Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 364: Agenda for BOD meeting, Tuesday, 9/26/06, 8PM

Entered by aruba on Sat Sep 23 22:29:50 2006:

Agenda: Grex Board of Directors Meeting, Tuesday, September 26th, 2006

     1. Arrivals 7:30p
     2. Opening Gavel Tap 8:00p
     3. Treasurer's Report
     4. Staff Report
     5. Root-granting policy and staff initiatives
     6. Old Business
     7. Schedule Next Meeting
     8. New Business
     9. Closing Gavel Tap

The board meeting will be held at 8:00 p.m., at the home of John and Mary 
Remmers, 19 Westbury Court, Ann Arbor.
66 responses total.

#1 of 66 by aruba on Sat Sep 23 22:31:09 2006:

Item 5 is for discussion of when it's OK for staff to grant privilieges to
someone, and in general how we can avoid miscommunication in the future.


#2 of 66 by naftee on Sun Sep 24 05:11:59 2006:

the opposite, that is, the summary revoking of staff privileges should be
discussed, too.


#3 of 66 by aruba on Sun Sep 24 13:37:16 2006:

I agree, that should be a part of the discussion.


#4 of 66 by remmers on Sun Sep 24 14:21:01 2006:

I should mention - since it hasn't been emphasized lately - that board 
meetings are open to the public.


#5 of 66 by cross on Sun Sep 24 16:52:09 2006:

Yes, I'd further make it a goal to come up with a suitable policy.  How do
members of the public attend the board meeting if they aren't near Ann Arbor?


#6 of 66 by other on Sun Sep 24 19:12:05 2006:

That's not the board's concern. It's no different for any other company.


#7 of 66 by cross on Sun Sep 24 19:14:38 2006:

Staff revoking other staff members' privileges is not the board's concern?
Then why is it the board's concern if a staff member gives another staff
member staff privileges?


#8 of 66 by glenda on Sun Sep 24 19:49:32 2006:

I think that Eric's response is to the second question in #5, not the first.


#9 of 66 by cross on Sun Sep 24 20:18:19 2006:

I think you must be right, Glenda.  To clarify: I think the board should come
up with a suitable policy for staff members revoking the privileges of other
staff members.

I was just curious on a personal note how one attends a board meeting if one
is not local to the area, and was not suggesting that the board form a policy
for such things.  Clearly, that is beyond the scope of the board's
responsibilities.


#10 of 66 by nharmon on Sun Sep 24 21:37:02 2006:

Building on Dan's suggestion in #9, I think the BoD should consider
appointing a person to be in charge of staff activities. This would be
in the form of a corporate officer (say like a CIO or CTO) who would
report directly to the board. The board would vest supervisory authority
in this person including the authority to add and remove people from
staff, approve system changes, etc. Staff members added by this
administrator could be given limited administrative access to the system
using sudo, with full access to the root password still requiring BoD
approval.


#11 of 66 by gelinas on Mon Sep 25 03:14:55 2006:

The only ways to attend board meetings, that I know of, are to appear in
person at the meeting site and to call in.  The latter option is limited
to the number of available dial-in lines (and speaker-equipped telephones).


#12 of 66 by drew on Mon Sep 25 04:33:27 2006:

    FWIW: A Three-Way Call can now be placed, for a per-call charge, even
from a line that does not have 3 way calling as a regular feature, This
should add at least one extra person worth of capacity to each phone line
available at the meeting site.

    For long distance charges, the current low bid seems to be calling
cards sold at Dollar Tree (tm), 35 minutes worth of long distance for,
of course, a dollar; though two to four such cards will probably be
necessary to cover a meeting, with necessity of redialing for each card.
This should make attendance of a meeting remote possible for < $10,
probably much less than the cost of traveling to the meeting site.

    Also, some cell phone plans may be of help. (I *think* that 3-way
is an included feature of most.) Sprint, for example, has an airtime
free after 7PM plan; and I've been hearing commercials lately for a
Talk-All-You-Want for $40/month service.


#13 of 66 by nharmon on Mon Sep 25 13:10:16 2006:

Or you could book a telephone conferencing system for board meetings.
Some are free without 800 numbers IIRC.


#14 of 66 by scholar on Mon Sep 25 14:04:42 2006:

At the very least, why doesn't the Board see to it that meetings are recorded
and then published on the Internet?


#15 of 66 by nharmon on Mon Sep 25 14:35:29 2006:

I think the minutes are published on the internet.


#16 of 66 by tod on Mon Sep 25 17:37:28 2006:

re #10
We did that on M-Net.  We created a "sys admin" and that person is currently
Rex Roof.  The buck stops with him when staff gets questionable.  He is also
the one that answers for any weirdness.  I'm actually suprised that sort of
title hasn't been extended to STeve since he obviously operates under such
an assumption.


#17 of 66 by nharmon on Mon Sep 25 17:41:14 2006:

Well, whether it exists informally or not at all, I think formal unity
of command is a good thing and would prevent problems like this.


#18 of 66 by tod on Mon Sep 25 17:55:52 2006:

I think addressing it formally would be a way to inform people that want to
volunteer for staff that they have to seek approval of the guy behind the
curtain before they attempt something silly like logic.  Nobody is going to
come right out and say that there are going to be bruised egos if you attempt
to fix anything so it should be formally noted at least.


#19 of 66 by scholar on Mon Sep 25 18:05:48 2006:

Re. 15:  Yes, but no matter how good a secretary Grex has, minutes can't be
as good as audio recordings, which is what I'm suggesting.


#20 of 66 by nharmon on Mon Sep 25 19:05:27 2006:

re 19: Sounds like an issue to be taken up by a BoD candidate.


#21 of 66 by tod on Mon Sep 25 19:29:29 2006:

re #20
I agree.  Hope we have a good volunteer to be on BoD.


#22 of 66 by steve on Mon Sep 25 20:34:35 2006:

   I'm going to see if I can't record the meeting.  I'm  not sure
how I'll take it off the device, so I'll have to figure that out
before I can put it somewhere for people to get to it.


#23 of 66 by tod on Mon Sep 25 20:39:32 2006:

You could use a laptop and Total Recorder to put it right on mp3.



#24 of 66 by naftee on Mon Sep 25 22:01:29 2006:

re 19
But then we'd have to guess the person who's snoring during the meeting :(


#25 of 66 by cross on Mon Sep 25 22:35:03 2006:

How does M-Net go about selecting this sysadmin above all sysadmins?  How are
the personality conflicts that seem inevitable to arise between that person
and others handled?  What if that person just says, "no" to anything that
anyone else proposes?  Like I said, you're giving one person an awful lot of
power without a lot of checks and balances.  Having someone responsible for
the system is one thing.  Having them responsible for and have authority over
the rest of the staff is quite another.

Regarding #22; If you have an iPod, you could get an iMic and plug it in to
take a recording.

I wanted to try and call into the meeting, but now it looks like tomorrow
night isn't going to be so hot.  :-(


#26 of 66 by tod on Mon Sep 25 23:04:58 2006:

The sysadmin is basically an appointed position by the prez.  If the
membership has a beef with the choice or conduct of said sysadmin then they
can issue a request with alternative choices.  If they still are unhappy, they
can ask the membership to issue a vote of no-confidence against the president
that made the appointment and ask him to step-down.

I would say that Grex should do that but once again, there are toes and
egos that might be bruised so I'd be almost completely blown away by such
an act of mature accountability.


#27 of 66 by cross on Mon Sep 25 23:31:41 2006:

The problem is that that forces the membership to either (a) understand the
technical issues involved, or (b) just go blindly with one side or another.
The problem with grex is that it isn't so much a working democracy as it is
a popularity contest; I'm wondering if we'd just be formalizing that.


#28 of 66 by nharmon on Mon Sep 25 23:53:12 2006:

I just think that more and more people fall into this "i am just a
volunteer" mentality because of the present way staff is organized. And
this is usually helped by instituting order on a professional level so
that instead of being "just a volunteer" you become an "unpaid
professional".

I've volunteered in a lot of organizations, most of which simply did not
accept the answer of "look, i'm just a volunteer". I mean, if my CAP
commander called for my availability for SAR sorties, what would I say..
"Gee Major, I dont really feel like flying today, uh, besides im justa
volunteer"? It'd be the last thing I said. Or when I was on a volunteer
fire fighter. Do you think those guys blew off their responsibility? No
way. Or when I taught CPR/First Aid/AED for the Red Cross...what if I
just said "nah, im just a volunteer, ill just not show up at that
class". Yes, you can fire a volunteer, and the Red Cross doesn't have
any problem with doing so.

Now you might say "Gee Nathan, thats different, we're just an
organization on the internet". And I say that is exactly the attitude
you should NOT have. Board of Directors, how many times do you sit down
and think "what is grex NOT doing to promote free speech and free access
on the internet that we COULD be doing right now?" I mean, looking at
the BoD minutes...(this is just my opinion, not trying to be
offensive)...the BoD spends WAAY too much time micromanaging Grex. I
mean, discussion of the PC weasel? You should be discussing
GOALS...planning on how you can better accomplish your mission
statement. Forming committees for initiatives. Need an
initiative?...here is one: What is Grex doing to help promote a neutral
internet?

I say you people need to THINK BIG. Not about becoming big in size, but
rather big in impact. Grex is supposed to be about much more than just
running a BBS.


#29 of 66 by cross on Tue Sep 26 00:00:06 2006:

Good points.


#30 of 66 by tod on Tue Sep 26 00:02:32 2006:

re #27
Most places operate that way.  I mean..we're talking about gross misconduct
for a membership to make motions to remove a sysadmin but at the same time
someone with a good reason could probably muster a reaction.


#31 of 66 by cross on Tue Sep 26 00:49:03 2006:

So the recourse to the board is only for removing sysadmins, or for change
management issues?

Look.  Let's be frank.  If Steve said that water turned orange when you poured
it on a Unix system, 99% of the grex population would believe him.  If some
of the other staff members said the same thing, no one would believe them.
"Because Steve says it's the right thing to do..." is a strong argument for
a lot of people, no matter what the thing being considered really is.  And
of course, at some point, staff needs discretion to be able to do things
without endless rounds of public debate: ``Hey, I'm upgrading emacs....'' 
``But wait!  You can't!  What about X, Y, and Z!  This is EMACS we're talking
about!!''  That's exactly right; it is emacs we're talking about, not the OS
or hardware platform or anything else.  Should users be able to push things
like that to the board level?  I'd say no.  Should they have recourse against
what must be acknowledged as the very, very strong influence of a few of the
"traditional" staff members?  Yeah, but what does that mean in practice?

Marcus Watts was right about something in his posts in item #27 in garage:
staff does need to be able to build concensus.  I'd rather see that
facilitated than a dictatorship emposed.


#32 of 66 by tod on Tue Sep 26 00:54:36 2006:

Listen, I had lunch with Hellman so don't tell me about crypto, okay?
(Hellman's mayonaisse that is..)


#33 of 66 by cross on Tue Sep 26 00:56:40 2006:

The thing is, I *really have* had lunch with Whit Diffie.


#34 of 66 by tod on Tue Sep 26 17:34:30 2006:

re #33
(Me, too.  Not only that, I was on a speaker panel with him.)


#35 of 66 by cross on Tue Sep 26 17:44:33 2006:

He's a nice guy.


#36 of 66 by tod on Tue Sep 26 18:15:32 2006:

His hair smells like strawberries.


#37 of 66 by cross on Tue Sep 26 19:24:13 2006:

The snozzberries taste like snozzberries!


#38 of 66 by cross on Tue Sep 26 23:59:50 2006:

I realize it's a bit late, but what's the phone number to dial into the board
meeting?


#39 of 66 by mary on Wed Sep 27 01:34:14 2006:

Tonight, it's our home phone number.  Bruce Howard is on that
line for the meeting.


#40 of 66 by cross on Wed Sep 27 01:45:14 2006:

Guess that sort of rules out me calling in.  Okay.


#41 of 66 by aruba on Wed Sep 27 03:26:35 2006:

We only have the one phone line, and the one full-duplex phone,
unfortunately.


#42 of 66 by cross on Wed Sep 27 04:13:43 2006:

Them's the breaks, I suppose.


#43 of 66 by tod on Wed Sep 27 16:45:48 2006:

Too bad you can't skype a conference call


#44 of 66 by krj on Wed Sep 27 19:08:19 2006:

nharmon in resp:28 :: deja vu all over again.  I heard that speech 
-- both parts of it, the "professional" one and "we should be a bigger
organization with more impact" one -- on M-net, maybe half a dozen times.
Usually it led to grief.

What sticks in my mind is a line from the non-profit organization 
lawyer who M-net consulted once.  As it was reported at the time,
the line was:   "You can't make the membership go somewhere it doesn't
want to go."



#45 of 66 by tod on Wed Sep 27 19:26:15 2006:

This isn't M-Net.  Even if it was, and there was this much interest, it seems
like a basic duty of a director to review short-term and long-term goal
formulations as well as deliberating on recruitment ideas.
What I probably find the most offensive is when directors make business
decisions without being reasonably informed (aka "duty of inquiry".)  As a
director, one should always be cautious that information provided strictly
for the first time at a meeting may not always be accurate.

 "A director may not close his eyes to what is going on about him in the
conduct of the corporate business, and, if he is put on notice by the presence
of suspicious circumstances, he may be required to make such 'reasonable
inquiry' as an ordinarily prudent person in his position would make under
similar circumstances."
  -Report of the Assembly Select Committee on Revision to the Corporations 
   Code  p. 50 (1975).



#46 of 66 by nharmon on Wed Sep 27 19:38:43 2006:

I dunno. I just feel that Grex has so much more potential. I feel that
Grex could do so much more for many more people if it just made that
next leap in terms of quality and intensity. So single person can get us
there, its going to need to be a team effort. Here is what we need to do:

1. Everyone needs to put more work into the organization. Everyone means
everyone, from members on the BoD to conference fairwitnesses. It isn't
enough just to attend regular meetings. We need to be creating,
experimenting, planning and implementing new ideas, encouraging new
members. I know that Grexers tend to be extremely busy people, but just
a few more minutes of brainfocus goes a long way. Maybe its just taking
5 minutes to pick up the phone and call the Free Software Foundation, or
spending a few minutes in party to meet and greet new users. Every
little effort helps.

2. Grex needs to incorporate professional development plans if it ever
hopes to recruiting more staff. You simply can't expect knowledgable
system administrators to come from nowhere. New staff should be
cultivated from the user pool because those people already have the
motivation and committment.

3. Grex needs to take advantage of its resources. I never cease to be
amazed by the talent we have on here. We have PhDs, professional system
administrators, programmers...the list goes on. We're sitting on a
goldmine of technical prowess that just isn't being tapped.

4. Grex needs to raise the level of professionalism. This isn't optional
in my opinion. And it isn't difficult. Those of us who are IT
professionals already do it every day. We simply need to bring the same
sense of responsibility to Grex that we bring to our careers.

I think if we put our personalities, egos, and personal agendas aside
and work on Grex's mission, a lot of other things will fall into place.
 It is all about "service before self" for our members and for each other.


#47 of 66 by tod on Wed Sep 27 19:59:51 2006:

 It is all about "service before self" for our members and for each other.
BWAHAHAHAHAH!!


#48 of 66 by nharmon on Wed Sep 27 20:08:13 2006:

It wasn't meant to be funny, Todd.


#49 of 66 by cross on Wed Sep 27 21:48:35 2006:

I think Todd was expressing skepticism.  I think what you're saying is great,
Nate, but I'm not sure it will ever happen.


#50 of 66 by aruba on Thu Sep 28 04:46:48 2006:

I agree with the principles Nate cites.


#51 of 66 by remmers on Thu Sep 28 16:49:52 2006:

Re #46:  Right, there are plenty of talented people who log in to Grex.  
As you say, "We have PhDs, professional system administrators, 
programmers...the list goes on."

As a practical matter, I wonder how much of those talents would actually 
be available to us, given people's busy lives and time constraints.  For 
example, my impression is that you have some technical skills that would 
be of value to Grex.  Can you estimate how many hours per week you would 
have available to devote those skills to Grex?  How big a personal 
commitment could you afford?


#52 of 66 by cross on Thu Sep 28 19:51:20 2006:

Doing what, though?  I'd volunteer to work on grexsoft again, but when I *was*
working on it, no one else was at all interested and after a while it just
became a pleasant but ultimately useless time sink for me.  Then again, it
never made it through the last OpenBSD upgrade.  Hmm.  Maybe I should
volunteer for staff to reinstall it.  I wonder how receptive staff and the
board would be to such a thing?  (That's a real question.)

grexdoc could also use some reoganization.


#53 of 66 by tod on Thu Sep 28 20:00:55 2006:

We should build an opensource replica of the grex system.


#54 of 66 by cross on Thu Sep 28 20:02:06 2006:

It's most of the way there, except for a picospan replacement.


#55 of 66 by tod on Thu Sep 28 20:13:23 2006:

Maybe you should think about transcoding Eagle's Nest BBS or something
Take your pick of BBS...

ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/linux/system/bbs


#56 of 66 by cross on Thu Sep 28 22:28:18 2006:

I've looked at a lot of those; they're basically all pretty poorly
implemented.  I think that one of the things that made Picospan and YAPP
reasonably successful is that, imperfect though they are, they integrate
reasonably well into the Unix paradigm.  Most of the menu-based BBS systems
don't really do that.

I think the best thing to do would be define a protocol for how a
client/server BBS system would look like; what kind of RPC's (or functional
equivalent) would one want?  PostItem, PostResponse, etc, and then build a
system on top of that.  This is essentially what Jan did with
backtalk/fronttalk, but he chose to use HTTP as the basic protocol, which
eliminates a lot of the state-full-ness of the whole thing and makes some
things difficult; hence not all of PicoSpan is in fronttalk (and of course
it still has that damn bug where a C-style NUL character ' \ 0 ' terminates
an input buffer because it's not properly quoted...).


#57 of 66 by tod on Thu Sep 28 22:54:35 2006:

I'm satisfied using YABB.  Its flat file and neat.


#58 of 66 by cross on Thu Sep 28 23:02:26 2006:

Does it have a command line interface?


#59 of 66 by tod on Thu Sep 28 23:49:55 2006:

Currently developing a lynx friendly front end for it.


#60 of 66 by cross on Thu Sep 28 23:54:26 2006:

Hmm.  That's not quite the same thing....  (But still a good idea....)


#61 of 66 by tod on Fri Sep 29 00:39:54 2006:

re #60
Thank of the mobile phone possibilities


#62 of 66 by slynne on Fri Sep 29 00:51:44 2006:

resp:52 I would be happy to see you on staff


#63 of 66 by cross on Fri Sep 29 01:04:36 2006:

Regarding #61; Good point.

Regarding #62; Thanks!


#64 of 66 by naftee on Fri Sep 29 03:50:57 2006:

yeah; you were doing good work on GreXsoft, cross.


#65 of 66 by spooked on Thu Oct 12 09:48:00 2006:

I would support a new system


#66 of 66 by mary on Thu Oct 12 10:32:42 2006:

Me too.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: