steve Gibbard (scg) Valerie Mates (valerie) Dan Gryniewicz (dang) Jan Wolters (janc) Mark Conger (aruba) Misti Tucker (mta) Charles (arthurp) qt314 (qt314) Rob Henderson (robh) Steve Sarrica (sarrica) Jared Mauch (jared) Rob Argy (ajax) TS Taylor (tsty) Jeff Kaplan (kaplan) STeve Andre' (steve) 1002. Treasurer's report ------------------------ January was a record month for income. We collected approximately $900 in membership dues, $1150 in computer fund contributions, and $300 in other miscellaneous income. We also spent the majority of that money on the hardware for the new computer, but still gained money overall. We had 11 returning members and one new member in January. February is a good bit slower, so far collecting $408. $170 pledged for the new computer, from six people, has not yet bee donated. We will send an e-mail reminder, but some pledges in a pledge drive usually go unfulfilled. There is $75 of transactions, among three people, from the last auction. Valerie and RobH may reoffer the goods to the second-highest bidders. Phone bills are cleared up, except that they're charging us for about a thousand local calls ($84.60 in a recent bill). It's conceivable that the Gryphis, the router that calls IC-Net, may have made several many local calls; staff will look into. 1003. Computer Rehab -------------------- DanG reports that Steve still has stuff, Dan has non-working stuff. Dan also has a box of software, some of it decent, but some of it not for resale. Not sure where rehab going, as it's not really doing anything. Dan will enter a co-op discussion about that. 1004. Publicity Committee ------------------------- Misti's recently-volunteered assistant is getting married and leaving for Cincinatti, and will be unavailable. Misti will have some publicity stuff ready to go for the concert, if we do the concert. (The concert is discussed in agenda item 1038 below). 1008. Technical Committee ------------------------- Sun 4/670 - Jan, the primary staffperson working on this, hasn't been available to work on it for the past two weeks. He posted a message to a Sun admin group, got some advice back, and has new things to try. He said he's still not the best person to be doing this, and it would be best to find someone more experienced, but will try the new advice as time permits. Advice was to boot the 670 off the CD, then build the hard disk, rather than install from CD to hard disk, then boot from hard disk. Marcus made two copies of a 670 manual, and will give us one at some point. Other advice: should use Solaris rather than SunOS, but that's another can of worms that can't be tackled at the moment. Valerie and Jan recently reconfigured one of the new modems, but it connects in a laggy Internet-like mode. It also seemed to be in the telephone trunk hunt, which was unexpected and undesired. We had five various broken modems, which Jan brought to his brother Klaus (n8xf) who repaired four of them. Most (all?) are 2400 baud modems. One of TS's two loaned modems was among them, and the other of TS's is still in the pumpkin, but nobody has had time to try them yet. We have lots of modems, lots of manuals, but most don't agree, so configuring modems is harder than one would expect. Staff could use some help from someone with the time and inclination to work on them. Terminal server - dang is the last person to try them, and couldn't get anything working when he used one, but scg got past that level when he tried them. Ajax has one, and is getting manual from Valerie to look at. A number of different mail problems were mentioned, including some security-related issues. Jan installed a new version of the write program, with selective write permissions, among other things. It allows filtering out selected people, or only allowing selected people, to write to you. He mentioned that he's not enthused with the features, but ackowledged their need given Grex's growth. 1020. ISDN Connection --------------------- Jared and CIC-Net have offered ISDN service. We have a customer service agreement. Basic offer: we buy two ISDN adapters (like Ascend Pipeline 50s) and two ISDN lines. Jared will set things up at the computing center, get an IP address. We need to change DNS, IP address things. Costs are just for ISDN lines and ISDN adapters/routers; all service costs are being given by CIC-Net. Scg called Capella Networking; their pricing on Pipeline P50s is $595 each. We're also considering Jared's offer to configure a caching proxy server on CIC-Net's side of the link, which would offload some web usage from Grex's web server and network link. Centrex ISDN is guessed to be around $27/month per line. This would be for one channel ISDN. Could be compressed or not, will check to see. Will keep IC-Net link going at least until this connection is made; may keep if agreeable to IC-Net and it could give us more usable bandwidth. This proposal was mentioned a while ago. Mary Remmers raised the concern in the meeting agenda item that this was the first it had been mentioned, but people felt it's been discussed on-line adequately over several months, with sufficient detail over the past month, for people to provide feedback. Concerning the purchase of ISDN equipment, there was discussion of whether we should purchase this from the general fund, or do a fund- raiser. We have $3700 in our account. Expenses are $500-$600 per month. We recently did big fundraiser. ISDN installation is guessed to be under $140 per line. Might need AUI transceivers to hook to our local area network. Jared will see if he can find 10Base-T equipment to use for local ethernet to replace our current coax network. Overall, estimating on the high side, $1300 for P50s, $300 for installations, $51 per month for both lines. We're currently paying $35 for two POTS lines for C-Net connection. Ascend Pipelines have added advantage of replacing Gryphis, our unreliable router. Motion: 1. We authorize $1600 for the purchase of the two Ascend Pipeline P50s and installation of two ISDN lines in the appropriate places. 2. We authorize Valerie Mates to negotiate and sign the final version of the CIC-Net Customer Service Agreement for a zero-cost ISDN connection, after being posted on-line for one week of public comments. Jan made motion, Valerie seconded, motion passed 6-0. STeve mentioned not to expect quick service from Ameritech. Jared mentioned that it takes them a while to get a digital connection working, but once it's working, it tends to keep working. 1032. Appointment of cfadm trainees ----------------------------------- Valerie is one of current cfadms. Cfadm is not too hard a job. Volunteers were solicited in co-op, and several people volunteered. At the last staff meeting, staff decided to ask that void and arthurp be accepted. Cfadms have access to staff conference, which is why it's being brough before the board. Motion: Add void and arthurp as cdadm trainees. Valerie made motion, Steve Gibbard seconded, motion passed 6-0. 1038. Poignant Plecostomus offer -------------------------------- Misti was approached on the 16th by this band that would like to put together a concert to benefit Grex. They're willing to set up details, find location, etc., and give proceeds to Grex. They have a good local following. They're a socially conscious group that likes what Grex stands for. There are apparently no "catches." This could dovetail nicely with a planned membership-drive. Differences from wolfmage's offer of a benefit performance a year or two ago were discussed: in that offer, Grex had to do the up-front work, requiring volunteer time from someone with event planning/promotion experience (which did not entirely present itself), and money for the venue, entailing some financial risk to Grex. Owners of a venue for this concert are probably willing to donate the venue space, and being local, the band can handle the details. A printout of E-mail concerning the offer was circulated around the meeting, and will be posted on-line at some point. Participants at the board meeting were quite supportive of this venture. Details can be further discussed and worked out on-line. Motion: We authorize the use of the names Grex and Cyberspace Communications in the fundraiser by the Poignant Plecostomus. Misti made motion, Jan seconded, motion passed 6-0. 1042. New Business ------------------ STeve gave advisory to board that "grex.com" ("Graphics Extension" or some such company) is currently registered, and he had two recent queries from people who got to Grex looking for grex.com. He proposed consideration of registering "grex.org," and/or establishing a dialog grex.com to arrange for each to explain in our web sites that we're not the other group. We can discuss more in co-op. We may tentatively register grex.org now, then decide whether or not to finalize it with payment, since the Internic takes a month or two to process orders. STeve or someone will enter an item to discuss this in co-op. A question was raised as to when talk is coming back? It's an issue that requires work from a number of staff people so it's taking a while. No firm timeline has been established. Valerie talked to Ken Kiarnen at Ameritech, who is still not resolving our open issues. Valerie talked to Ken Asher (a local businessperson and Grexer who deals a *lot* with Ameritech), who said he often calls the Michigan Public Service Commission, which helps resolve problems. Valerie would like to tell Ken Kiarnen that we're planning to do that, then contact the MPSC. STeve said Kiarnen has been good until lately, and would like to give him more time, but others feel we've given Ameritech a lot of time already. STeve said one of the best ways of dealing with Ameritech is to go ballistic, and that he'd call them tomorrow. STeve will leave his pager number, and give Valerie's number as backup, to eliminate the possible problem of a "lost page." Our major problem is that outgoing calls are still not disabled. A recent minor issue is that a line on our trunk hunt shouldn't be in the trunk hunt (it's being used for a test modem right now), but that may have been reprogrammed to be that way by Mike. There was discussion of reimbursing someone for shelter for Grex's sixth anniversary party. Hesitance was because this wasn't discussed in co-op initially, and was purchased with mixed approval from individual board members (Valerie said not to get this yet, Mark said it was ok). We don't want to encourage purchases on Grex's behalf until the purchase has been officially authorized. Motion: Spend $24 on reserving a shelter in Island Park for a party. Jan made motion, Mark seconded, motion passed 4-0-2 (two abstentions). 1049. Final Gavel Pounding around 9:30ish. 44 responses total. ---------- (61) #1 Rob Argy (ajax) Fri, Feb 28, 1997 (19:35). 4 lines. By the way, I took down the minutes, as Misti was a couple minutes late, and I'd already started typing them on Valerie's laptop by the time she got there, so it was easy enough to just keep typing. (Well, until the battery gave out at the end...I had to write two paragraphs by hand - yech!) ---------- (61) #2 Mary Remmers (mary) Fri, Feb 28, 1997 (20:20). 13 lines. Thanks for entering these so promptly, Rob. I'd like to make one correction though. I never "raised the concern in the meeting agenda item that this was the first time it had been mentioned". What I said was, " I'm somewhat uncomfortable with this being decided tonight when the final deal is just now being announced and there are questions." I stand by that concern. The final plan should have been available to the members, in Co-op, before the vote. ---------- (61) #3 Arnold D. Barr (adbarr) Fri, Feb 28, 1997 (21:12). 3 lines. There may be events the responsible parties must deal with absent a formal meetig with nice notices. That is what representative government is all about, I believe. Relax, already. ---------- (61) #4 Mark A. Conger (aruba) Sat, Mar 1, 1997 (02:16). 2 lines. That should have said "11 new members and one returning member", rather than the other way around. ---------- (61) #5 Jan Wolter (janc) Sat, Mar 1, 1997 (09:17). 2 lines. The final deal still doesn't exist. There will probably a discussion period after it does. ---------- (61) #6 Rob Argy (ajax) Sat, Mar 1, 1997 (09:45). 3 lines. Re 2, to make changes to the minutes, should I put the changed version in a separate file, for inclusion in the archive directory, or repost the new version in this item? ---------- (61) #7 Richard J. Wallner (richard) Sat, Mar 1, 1997 (12:48). 4 lines. cool, a band wants to raise money for gfrex...are any of them grexers? Hopefully some grexers wil go to the benefit...someone has to collect the money and get it to the treasurer! :) \. ---------- (61) #8 Mary Remmers (mary) Sat, Mar 1, 1997 (16:07). 13 lines. I've always archived only #0, as posted by the Secretary. Any corrections, additions, suggestions, or drift which would follow in the responses have not been archived with the minutes but would be found by simply rereading the item in the archived conference. I guess I've never considered what followed the Secretary's entry as official and I tend to update the archive as soon as the minutes are posted. If we waited for all responses to make it into the item... Well, when is that exactly? ;-) Maybe the best way to address this is to have approval of the minutes be part of each Board meeting. That way any corrections can be included, officially. I'm open for suggestions. ---------- (61) #9 Jared Mauch (jared) Sat, Mar 1, 1997 (16:15). 6 lines. re #8 Sonds good.. first item of business should always be approval of last meetings minutes. I'd like to suggest a "final revision" be posted a few days before the BoD meeting which will include any corrections/additions, whatnot. ---------- (61) #10 Jeff Kaplan (kaplan) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (00:54). 6 lines. Just one stupid spelling correction. Gryphis should be gryps. Also, grex.org is registered now. Feel free to use grex.org in any context you previously used cyberspace.org but I wouldn't tell people to mail you at grex.org yet because it may not stick around if the emebers decide not to spend the $50 per year to keep it. ---------- (61) #11 Jeff Kaplan (kaplan) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (00:55). 3 lines. I mean the correction is stupid, not the mistake. Any reasonable person would spell it something like that given how gryps is pronounced. And I meant members not emebers above. ---------- (61) #12 Arnold D. Barr (adbarr) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (04:22). 2 lines. I buy that. I think the name Grex is worth the freight charges. This is unique. May it always be so. ---------- (61) #13 Steven R. Weiss (srw) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (07:57). 18 lines. I think Mary's strategy of archiving item 0 only is fine. If there are some VERY SUBSTANTIVE corrections needed, it would be a good idea to copy them from this discussion into the agenda for trhe next meeting, so that the corrections will show up in the following meeting's minutes. The only alternative would be to have the minutes officially approved at the next meeting, and archive those. THat would be more in keeping with common usage, and less Grexian (that's not a value judgment). Some suggestions to whoever keeps the minutes: (1) I find it helpful to delineate who is a voing board member in the "attendee" section. Which board member was not present? (2) I find it helpful, and in fact I think it should be required to specify who voted each way when the vote was not unanimous. These are not secret ballots. Who abstained on the shelter? That said, I want to thank Rob for taking the minutes and posting them quickly. The job gets very few thanks, and deserves more. ---------- (61) #14 Valerie Mates (valerie) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (10:43). 15 lines. Thanks Rob for taking such detailed notes. I appreciate that. Another minor spelling correction: Jan's brother's login ID is n8nxs. I think the minutes said ISDN would cost Grex $600 per month?? (That part has scrolled out of my scrollback buffer already). Actually, it would cost Grex up to $1600 in one-time charges, and then the only monthly cost would be for the pair of ISDN phone lines, which cost about $35/month each. Re 13: Misti and I abstained in the vote on reimbursing dadroc/aruba for the park shelter. I'd appreciate it if corrections to the minutes were somehow included in the archived minutes. Maybe it would work to append responses with corrections at the end of the file? ---------- (61) #15 Rob Argy (ajax) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (10:55). 3 lines. I'll edit #0 in a couple days to reflect suggested corrections, repost it in this item, then that can be archived. Re #13, good ideas for minute- keepers. ---------- (61) #16 Mary Remmers (mary) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (13:54). 9 lines. If any corrections to the Secretary's minutes were to be part of the record then I'd rather it not be up to me to decide which are accurate corrections or corrections worthy of inclusion. Another way this could be handled in a more casual manner would be for me to archive #0 and any responses entered up to X number of days after the minutes were posted. X maybe being one month. ---------- (61) #17 Rosencranz and Gildenstern are dead and I don't feel so good myself (omni) Sun, Mar 2, 1997 (16:04). 1 line. I really hate to pick nits, but Klaus' callsign/login is n8nxf, not s. ---------- (61) #18 Valerie Mates (valerie) Mon, Mar 3, 1997 (09:52). 4 lines. Thanks, I just noticed that too. Mary, archiving minutes with responses posted one month after the minutes were posted, sounds very good. ---------- (61) #19 Klaus (n8nxf) Mon, Mar 3, 1997 (10:11). 1 line. No problem with my login. It's pretty much meaninless. ---------- (61) #20 John H. Remmers (remmers) Mon, Mar 3, 1997 (12:19). 1 line. I thought it meant that your real name is Nate Nixuf. ---------- (61) #21 Klaus (n8nxf) Mon, Mar 3, 1997 (16:51). 1 line. ROTFL!! ---------- (61) #22 TS Taylor (tsty) Tue, Mar 4, 1997 (14:38). 1 line. substantial .. is that $600/month a typo? ---------- (61) #23 Mark A. Conger (aruba) Tue, Mar 4, 1997 (23:07). 8 lines. $600/month is an approximation of our current monthly costs, which I believe is what Rob said in #0 (though I see how it could have been misinterpreted). If you look at the last treasurer's report, you'll see that rent, electric, and internet connection cost us $163 a month and phones have been running about $440/month. That's where the $600 figure comes from. (Note that that phone bill is so high because we are paying off the Centrex installation charges, and will be for the next (I think) 8 months (maybe it's 9, I can't remember).) ---------- (61) #24 Valerie Mates (valerie) Wed, Mar 5, 1997 (12:39). 2 lines. Oh!! Somehow I read that as a hypothetical Centrex cost, not Grex's current monthly costs. Never mind.... ---------- (61) #25 Mary Remmers (mary) Tue, Mar 11, 1997 (20:40). 4 lines. Starting with these minutes I'll not archive them for one month and when I do I'll include all responses up to that time. This would be a low-key way of making sure any corrections stay with the minutes. Okay with folks? (Only negatives need respond.) ;-) ---------- (61) #26 Valerie Mates (valerie) Wed, Mar 12, 1997 (01:14). 1 line. (Fine with me. Very fine, in fact.) ---------- (61) #27 Rane Curl (rcurl) Wed, Mar 12, 1997 (01:35). 5 lines. That would mean one would have to read all the responses to find the corrections. Only the *corrected* minutes (as approved by the board.....) should be archived. Since there are usually few corrections, this would not be difficult (apart from getting the board to approve them). ---------- (61) #28 David Cahill (dpc) Thu, Mar 13, 1997 (16:55). 1 line. Please ignore all rcurl's comments. ---------- (61) #29 Rane Curl (rcurl) Thu, Mar 13, 1997 (23:28). 1 line. Well, now, up your's too.....(said with proper British accent). ---------- (61) #30 Steven R. Weiss (srw) Fri, Mar 14, 1997 (01:44). 5 lines. Well. I am inclined to agree with rcurl, but since Mary is doing us a big favor by archiving the minutes in the first place, I'm not inclined to ask her to do any more work. Perhaps it should be the secretary's job to provide an edited version of the minutes approx one month later, for archiving purposes. This is really quite simple, in fact. ---------- (61) #31 Mary Remmers (mary) Fri, Mar 14, 1997 (06:06). 20 lines. Er, sometimes even getting the first draft of the minutes online in a timely fashion seems a problem. I'm not slapping anyone on the hand here, I understand this is a volunteer show and that almost all of us have real lives. But I'd rather we not set it up so I have to bug folks for corrected minutes. That bugs me. ;-) I think eventually we'll no doubt end up doing business in a more formal and conventional manner as we move away from a co-operative model into a corporate model. Then, we'll need more elaborate minutes with formal corrections. But by then we will probably have stricter rules for the posting of minutes, their content, etc. Until then, why not bathe in the luxury of keeping it simple. Rane, if you feel strongly we should get stricter about the Board formally accepting corrections to the minutes then I'd suggest you enter an item seeking a formal decision on how this should go. In the absence of that I'll just archive everything that shows up within the first month the minutes are posted. ---------- (61) #32 David Cahill (dpc) Fri, Mar 14, 1997 (14:43). 6 lines. Mary, I approve of what you will be doing in the last paragraph of #31. It provides an accurate record of corrections. FWIW, on M-Net, minutes and corrections are posted on-line. The standard motion of approval at the subsequent meeting is "I move approval of the minutes with the corrections as posted on-line." ---------- (61) #33 C. S. McGee (cmcgee) Fri, Mar 14, 1997 (23:26). 10 lines. There is no need to move away from a cooperative model just to be business-like. I just came from the annual meeting of a cooperative with roughly $3 million a year in sales, and we work on consensus and cooperation. (Very profitably, I might add!). And I'm also involved in a tiny corporation that does not get bogged down in elaborate formality. We just do what needs to be done to keep the tax man and the corporations folks in Lansing happy, which is really minimal. So Grex really doesn't need to be terribly formal, if it doesn't want to. ---------- (61) #34 Rane Curl (rcurl) Sat, Mar 15, 1997 (00:17). 5 lines. I've never suggested that grex be "formal". I have only recommended working under widely accepted procedural rules, in an informal way. It is primarily a courtesy and convenience that corrected minutes are those archived. Whoever took the minutes should correct them anyway. Since this floats around a bit, it isn't a burden on one person. ---------- (61) #35 Jenna Hirschman (jenna) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (00:53). 7 lines. Having been told about RRO, some of it wouldn't work for grex conferencing becaue it is intended for real life meeting of definite time frames, and does not accoutn for constant input from different people. However, some RRo suggested guidelines might help for some cases here. Not laws, not straight from RRO but something in the same vein. ---------- (61) #36 Rane Curl (rcurl) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (01:58). 7 lines. You are right, which is why I've been saying they would have to be adapted. RRO are for ftf assemblies, board and committee meetings, etc. Still, there is a lot that would be useful in this format: only one motion on the floor at a time; using amendments to develop consensus; and some others. However RRO certainly do permit "constant input from different people", although they can make it fairer by ensuring that everyone speaks their thoughts on motions. ---------- (61) #37 John H. Remmers (remmers) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (07:10). 13 lines. Re #36: I don't understand the last sentence. Regarding amendments: Formal amendments would have to be voted on, yes? That's a cumbersome and time-consuming procedure in this medium, as we all know. Because of that, I don't see that a formal amendment process would be any more helpful towards building concensus than the "alternative motions" approach that we're using right now. Right now, what we do in a discussion item seems roughly equivalent to the RRO concept of "friendly amendments", i.e. changes to the propsal with which the proposer agrees and which don't require votes. That's feasible in this medium. ---------- (61) #38 Rane Curl (rcurl) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (10:53). 15 lines. Creating successive approximations to what may be a final motion, one motion and vote at a time, is *more* cumbersome than amending. In fact, I am surprised that those wanting a different motion didn't move to amend, rather than putting a whole new motion on the 'floor'. Or, they could move to substitute. (I presume they didn't because they did not know of these common tools for forging most acceptable motions.) There is no RRO concept of "friendly amendments". Once a motion has been made, seconded, and stated by the chair, it is the possession of the assembly, and only the assembly can change it. However, the chair can facilitate that by asking "are there any objections?". My last sentence in #36 referred to the RRO emphasis on giving everyone an opprtunity to speak and not be drowned out by the loudest and longest, as occurs here. ---------- (61) #39 John H. Remmers (remmers) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (12:18). 4 lines. Hm, most of the deliberative bodies I've been a member of have allowed "friendly amendments" of the kind I described. I always assumed it was an RRO thing, but I guess not. However, "Just because it's not RRO doesn't mean it's not a Good Thing." ---------- (61) #40 C. S. McGee (cmcgee) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (12:49). 8 lines. Under RRO, amendments must be voted on too. I have uses RRO in all its gritty detail for several decades (Thanks dpc, for my own private copy). If you make a motion to amend or to substitute that motion must be voted on before you can move back to discussing the main motion. On Grex, this would make things slower, not faster, since there would not be the flexibility of the maker of the motion changing it. Once it is in possession of the assembly, as Rane says, only a *vote* of the assembly can change it. ---------- (61) #41 Rane Curl (rcurl) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (14:27). 22 lines. It's not a Good Thing, because other members of the assembly may consider it an *unfriendly* amendment, but they have no recourse to express that. cmcgee is correct, but then one is voting on an evolution of the motion, rather than a whole new motion. That is, an amendment (unless a substitute) changes only part of a motion, which can be more efficient (at least in a forum where it does not take a long, ponderous, time consuming, procedure to raise and dispose of amendments). The amendment procedure, as cmcgee indicates, does not put two motions on the floor simultaneously. An amendment must be disposed of before the main motion (or another amendment) is taken up. [The RRO prohibition against amendments of the third degree is also very useful!] The flexibility of the maker of a motion to change it is a detriment as the various changes made over a course of time can be contrary to what the assembly would wish. While the assembly is making comments on a proposd motion, in the current practice, they really have no power to direct it towards their goal. However, one could consider the present system as consideration in a committee of the whole, although even there the committee possesses the motion, not the proposer. ---------- (61) #42 [!world] Pete (pfv) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (16:57). 2 lines. Still need a better system ---------- (61) #43 Jenna Hirschman (jenna) Mon, Mar 17, 1997 (21:50). 6 lines. I don't know about amendments, but maybe a system for voting with a different ratio beside 51/50 winning non-bylaw amending motions; maybe a longer discussion period, and I definitely think after whatever discussion period an item with the proposal as it turns out should be posted and frozen. ---------- (61) #44 Kevin Albaugh (albaugh) Sun, Mar 23, 1997 (01:50). 1 line. Cin cin nati