From Wikimedia UK
Jump to navigation Jump to search


[20:29] mpeel: evening all
[20:29] AndrewRT: hi mike
[20:30] cfp: evening
[20:30] KTC: hi
[20:30] mpeel: so, the newsletter still needs a fair bit of work...
[20:31] Warofdreams joined the chat room.
[20:31] AndrewRT: when did we say we'd get it out again?
[20:31] mpeel: tomorrow
[20:31] KTC was promoted to operator by ChanServ.
[20:31] KTC made this room moderated for normal users.
[20:31] KTC was demoted from operator by ChanServ.
[20:32] AndrewRT: oh
[20:32] AndrewRT: r we ready to begin?
[20:32] KTC: when Warofdreams id'd
[20:32] AndrewRT: oh yes
[20:32] Warofdreams was granted voice by ChanServ.
[20:33] Warofdreams: thanks
[20:33] Warofdreams: I'm ready to begin
[20:33] mpeel: "voice #wikimedia-uk-board Warofdreams" helps.
[20:34] KTC: let's start then
[20:34] KTC: thanks andrew for the agenda
[20:34] AndrewRT: i'm afraid I have to give my apologies
[20:34] AndrewRT: have to leave early
[20:34] AndrewRT: around 10pm
[20:34] KTC: ok
[20:34] AndrewRT: KTC: welcome
[20:34] cfp: no worries.
[20:34] mpeel: hopefully we can be done by then anyway...
[20:34] KTC: just to note i'm a bit on the slow side still
[20:34] AndrewRT: who knows we may be finished by then 
[20:34] KTC: *nod*
[20:35] AndrewRT: no probs
[20:35] Warofdreams: would be nice 
[20:35] KTC:
[20:35] KTC:
[20:35] KTC: happy with the minutes?
[20:36] mpeel: minutes look fine to me
[20:36] Warofdreams: and I'm happy with your change, Andrew
[20:36] AndrewRT: thanks
[20:36] cfp: minutes look fine.
[20:37] AndrewRT: r u happy with me just makign the change on wiki or would you prefer me to raise on the talk page?
[20:37] AndrewRT: Warofdreams?
[20:37] Warofdreams: I'm happy with making the change on the wiki, provided it is before the board meeting
[20:38] AndrewRT: ok thx just so i know
[20:38] KTC: next ?
[20:38] KTC: 4.1
[20:38] AndrewRT: cfp?
[20:38] cfp: have been discussing with mike godwin
[20:38] KTC:
[20:39] cfp: my legal advice is that by him emailing that clarification of 4.7
[20:39] cfp: he's in effect made that the interpretation that any hypothetical court would use
[20:39] AndrewRT: would a minute from the WMF saying they had agreed in principle to recognise be sufficient for the coop?
[20:39] AndrewRT: or are they insisting on the signed agreement?
[20:39] cfp: and from talking to him evidently he got the same legal advice
[20:39] cfp: the coop want a signed agreement
[20:40] cfp: ultimately a hard copy.
[20:40] mpeel: cfp: could you clarify your legal advice comments?
[20:40] cfp: let me quote two bits of email. one sec
[20:40] AndrewRT: this is onthe meaning of "commercial"?
[20:41] cfp: yes
[20:41] cfp: mike godwin wrote:
[20:41] cfp: > We've always interpreted a chapter's direct sales of t-shirts and other
[20:41] cfp: > Wikimedia-labelled materials as noncommercial fundraising. In other words,
[20:41] cfp: > "Wikimedia UK" and the variants may freely be used for this purpose.
[20:41] cfp: >
[20:41] cfp: > We generally interpret "commercial" to apply to industry partners,
[20:41] cfp: > publishers, and the like -- chapter-based production of branded material for
[20:41] cfp: > members, or to directly raise money for the chapters, is something we want
[20:41] cfp: > you to consider yourselves able to do.
[20:41] cfp: >
[20:41] cfp: > So for example:
[20:41] cfp: >
[20:41] cfp: > 1) "Wikimedia UK" T-shirts, sold to members or other folks, are okay by us.
[20:41] cfp: >
[20:41] cfp: > 2) Using the "Wikimedia UK" or other WMUK brands to partner with a mobile
[20:41] cfp: > company or a dictionary publisher would require a separate agreement.
[20:41] cfp: my barrister friend wrote:
[20:41] cfp: One further, important point.  In the somewhat unlikely event that you
[20:41] cfp: ever get into a serious dispute with the Foundation about this, their
[20:42] cfp: pre-contractual 'clarification' of how the Clause should operate will
[20:42] cfp: make it very difficult for the Foundation to argue that some other
[20:42] cfp: interpretation should apply.  They would probably be estopped from
[20:42] cfp: going back on this; and/or the court may treat this statement as a
[20:42] cfp: warranty or a collateral contract (subject to Florida, which is a
[20:42] cfp: common law jurisdiction, having a similar law of contract).  If, as I
[20:42] cfp: understand it, you *do* want to go with the interpretation that the
[20:42] cfp: Foundation have put forward, you can lock things up even more by
[20:42] cfp: replying: "As to Clause 4.7, we would be willing to proceed on the
[20:42] cfp: basis that these words shall be interpreted in the manner indicated in
[20:42] cfp: your previous email..."  Then it should be extremely difficult from
[20:42] cfp: them to back-track.
[20:42] cfp: and from talking to mike, that was his express intention in offering that interpretation.
[20:42] cfp: so i hope the chapter agreement is now in a form that we're all happy with?
[20:42] AndrewRT: is there anything else that's still up for discussion?
[20:43] mpeel: as it stands, we won't be able to use the wikipedia trademark
[20:43] mpeel: is everyone ok with that?
[20:43] cfp: no he hasn't objected to any of our other changes
[20:43] mpeel: (unless we have another agreement for that trademark)
[20:43] AndrewRT: mpeel; I would say yes
[20:43] AndrewRT: lets get this agreement signed so we can get a bank account
[20:43] AndrewRT: then lets start of a trademark agreement
[20:43] AndrewRT: if we want one
[20:43] mpeel: the other point that was raised (I forget who by) was: which trademarks are actually registered by the WMF in this country?
[20:43] cfp: we certainly can negotiate on using wikipedia later. i don't actually see us needing to use it for most things we might do though
[20:44] cfp: mostly we want to be able to say that we are wikipedia uk
[20:44] mpeel: erm...wikimedia uk?
[20:44] cfp: yeah that.
[20:44] cfp: typo...
[20:44] cfp: oops.
[20:45] cfp: i don't know which trademarks are actually registered in this country. but my assumption is that if it was necessary for them to be registered here in order to get sufficient protection, then they were.
[20:47] mpeel: "wikimedia" is registered as a trademark
[20:47] mpeel: as of 20/09/2006 
[20:47] Warofdreams: I agree with AndrewRT.  The agreement appears to meet all our requests, and we can think about a trademark agreement for the (near) future.
[20:47] mpeel: as is wikimania
[20:48] mpeel:
[20:48] cfp: as is wikipedia
[20:48] cfp: i was using this site:
[20:48] KTC_ joined the chat room.
[20:48] KTC_ was granted voice by ChanServ.
[20:48] mpeel: same here
[20:49] mpeel: wikimedia info at
[20:49] cfp: this one is a little odd:
[20:49] cfp: but anyway this is by the by to a certain extent.
[20:50] cfp: do i take it there are no objections to the agreement text as it stands?
[20:50] cfp: ktc's irc client seems to have died again...
[20:50] KTC_ left the chat room. (Client Quit)
[20:50] KTC left the chat room. ("Leaving")
[20:51] KTC joined the chat room.
[20:51] KTC was granted voice by ChanServ.
[20:51] AndrewRT: sorry about that
[20:51] AndrewRT: back now
[20:52] KTC: um, that was me calling andrew
[20:53] AndrewRT: hi KTC
[20:53] AndrewRT: u back in the room?
[20:53] KTC: for now
[20:53] AndrewRT: I support the agreement text as it stands
[20:53] KTC: missed the last few mins
[20:53] AndrewRT: others?
[20:54] cfp: can this be minuted as an official resolution then
[20:54] Warofdreams: i support it
[20:54] KTC: ok
[20:54] mpeel: there's some tidying that could be done - e.g. 7.1 "together with a certified translation into English if not already in that language." isn't really needed.
[20:54] AndrewRT: mpeel?
[20:54] cfp: though mike godwin did suggest he may want to make another change. hopefully not though and we can get on with signing it.
[20:54] mpeel: but I'm pretty happy with how it is now.
[20:55] AndrewRT: can I make one point about conflicts of interest
[20:55] cfp: well for welsh etc. might as well leave it in.
[20:55] AndrewRT: I sent an email round about this - thanks everyone for replying
[20:55] cfp: yes go on?
[20:55] Tango42 joined the chat room.
[20:55] AndrewRT: Looking at the articles I'm concerned that we may be deemed to be connected with the WMF
[20:56] AndrewRT: hence I asked anyone if they had been employed by the WMF
[20:56] AndrewRT: or had been a director or member
[20:56] AndrewRT: or if any of their family had
[20:56] KTC: which "articles"?
[20:56] AndrewRT: sorry I should have said teh Memorandum of Association
[20:57] AndrewRT:
[20:57] AndrewRT: I was trying to work through how the law stands
[20:58] mpeel: I think we're ok.
[20:58] AndrewRT: pardon me for a moment while I go through it
[21:00] AndrewRT: Looking through my email I've had responses from everyone
[21:00] AndrewRT: KTC mentioned that he has served on a committee of the WMF
[21:00] AndrewRT: That seems to be the only issue
[21:01] AndrewRT: question is - should he excuse himself when we make the decision
[21:01] mpeel: are any of us going to vote nay?
[21:01] AndrewRT: or is the relationship not close enough to be a conflict of interest
[21:01] AndrewRT: no - i think we all support it
[21:01] mpeel: then methinks it's a moot point
[21:01] AndrewRT: hence it may be the safe option - four yeses and one abstain
[21:01] cfp: yes seems sensible
[21:01] cfp: everyone ok with that?
[21:01] AndrewRT: KTC are you happy with that?
[21:02] KTC: am i still here?
[21:02] AndrewRT: yes
[21:03] AndrewRT: are you happy to abstain on this matter?
[21:03] KTC: um, i don't think there's a conflict of interest
[21:03] KTC: but okay
[21:04] AndrewRT: thanks for accommodating me on this one!
[21:04] AndrewRT: can we minute that then mickey?
[21:04] Warofdreams: will do.
[21:04] mpeel: could we make a formal resolution about the agreement?
[21:04] AndrewRT: would a minute now suffice?
[21:04] AndrewRT: _not_
[21:05] KTC: i would argue the underline bit of 5.5(b) apply but whatever 
[21:05] cfp: perhaps it would make sense to authorise me to sign it on behalf of wiki uk ltd, with the current text?
[21:05] cfp: if that's ok
[21:06] mpeel: by the second "it", do you mean the chapters agreement?
[21:06] cfp: yes i do
[21:06] AndrewRT: I agree with cfp: authorise him to sign it on our behalf
[21:06] mpeel: makes sense to me.
[21:07] cfp: any objections?
[21:07] cfp: wod, ktc?
[21:07] Warofdreams: fine with me
[21:09] KTC: i'm absent from this part of the meeting remember 
[21:09] mpeel: KTC: you're here, you're just abstaining from decisions. You can still comment on them though.
[21:09] AndrewRT: oh yeah so you are!
[21:10] AndrewRT: ok is that decided then
[21:10] mpeel: how will the chapters agreement be sent to us? By post or fax?
[21:10] AndrewRT: ?
[21:10] mpeel: see discussion in #wikimedia-uk about whether 1 or 2 people need to sign the agreement.
[21:11] cfp: i asked about that. didn't get a reply. will pester mike again after this meeting
[21:11] cfp: i'm hoping it will be doable electronically
[21:12] mpeel: if necessary, doing it by post would only make a few day's difference in times.
[21:12] cfp: if someone else wants to sign, might i suggest it is someone who has access to either a scanner, a fax, or a photocopier that sends emails
[21:12] cfp: yes i suppose so. it still takes a while cross atlantic. and if multiple of us were signing it that would add another few days
[21:13] mpeel: if we want two people to sign, and we're doing it electronically, then I have access to both of the first two.
[21:13] cfp: <Tango42> Charities Act 1993, Section 82, Part 1:
[21:13] cfp: <Tango42> "Charity trustees may, subject to the trusts of the charity, confer on any of their body (not being less than two in number) a general authority, or an authority limited in such manner as the trustees think fit, to execute in the names and on behalf of the trustees assurances or other deeds or instruments for giving effect to transactions to which the trustees are a party; and any deed or...
[21:13] cfp: <Tango42> ...instrument executed in pursuance of an authority so given shall be of the same effect as if executed by the whole body."
[21:14] cfp: so tango's right
[21:14] AndrewRT: right that clarifies it
[21:14] mpeel: so, we either include that in the resolution, or use the AndrewRT/cfp pair already agreed.
[21:15] cfp: andrew are you going to be near a fax machine then?
[21:16] cfp: otherwise it would make sense for me and mpeel to do it instead
[21:16] AndrewRT: I will be on Wednesday, Thurs & Friday
[21:16] AndrewRT: when are we expecting?
[21:16] AndrewRT: if mpeel has regular access may be better to use him
[21:17] cfp: don't know really. partly dependant on alison i guess.
[21:17] cfp: ok so is everyone ok with granting mpeel and i jointly the power to sign the chapter agremeent with the wmf, as the text currently stands
[21:18] AndrewRT: yeah i think so if you're ok mpeel?
[21:18] mpeel: I'm ok with that.
[21:18] Warofdreams: I'm happy with that
[21:18] AndrewRT: thanks mpeel and cfp for sorting this out
[21:18] mpeel: This board resolves to approve the Chapters Agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation and, pursuant to Section 82 of the Charities Act 1993, the Board of Directors confers upon the Treasurer, Tom Holden, and the Membership Secretary, Michael Peel, acting together, the authority to sign in the name and on behalf of the charity the chapters agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation
[21:19] AndrewRT: I support
[21:19] cfp: you should probably include a permalink to the page history
[21:19] cfp: i support
[21:19] cfp: page text i should say.
[21:19] mpeel: I'll include that in the wikitext version
[21:19] Warofdreams: i support
[21:19] AndrewRT: and KTC abstains
[21:20] mpeel: I support
[21:20] AndrewRT: so it passes then
[21:20] Warofdreams: I'll minute that.
[21:20] cfp: cool.
[21:20] AndrewRT: next item
[21:20] AndrewRT: welcoem back KTC!
[21:20] cfp: 4.2. wmuk v1
[21:21] AndrewRT: KTC r u still ok to chair btw?
[21:21] cfp: i'm not sure what the weird pings we've been getting from him mean
[21:21] AndrewRT: or should cfp take over as ur connection is slow?
[21:21] KTC: whatever you guys want
[21:21] AndrewRT: r u still having trouble connecting?
[21:22] AndrewRT: or r u ok now?
[21:22] KTC: cfp, it's just me checking how slow i am in communicating
[21:22] cfp: oh ok sure.
[21:22] cfp: well it seems ktc's fine
[21:22] mpeel: btw: resolution is at
[21:22] AndrewRT: thanks KTC
[21:22] AndrewRT: thanks mpeel
[21:22] AndrewRT: on 4.2 that was my point
[21:23] AndrewRT: I sent an email to Alison thanking her for her support
[21:23] AndrewRT: ccd everyone else
[21:23] cfp: thanks andrew.
[21:23] AndrewRT: no response at teh moment - will tell you if/when she gets back to me
[21:23] AndrewRT: AGM Location is also mine
[21:23] AndrewRT: shall I continue?
[21:24] AndrewRT: ?
[21:25] AndrewRT: everyone still there?
[21:25] Warofdreams: yep
[21:25] Warofdreams: please go on...
[21:25] AndrewRT: shall i go on to 4.3?
[21:25] KTC_ joined the chat room.
[21:25] KTC_ was granted voice by ChanServ.
[21:25] KTC_: where r we?
[21:25] AndrewRT: hi KTC
[21:25] AndrewRT: 4.3
[21:25] AndrewRT: shall i continue?
[21:26] KTC_: yeah
[21:26] AndrewRT: ok AGM Location
[21:26] KTC_: just got all the text from the last 5 mins 
[21:26] AndrewRT: I've been in touch with a supporter who's spoken to some people at Birmingham Uni
[21:26] AndrewRT: KTC_ u happy with it all?
[21:26] cfp: and good news?
[21:26] AndrewRT: well, in progress
[21:26] AndrewRT: he reckons we can get a room for free
[21:27] KTC: yes andrew
[21:27] AndrewRT: if we can persuade a student society to book it for us
[21:27] AndrewRT: cogs - the computer science society - is a good lead
[21:27] AndrewRT: he is following it up for me
[21:27] AndrewRT: I guess we've still got a bit of time
[21:27] Warofdreams: that sounds promising, and thanks for looking in to it
[21:27] AndrewRT: if teh Board's happy I'll continue investigating and let you knwo what happens?
[21:27] KTC: *nod* 
[21:28] KTC_ left the chat room. (Client Quit)
[21:28] cfp: yup thanks for pursuing this
[21:28] mpeel: we've probably got a week or two before we'll be in a position to book a room for a specific date, I guess.
[21:28] AndrewRT: ok if everyone's happy, move onto Election Rules?
[21:28] mpeel: thanks andrew for investigating it.
[21:28] AndrewRT: mpeel: maybe more than that depending on how long the agreement takes and the bank accoutn after that
[21:29] mpeel: I thought I was being pessimistic with a fortnight...
[21:29] KTC: no no, the other way round i think... 
[21:29] AndrewRT: I'm afraid I agree with KTC - could be 3 weeks
[21:29] AndrewRT: cfp what's your view?
[21:30] AndrewRT: you're closest to it
[21:30] cfp: the impression the coop gave me at least was that once they get this fax of the letter, they'll be able to go ahead pretty quickly
[21:30] cfp: but i certainly wouldn't swear to that impression.
[21:31] AndrewRT: I imagine it would still take a week for them to send you the paying in slips though
[21:31] cfp: (and they certainly didn't give a timeline or whatever)
[21:31] cfp: yeah banks are generally slow. lets just hope for the best.
[21:31] cfp: shall we move on?
[21:31] AndrewRT: yes please
[21:31] AndrewRT: Election Ruels
[21:31] AndrewRT: I've implemented teh change agreed here:
[21:31] AndrewRT:
[21:32] AndrewRT: as decided, the top three candidates are elected regardless
[21:32] AndrewRT: if they dont get more than 50%, they are forced to hold an election within two months
[21:32] AndrewRT: I also put in a couple of minor changes clearing up some inconsistencies I found
[21:32] AndrewRT: One thing was mentioned on the email list
[21:33] AndrewRT: If, say, #1 gets 75%, #2 gets 60% and #3 gets 45% should they all have to go up for reelection or just the one who got less than 50%?
[21:34] AndrewRT: any views on this>
[21:34] AndrewRT: ?
[21:34] cfp: it might be simpler for them all to go up for reelection
[21:34] KTC: what cfp just said
[21:34] AndrewRT: as currently drafted it says they all go up
[21:34] AndrewRT: I agree as well
[21:34] cfp: it's not like the individual who got 75% would need to canvas again.
[21:34] AndrewRT: well indeed!
[21:35] mpeel: I'm happy with them all going for re-election.
[21:35] Warofdreams: yes, I agree too
[21:35] cfp: so are we all happy with the membership rules as they stand?
[21:35] AndrewRT: Election Rules?
[21:35] KTC: election rules
[21:35] AndrewRT: mpeel? cfp? KTC?
[21:36] AndrewRT: warofdreams?
[21:36] KTC: *nod*
[21:36] mpeel: I'm happy
[21:36] Warofdreams: I am
[21:36] AndrewRT: sounds like they are adopted!
[21:36] AndrewRT: thanks everyone for that
[21:36] cfp: cool. and yes that was a typo...
[21:36] mpeel: do we want a resolution, or are we ok with a minuted agreement?
[21:36] AndrewRT: I would be happy with a minute
[21:37] Warofdreams: As would I
[21:37] mpeel: ok
[21:37] KTC: y
[21:37] cfp: doesn't make too much difference.
[21:37] AndrewRT: move onto WMF website?
[21:37] KTC: y
[21:37] cfp: no progress from the bugzilla bug it seems
[21:37] mpeel: no response yet to the request for the wiki
[21:38] mpeel: will poke the appropriate people by email, as soon as I find out who they are.
[21:38] cfp: do we know any developers we can contact directly
[21:38] AndrewRT: mpeel did you suggest on email we set up outside WMF?
[21:38] KTC: i added the "shell" keyword recently
[21:38] mpeel: (methinks Erik Moller and Tim Starling...)
[21:38] KTC: so it might actually get picked up by one of the dev
[21:38] mpeel: AndrewRT: please could you clarify?
[21:39] AndrewRT: i may be misremembering an email
[21:39] KTC: someone said we might want to consider external hosting from the start
[21:39] cfp: i would still rather we were patient and stuck with wmf
[21:39] mpeel: that was probably me
[21:39] mpeel: the advantage is that it would be much quicker to set up, as well as to modify as needed.
[21:40] mpeel: the downsides are that it's not hosted by the WMF, and that we wouldn't be able to use unified login.
[21:40] cfp: well there's no desperate rush with the website.
[21:40] AndrewRT: Do we know how long the WMF will take?
[21:40] mpeel: have you looked at the existing one recently?
[21:40] AndrewRT:
[21:40] AndrewRT:
[21:40] mpeel: the latter. 
[21:40] KTC: AndrewRT, how long is a simple question of when one of the dev with shell access set it up
[21:41] cfp: i think we do just need do email someone directly. one of the devs on foundation-l was complaining that people were over reliant on the bug submission system, and was saying he'd preferred to be emailed
[21:41] cfp: is there a dev irc channel?
[21:41] KTC: #wikimedia-tech
[21:42] KTC: i can give Tim or Brion a prod soon via email  if people want
[21:42] AndrewRT: mpeel do you think it's worth investogating non-WMF hosting?
[21:42] AndrewRT: or wait for a while?
[21:43] mpeel: I don't mind either way
[21:44] AndrewRT: ok i suggest mpeel cfp if you two could continue with this
[21:44] mpeel: ok
[21:44] AndrewRT: discuss again next time
[21:46] cfp: sure.
[21:46] AndrewRT: ok
[21:46] cfp: wikipedia loves art sponsorship is me
[21:46] cfp: we have a new sponsor!
[21:46] AndrewRT: How are we getting on with the domain name transfer?
[21:46] AndrewRT: mpeel?
[21:47] cfp: oh ok.
[21:47] mpeel: I've emailed James Forrester
[21:47] mpeel: no response yet
[21:47] AndrewRT: ok
[21:47] cfp: ok to move on?
[21:48] AndrewRT: sorry, we should move on
[21:48] AndrewRT: WLA sponsorship
[21:48] cfp: i sent out about 20 emails to potential sponsors, and one of them actually got a positive response
[21:48] cfp: so will be donating some prizes. details are still being worked out.
[21:48] Warofdreams: fantastic!
[21:48] AndrewRT: thanks for your efforts cfp!
[21:48] KTC:
[21:48] cfp: this is important though as i had hoped for to sponsor wikimania
[21:49] AndrewRT: ah even better
[21:49] cfp: and if this event is successful for both of us it should make those negotiations easier
[21:49] AndrewRT: i was wondering if this would give us potential sponsors for the future!
[21:49] mpeel: great news cfp - well done
[21:50] AndrewRT: cfp and me will follow it up in the week to get the details worked out
[21:50] AndrewRT: mpeel - moderation of #wikimedia-uk?
[21:51] mpeel: ditto the above - have emailed James Forrester, no response yet.
[21:52] AndrewRT: ok - carry forward to next meeting then
[21:52] AndrewRT: shall i continue with AGm docs?
[21:52] Warofdreams: please do
[21:52] AndrewRT: I've started with
[21:52] AndrewRT: comments gladly received!
[21:53] AndrewRT: will continue with the rest of the
[21:53] AndrewRT: page
[21:53] AndrewRT: suggest we finalise in about a fortnight's time
[21:54] Warofdreams: that looks very promising.  will have a closer look later this week
[21:54] AndrewRT: we should start thinking about appointin a teller
[21:54] AndrewRT: or tellers
[21:54] AndrewRT: to count the vote
[21:54] AndrewRT: someone who isn't standing
[21:54] Warofdreams: aim to finalise in about a fortnight sounds right, given expected wait to sign agreement and open bank account
[21:54] KTC: u can't do that until u know who is (not) standing
[21:55] AndrewRT: hmm, we need to know when we send the notice of the AGm out
[21:55] KTC: do we?
[21:55] Warofdreams: I don't see why
[21:55] Warofdreams: when I've been a teller, it was all decided on the day
[21:56] Warofdreams: (obviously it'd be better to decide once we have the noms in than leaving it until the day)
[21:56] AndrewRT: well the application form to be a candidate is returned to the teller
[21:56] KTC: i was thinking of appointing someones on the day, and ask if everyone on the floor is happy with the choice
[21:56] AndrewRT: who then announces who are teh candidates
[21:56] AndrewRT: the electronic votes are also sent to the teller before teh day
[21:57] Warofdreams: hmm - this could be an issue with the procedure.  It seems awkward to appoint a teller before we know who is standing.
[21:57] AndrewRT: we could get them all sent to the secretary who then forwards to the teller
[21:57] AndrewRT: we could invite people to act as tellers now
[21:57] Warofdreams: yes, that makes sense
[21:58] AndrewRT: that way it's all ready for teh election
[21:58] AndrewRT: shall I send something on the list asking for volunteers
[21:58] KTC: ok
[21:58] Warofdreams: great
[21:58] cfp: that'd be good, thanks andrew
[21:58] mpeel: do they need to be a member?
[21:58] AndrewRT: obviously making clear if you volunteer to be teller you cant then apply to be a candidate!
[21:58] mpeel: or just be able to attend on the day?
[21:58] AndrewRT: er - i dont think so
[21:58] AndrewRT: they do need to be able to attend
[21:59] AndrewRT: so they can count the physical votes
[21:59] Warofdreams: no need for them to be a member, but if they are not, they may not be too keen to attend
[21:59] AndrewRT: ok can you put that down as an action for me warofdreams?
[21:59] Warofdreams: will do.
[22:00] AndrewRT: i dont think there's anything else to discuss on AGM for now
[22:00] AndrewRT: unless you can think of anything?
[22:00] Warofdreams: It's 22:00...
[22:00] Warofdreams: is there anything else you want the meeting to cover while you are still here?
[22:00] AndrewRT: what have we got left on the agenda?
[22:00] KTC: the standard items
[22:01] Warofdreams: # Newsletter
[22:01] Warofdreams: # Treasurer's Report
[22:01] Warofdreams: # Secretary's Report
[22:01] Warofdreams: # Membership Report
[22:01] Warofdreams:   1. Membership Rules
[22:01] KTC: newsletter, reports, timetable, bid, aocb
[22:01] Warofdreams: # Timetable Review
[22:01] Warofdreams: # Wikimania bid
[22:01] Warofdreams: # AOCB
[22:01] Warofdreams: # Closure
[22:01] AndrewRT: how long will that take?
[22:01] cfp: well does anyone have anything to report? i don't.
[22:01] KTC: u got anything to report?
[22:01] AndrewRT: me neither
[22:01] AndrewRT: mpeel?
[22:01] mpeel: under membership report? nope
[22:01] AndrewRT: Mem Rules?
[22:02] mpeel: newsletter needs discussion
[22:02] AndrewRT: should they still be on?
[22:02] KTC: r we happy with leaving the timetable for now?
[22:02] mpeel: yup
[22:02] AndrewRT: newsletter - is it worth delaying until bank account opened?
[22:02] AndrewRT: or just send out now?
[22:03] Warofdreams: I think we should send it out now, we seem to expect bank account opening to be two weeks or more away
[22:03] mpeel: newsletter is nowhere near ready
[22:03] mpeel: see
[22:03] Warofdreams: we can always bring the February newsletter forward if necessary
[22:03] mpeel: so we can't send it out now...
[22:03] mpeel: suggest we work on it this coming week, and send out after the next meeting.
[22:03] LoopZilla left the chat room.
[22:04] cfp: sorry it seems i've been shirking in my duties. was waiting until i had something to write.
[22:04] Warofdreams: is everyone still OK to write their sections?
[22:04] AndrewRT: I'm not sure
[22:04] AndrewRT: I suggest we drop the AGM section
[22:04] KTC: yes Warofdreams
[22:04] AndrewRT: too long in the future now
[22:04] AndrewRT: and possible the webiste one too
[22:04] Warofdreams: I was thinking of merging the website section into WMF approval
[22:05] mpeel: makes sense
[22:05] AndrewRT: I suggest we work on it this week and aim to send out on Friday?
[22:05] Warofdreams: the AGM section could simply say that we're looking at holding it in Birmingham around early March
[22:06] AndrewRT: yeah I agree
[22:07] Warofdreams: perhaps aim to send it out at the weekend - I'll prod anyone who hasn't written their section by Thursday.
[22:07] AndrewRT: ok
[22:07] mpeel: Warofdreams: you should have received an email from me about the email recipients of the newsletter.
[22:07] cfp: k. i've added it to my calendar.
[22:07] KTC: do we still need 8.1 of agenda?
[22:07] Warofdreams: yes, thanks mpeel - I have that.
[22:07] AndrewRT: I dont think so
[22:07] AndrewRT: sorry that was my fault - copied from previous month
[22:07] cfp: aocb?
[22:07] AndrewRT: !
[22:07] mpeel: depends: do we want to approve membership rules formally?
[22:07] KTC: bid then?
[22:08] AndrewRT: mpeel - not according to the minutes
[22:08] AndrewRT: Membership Rules
[22:08] AndrewRT: Draft rules were available to view at [3]. Board to organise a discussion on membership at the AGM.
[22:08] AndrewRT:
[22:08] mpeel: thanks for the reminder
[22:08] cfp: heard back from a few more colleges and from the town hall. a few slightly more promising availability signs. seddon's been doing some stuff too (thanks)
[22:09] Warofdreams: I notice Wikimania 2009 is planned for the very end of August
[22:09] Warofdreams: so the start of September isn't necessarily an impossibility
[22:09] cfp: and people seem unhappy with that date even
[22:09] Warofdreams: ...ah well, maybe it is, then
[22:09] cfp: i got a pretty negative response to my question on wikimania-l
[22:10] cfp: we should be able to make something work in august, though the accommodation location may not end up being ideal.
[22:10] AndrewRT: Seddon>the official bidding period opens [tomorrow] and the jury is supposed to be announced, they then watch us with eagle eyes
[22:10] cfp: will keep you all informed
[22:10] AndrewRT: I'll be in touch next week cfp!
[22:10] AndrewRT: no AOB from me
[22:10] Warofdreams: just the text for the Foundation website, for which I e-mailed a proposal around the board
[22:11] AndrewRT: I'm happy with that
[22:11] Warofdreams: did everyone see it, and are you all happy with it?
[22:11] KTC: it's fine
[22:11] AndrewRT: thanks for sorting this out
[22:11] Warofdreams: no probs
[22:12] KTC: anything else?
[22:12] mpeel: Warofdreams: one point: would it be worth mentioning who to expect answering the phone?
[22:12] AndrewRT: nope
[22:12] mpeel: it might confuse people if they phone that number expecting to speak to you, and then get me.
[22:13] Warofdreams: makes sense.  perhaps if I put your name in brackets after the number?
[22:13] mpeel: sure
[22:14] KTC: date of next meeting ?
[22:14] AndrewRT: a week or  fortnight?
[22:14] AndrewRT: i suggest a fortnight
[22:15] KTC: r we expecting anything to realisticlly happen within a week?
[22:15] AndrewRT: give cfp time to work on WMF and the coop!
[22:15] AndrewRT: unfortunately i dont think so
[22:15] cfp: we can always call a new meeting if something urgently needs to be discussed
[22:15] Warofdreams: if we have unexpected movement on the WMF and Coop
[22:15] Warofdreams: unexpectedly rapid, that is
[22:16] AndrewRT: i think meeting in a fortnight will still be about right personally
[22:16] AndrewRT: what do you think cfp?
[22:16] cfp: should be fine.
[22:16] cfp: i'm happy with that
[22:16] AndrewRT: sorry I meant what do you think about likely progress?
[22:16] KTC: mon? tues?
[22:16] AndrewRT: will we have anything to discuss in a week or best to delay a fortnight?
[22:17] AndrewRT: I can do either mon or tues
[22:17] Warofdreams: I'd prefer Mon, but only because I've been invited to a gig on Tues!
[22:17] Warofdreams: Could do Tues if its better for other people
[22:18] KTC: mon 2 weeks, if ppl r ok?
[22:18] cfp: i've no idea really andrew
[22:18] AndrewRT: fine by me
[22:18] AndrewRT: ok
[22:18] cfp: i got an email back from mike already saying "should be fine"
[22:18] cfp: but with no indications of when exactly things would happen
[22:19] AndrewRT: Monday 2nd Feb 8:30pm?
[22:19] AndrewRT: ok thats promising
[22:19] mpeel: eek - february already?
[22:19] cfp: yes that's fine
[22:19] Warofdreams: great, will see you all there
[22:19] AndrewRT: thanks all for finishing early for me
[22:19] KTC: that's it then 
[22:19] AndrewRT: sorry I haev to rush off
[22:20] KTC: and someone else will need to post the log again, sorry
[22:20] AndrewRT: see you all in a fortnight
[22:20] mpeel: I'll post it shortly.
[22:20] KTC: c u
[22:20] mpeel: g'bye all, then.
[22:20] AndrewRT: if not at WLA sooner!!
[22:20] AndrewRT: bye
[22:20] KTC was promoted to operator by ChanServ.
[22:20] AndrewRT left the chat room. ("ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 3.0.5/2008120122]")
[22:20] Warofdreams: bye
[22:20] KTC made this room no longer moderated for normal users.


[20:32] AndrewRT: hi mickey
[20:33] Warofdreams: hi
[20:33] Warofdreams: to everyone
[20:33] AndrewRT: board meetign about to start in #wikimedia-uk-board
[20:33] AndrewRT: you are all welcoem to join us in there!
[20:34] KTC: hi
[20:40] LoopZilla: Evening all
[20:40] Warofdreams: evening
[20:40] AndrewRT: hi LoopZilla
[20:40] Warofdreams: how's the report on the London meet-up coming along?
[20:41] LoopZilla: Errr..... in progress
[20:41] Warofdreams: excellent - just one or two paragraphs will be plenty
[20:41] Warofdreams: do you think you could complete it by tomorrow evening?
[20:42] LoopZilla: Maybe...
[20:43] Seddon: Im going to bring something up here associated with the chapters agreement
[20:46] LoopZilla: Ooooerrrrrr...
[20:46] cfp: ?
[20:47] Seddon: its to do with this statement in the email that gave me some, shall we say concerns and so may warrent changes in how the chapter is run in coordination withthe company
[20:47] Seddon: and now i understad the difference between chapter members
[20:47] Seddon: and garuantor members
[20:48] KTC_ joined the chat room.
[20:48] Seddon: "the board reserves the ability to appoint and remove members"
[20:50] Seddon: they have no such power in terms of the company
[20:50] KTC_ left the chat room. (Client Quit)
[20:50] KTC left the chat room. ("Leaving")
[20:51] KTC joined the chat room.
[20:51] mpeel: seddon: which email?
[20:51] cfp: yes i saw that briefly and thought it looked odd. let me find the email again
[20:51] Seddon: it was the one to the foundation mailing list
[20:51] Seddon: i dont have a link right now
[20:51] cfp: Also, two resolutions relating to the chapters committee's membership
[20:51] cfp: and procedures were approved. One recognizes the current members and the
[20:51] cfp: other allows the committee to determine its own membership in the
[20:51] cfp: future. This allows them to keep their work going without waiting for
[20:51] cfp: the board to pass a resolution (the board reserves the ability to
[20:51] cfp: appoint and remove members and will still be informed of changes).
[20:52] mpeel: that's the committee, not chapters.
[20:52] mpeel: as in, chapcom
[20:52] Seddon: ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
[20:52] Seddon: yes of course
[20:52] cfp: ahha. that makes a lot more sense.
[20:52] Seddon: i should learn to read
[20:53] mpeel: lol - "nobody does formality better than the British, which has been part of the difficulty"
[20:53] cfp: i skim read it and came to the same conclusion as you seddon, so you're certainly not the only one.
[20:53] Seddon: yes i rather liked that comment mpeel 
[20:53] KTC:
[20:54] AndrewRT: who was that from?
[20:54] KTC: michael snow wasn't it?
[20:54] schiste joined the chat room.
[20:55] Seddon: tango should be here in a minute
[20:55] Tango42 joined the chat room.
[20:55] KTC:
[20:55] Seddon: right on cue 
[20:55] • Tango42 staggers in rubbing his head
[20:55] Tango42: You could have used a soft brick...
[20:55] KTC: lol
[20:56] KTC: i was just about to ask whether i can get my brick ready 
[20:56] mpeel: hold on... I still have mine.
[20:56] mpeel: who threw the brick at Tango?
[20:56] mpeel:
[20:56] Seddon: i did 
[20:56] Tango42: mpeel, you aren't allowed to throw any bricks - I said a week or so, it's only been 6 days!
[20:56] Seddon: Tango42: doesnt have the same effect 
[20:57] mpeel: ok, I'll wait until tomorrow eve then.
[20:58] cfp: that was possibly the most tedious email thread i've ever had to persistently click "mark as read" on in my inbox...
[20:58] mpeel: no use of the delete key?
[20:58] KTC: lol
[20:58] Tango42: I just leave things unread - my gmail inbox currently holds 7213 unread emails!
[20:59] Tango42: (and there are plenty more that have been automatically filtered out of the inbox)
[20:59] mpeel: so I guess there's no point emailing brick-reminders, then...
[21:00] • KTC wonder what your uni email account is like, and how horrifed uni professor get if they find out
[21:00] KTC:
[21:00] Tango42: I read the subject lines...
[21:01] Tango42: I can usually tell from subject lines if uni emails are worth reading
[21:02] Tango42: By serving on a committee he hasn't recieved and isn't expected to recieve any personal benefit, so I don't think there's a problem.
[21:02] AndrewRT: yeah unpaid employement is still employment though
[21:02] AndrewRT: the wordin of the Act is so all-emcompassing it's hard to be sure
[21:05] Tango42: a minuted decision is a formal resolution - there's no difference legally
[21:06] cfp: no i know, but it's good practice to seperate out the most important, most formal bits
[21:06] privatemusings joined the chat room.
[21:07] KTC: hi
[21:07] Tango42: I think it needs 2 signatures
[21:07] mpeel: Tango42: why?
[21:07] Tango42: Didn't that resolution you made about people signing things say they had to do it together?
[21:07] cfp: that was solely for opening the bank account.
[21:07] Tango42: no, that was for all contracts and deeds and whatever
[21:08] cfp: there's no reason we can't pass a new resolution giving me the power to do this one specific thing though
[21:08] mpeel:
[21:08] Tango42: I think generally contracts with a limited company as a party require 2 representatives to sign
[21:08] Tango42: that's standard practice
[21:08] AndrewRT: i often contract as a limited company with only one signature
[21:08] AndrewRT: although it may be good practice I'm not aware of any requirement
[21:09] Tango42: is that a single director company, though?
[21:09] mpeel: it should be easy for two people to sign it, though - just use the postal system.
[21:09] cfp: andrew, do you have access to a scanner or similar?
[21:09] cfp: i guess you have a fax which'd do
[21:09] AndrewRT: I've done it for both signle director comapnies and multi-director comapnies
[21:09] cfp: just as long as it could all be done electronically.
[21:10] AndrewRT: at work yes - not there all the time
[21:10] Tango42: well, you worded the resolution are requiring both people, if you didn't intend it to work that way, why did you write it like that?
[21:10] AndrewRT: that was intended for the bank account opening
[21:10] AndrewRT: that needed two people
[21:11] Tango42: It was a "general authority", general means everything
[21:11] Majorly_ joined the chat room.
[21:11] Tango42: you can sign separate copies and staple them together if it's easier
[21:12] AndrewRT: hi Majorly
[21:12] KTC: "a scanner, a fax, or a photocopier that sends emails" - i didn't know they existed 
[21:13] Majorly_: hi Andrew
[21:13] cfp: yeah they're great
[21:13] Tango42: Charities Act 1993, Section 82, Part 1:
[21:13] Tango42: "Charity trustees may, subject to the trusts of the charity, confer on any of their body (not being less than two in number) a general authority, or an authority limited in such manner as the trustees think fit, to execute in the names and on behalf of the trustees assurances or other deeds or instruments for giving effect to transactions to which the trustees are a party; and any deed or...
[21:13] Tango42: ...instrument executed in pursuance of an authority so given shall be of the same effect as if executed by the whole body."
[21:13] Majorly_: AndrewRT: will you be going to the manchester meetup?
[21:13] Tango42: Key part: Not being less than 2 in number
[21:13] cfp: you can feed our department photocopier a big pile of papers, and it scans them, spits them out, then emails a pdf
[21:13] AndrewRT: thanks for this
[21:14] AndrewRT: just what I was looking for!
[21:14] Majorly_ is now known as Majorly.
[21:14] cfp: thanks tango
[21:14] AndrewRT: thanks
[21:14] AndrewRT: Majorly: possibly
[21:14] Tango42: This contract may not be important enough to constitute a deed/assurance whatever, I believe there is a distinction between a contract and a deed, but if none of us are sure what it is, err on the safe side
[21:14] AndrewRT: not sure yet
[21:17] KTC: alison, why?
[21:18] cfp: she's sending something back.
[21:18] Tango42: Worth noting - that's from the Charities Act, non-charitable companies may well be able to have a single signatory, which would explain AndrewRT's contradictory experience
[21:18] cfp: and mike's proceeding after that i'm told
[21:18] AndrewRT: yes that's right
[21:19] AndrewRT: I had the same line of thought when I suddenly remembered the discussion on two signatories for the bank
[21:19] Tango42: chuck in the word "limited" to fit with the statute
[21:19] KTC: looks good over here 
[21:20] LoopZilla: The words "ltd" and "limited" are option AFAIK
[21:20] Tango42: no, limited as in "limited authority"
[21:20] Tango42: it's not important, though, and they've all supported that version now
[21:25] KTC_ joined the chat room.
[21:27] Majorly_cold left the chat room. (Connection timed out)
[21:28] KTC_ left the chat room. (Client Quit)
[21:29] Seddon: can anyone please tell me the AGM isnt gonna happen on a saturday?
[21:29] cfp: it's all up for debate
[21:29] Warofdreams: we've not set the day yet, but a weekend seems likely
[21:29] cfp: i imagine once we have some possible times we'll use one of those voting on meeting times systems to find something amenable to as many as possible
[21:30] cfp: we may however not have a lot of choice over times though.
[21:30] Tango42: It almost certainly needs to be a weekend, sat is better for travel than sun, although more people have to work
[21:30] AndrewRT: Seddon would u prefer a Sunday?
[21:30] AndrewRT: or a weekday?
[21:30] Seddon: For me it would be better on a sunday
[21:31] Seddon: a weekday would be difficult for most people i imagine
[21:31] Tango42: I certainly can't get to bham on a weekday and I doubt I'm alone in that
[21:31] KTC: i'm sure u can physically get to it Tango42. more a question of u won't 
[21:32] Seddon: HAHA *unamused look towards KTC* 
[21:32] Tango42: ok, I could, but not without unreasonably harming my education
[21:33] KTC: who cares about university education? 
[21:33] Tango42: me?
[21:33] • KTC hope it was obvious he was kidding 
[21:33] KTC:
[21:34] Tango42: the sticking out tongue was a bit of a giveaway!
[21:34] Tango42: the alternative doesn't seem complicated to me...
[21:36] cfp: i actually think it's better this way anyway, despite its simplicity, as if the horrible failure of the first board election prompted a load of really brilliant people to stand, you might not even want that individual who passed the first time around
[21:37] Tango42: i guess, it just seems a bit harsh on those than win fair and square not to get to serve their full term solely because of the other candidates being unpopular
[21:38] cfp: but the candidate only won fair because they were the best of an awful bunch...
[21:38] cfp: in the hypothesis...
[21:40] Tango42: well, no, it's approval voting, if we assume there wasn't any tactical voting, the other candidates shouldn't factor into it
[21:41] Tango42: tactical voting can mess that up, but I doubt it would do so much in this case (unless people thought other people may vote for the really bad candidates so they could get 50% and it would come down to who had the most votes)
[21:43] Tango42: i hang out in #wikimedia-tech from time to time, would you like me to start a campaign of gentle nudging?
[21:43] • privatemusings pops up and wonders if there's an agenda, and if the uk website is going to come up? 
[21:43] Tango42: the UK website is just being discussed!
[21:43] KTC: privatemusings, it's the current item
[21:43] Warofdreams: I saw a quite a few people in the ArbCom election voting yes to a small slate and no to everyone else
[21:43] KTC:
[21:43] privatemusings: heh... well a) good timing and b) I'm stupid
[21:44] privatemusings: I'm sure others may have mentioned this, but I'd like to see media wiki installed for the chapter on some uk chapter owned / hired webspace
[21:44] privatemusings: I'm not sure that asking the foundation for space will actually work out mid / long term
[21:44] privatemusings: (as in, it'll be easier if the chapter board have simple, full control etc.)
[21:45] AndrewRT: good timing
[21:45] mpeel: personally, I'd like to see WMUK with its own server, along the lines of the de toolserver, in the long term.
[21:45] AndrewRT: we're just talking about that at the moment
[21:45] mpeel: ... if not a squid farm.
[21:45] Tango42: We need money before we can own/hire servers
[21:45] cfp: i think being a sysop or whatever will be fine amount of control
[21:45] Tango42: give us a chance!
[21:45] mpeel: so it's mostly the short term that's an issue here.
[21:45] yksinaisyyteni: mpeel: the toolserver doesn't host any of WMDE's websites
[21:45] cfp: there's no point us having a second toolserver. as people said a while back, we'd be better just giving money to de
[21:45] AndrewRT: the disadvantage cited is that we get unified logon with WMF
[21:45] mpeel: they have another server for that?
[21:45] privatemusings: does the chapter board have full access to the existing webspace?
[21:46] yksinaisyyteni: mpeel: they pay a hosting company for web hosting and email
[21:46] privatemusings: and if so, how long is it paid up for?
[21:46] cfp: it's not just the unified login. the legal situation is better on wmf
[21:46] mpeel: we have no access to the current website
[21:46] AndrewRT: pm - you mean
[21:46] privatemusings: yup
[21:46] mpeel: yksinaisyyteni: thanks, I didn't realise that.
[21:46] AndrewRT: no - we've asked for the domain name to be transferred to us
[21:46] yksinaisyyteni: also: a squid farm in .uk would be a total waste of money... and it'll never happen
[21:46] privatemusings: ah... well why not (short term) use the existing space, and get a media wiki install up and running asap
[21:46] yksinaisyyteni: it adds admin overhead, and won't do anything to improve access speeds for UK users (in fact, it might make it slower)
[21:46] KTC: yeah, the law isn't helpful in that case
[21:47] Tango42: The amsterdam server farm will need expanding with time, there is an argument for putting the new servers in a different place in order to have more points of failure
[21:48] yksinaisyyteni: Tango42: there is?  from who?
[21:48] yksinaisyyteni: ams expands regularly already
[21:48] privatemusings: heh... sorry folks but the squid talk is just a distraction at the mo, I reckon 
[21:48] privatemusings: I think the chapter should focus on getting current info online clearly - and ideally empowering members by allowing wiki editing 
[21:49] mpeel: yes, that was only meant to be an off-the-cuff mark...
[21:49] Tango42: what do you mean, "from who"? The argument is the argument, it doesn't matter who said it (if you want a person, then go with me)
[21:49] mpeel: *off-the-cuff comemnt
[21:49] Seddon: pm, i think we agreed on that a while back 
[21:49] privatemusings: coolio - so when is it happening?
[21:49] yksinaisyyteni: Tango42: i thought you meant someone had established it was something we (might) want to do
[21:49] Tango42: No, I was just speaking rhetorically
[21:49] privatemusings: I guess what I'm suggesting is to not bother waiting for the foundation - just seems likely to cause a bit of a wait to me
[21:50] privatemusings: plus there are many strong reasons why indepedant webspace is a good thing 
[21:50] yksinaisyyteni: (we = foundation, not wmf)
[21:50] yksinaisyyteni: (... not wmuk)
[21:50] Seddon: privatemusings: well we are waiting for a response from jame_f
[21:50] privatemusings: ah... well there's the chap to pester!
[21:50] Tango42: The WMF has recently started to get their act together with shell requests, so hopefully it won't take too long
[21:50] cfp: the legal situation re: libel is a lot worse in the uk than in the us
[21:50] KTC: the keyword was only added yesterday Tango42
[21:51] cfp: the less of a uk tie there is the better.
[21:51] yksinaisyyteni: cfp: it doesn't even need to get that far; there's simply no point putting squids in the UK.  the network latency between the uk and .nl is so small... it adds nothing
[21:51] privatemusings: so if James F is up for it, you could install media wiki on the uk webspace as a 'stop gap'?
[21:51] cfp: yeah that wasn't re squids, i agree that's stupid, that was as regards our own space
[21:51] privatemusings: that's what I'd like to see 
[21:51] Tango42: Free, good quality hosting is probably best for us at the moment, and WMF is the best source for that. I do agree that independent hosting is a good thing once we have the means
[21:52] privatemusings: tango - I'm happy to donate to cover web hosting....
[21:52] yksinaisyyteni: you can buy VPS hosting incredibly cheaply nowadays
[21:52] privatemusings: I think it's probably worth doing it sooner rather than later 
[21:52] mpeel: I have a reseller account with a reliable UK host, which I'm willing to give WMUK space on for at least a short while.
[21:52] yksinaisyyteni: in fact, i'd host the website on my own vps, if it was needed..
[21:52] yksinaisyyteni: (basically, i don't think that would be a problem 
[21:52] cfp: privatemusings: that really isn't the issue.
[21:52] KTC: yksinaisyyteni, i have a pretty unused vps myself
[21:52] privatemusings: coolio 
[21:52] Tango42: I'd rather we weren't reliant on an individual like that, though
[21:53] yksinaisyyteni: that's not what i meant
[21:53] privatemusings: presumably it should be 'owned' by the ltd.
[21:53] yksinaisyyteni: WMUK could have a VPS to themselves for hardly any money
[21:53] mpeel: the problem is, we have less than hardly any money atm.
[21:53] yksinaisyyteni: (enough that, if it came to it, one volunteer could cover)
[21:54] yksinaisyyteni: mpeel: well, you can invoice to WMUK and pay with a personal credit card.  maybe that creates legal issues 
[21:54] privatemusings: I'm getting the feeling that a smart way forward is to charge someone with 'getting it sorted asap' and allowing them to 'just do it' 
[21:54] privatemusings: whaddya reckon?
[21:54] Tango42: Indeed. At the moment we need all the money we have just for basic set up costs. Once we're up and running we can do some fundraising and then we can starting spending, but until then I think it's best to stick with the free option
[21:55] privatemusings: I think the existence of a functional wiki website is a priority though
[21:55] yksinaisyyteni: btw: mediawiki sucks for a proper website
[21:55] Seddon: guys can we catch up in here please
[21:55] yksinaisyyteni: check out's new website, if you remember their old MW one
[21:56] Seddon: AGM is a more important thing to sort out righy
[21:56] Seddon: right now*
[21:56] mpeel: mediawiki's great for a proper website
[21:56] mpeel: I use it for a large chunk of mine.
[21:56] yksinaisyyteni: mpeel: that's probably because you use MW all day
[21:57] Tango42: mediawiki is great for the online activities of the chapter, it's not ideal for getting information from the chapter to the public
[21:57] mpeel: it all depends on what you want
[21:57] Tango42: A static website in addition to the wiki may be desirable, but I think we can worry about that later.
[21:57] mpeel: if you want segments of information, then mediawiki doesn't work too well
[21:57] mpeel: if you want static-ish pages, then mediawiki's great
[21:57] mpeel: (segements of info - e.g. a blog)
[21:58] Tango42: Mediawiki involves lots of unnecessary clutter on static pages - you don't need an "edit this page"/"view source" link on the page journalists go to to find the phone number of our press contact, for example.
[21:59] mpeel: you can sideline those, though.
[21:59] KTC: the wmf do fine with it on
[21:59] yksinaisyyteni: the WMF website is as bad as the old WMDE one
[21:59] Tango42: We don't want to have different skins for different parts of the site, I'm not sure that's even possible
[21:59] Tango42: is primary for the benefit of the community
[22:00] Tango42: only a small handful of pages are for the public, and those could benefit from being somewhere else
[22:02] Tango42: note - the board are responsible for notifying members about who is standing. I see no reason that can't be delegated to a teller if you want, but the responsibility is still yours.
[22:03] AndrewRT: yes thats true
[22:04] LoopZilla left the chat room.
[22:04] KTC: board members can also delay their decision to stand or otherwise based on who they recieve standing
[22:04] Tango42: board members don't need to decide until the day
[22:04] Seddon: when is the date going to be finalised?
[22:04] Tango42: they don't need to notify anyone
[22:04] KTC: as soon as we have a bank account Seddon
[22:05] Seddon: understood
[22:05] WaRpAtH: so will Gerard be part of WMUK 2.0 ?
[22:05] cfp: we hope so
[22:05] yksinaisyyteni: dear god i hope so
[22:05] Tango42: My suggestion would be for the board to handle all the notification stuff and a teller to be appointed to serve as proxy for anyone that wants them too (obviously, people can choose other proxies if they so desire)
[22:05] cfp: he's done a good job as comms
[22:06] Tango42: I would certainly hope he joins and gets involved
[22:06] AndrewRT: what do you mean "Part"
[22:06] AndrewRT: board member?
[22:06] cfp: though perhaps yksinaisyyteni's "dear god" shows a worrying lack of faith in us...
[22:06] KTC:
[22:07] Tango42: I hope far more people will be a significant part of the chapter than just the board
[22:08] Seddon: as a note about wikimania: I contacted osmosoft but the guy i needed to speak was in a meeting, i have got his email address and i should be able to conduct future real time discussion with this guy in real time on irc
[22:08] Seddon: everyone needs to get involved in this bid if possible, its supposed to start 2moz
[22:09] AndrewRT: 2moz? what's happening then?
[22:09] Seddon: the official bidding period opens and the jury is supposed to be announced, they then watch us with eagle eyes
[22:10] Tango42: UK schools go back in September, it would be good to have wikimania during the summer hols
[22:10] Tango42: says who? the provisional timetable that hasn't been updated in months? or something more recent?
[22:11] cfp: a lot of universities don't start till latish september
[22:11] Seddon: no i have been in contact with cary bass
[22:11] Seddon: Tang42: ^
[22:11] cfp: (and ox doesn't start till 10th october...)
[22:11] Seddon: he said he is doing his best to keep in line with that provisional timetable
[22:11] KTC: stupid short terms 
[22:11] Tango42: universities don't, schools do
[22:11] cfp: are we likely to get an influx of new help when bidding starts officially? e.g. will it be advertised on wikipedia
[22:11] Seddon: this was as of last week so its recent communication
[22:12] Tango42: it would be good to be as open as possible to as many people as possible
[22:12] Seddon: cfp: im unsure, i havnt been able to get hold of cary to confirm what is going to happen
[22:12] Seddon: in case none of you are aware
[22:13] AndrewRT: thanks for filling us in
[22:13] Seddon:
[22:13] AndrewRT: yes i saw that
[22:13] AndrewRT: are they going to interview us?
[22:13] cfp: Tango42: there can't me that many people of below university age coming
[22:13] cfp: we still seem to be the most advanced bid page by a long stretch
[22:14] mpeel: someone probably needs to poke wikinews if we want them to do that.
[22:14] Tango42: I don't know, we have lots of under-18s on the projects, why wouldn't they come to Wikimania?
[22:14] Warofdreams: I've been keeping an eye on the other bid pages, to see if they think of anything we've missed
[22:14] KTC: cost? permisssion?
[22:14] Seddon: indeed however we dont know if they are creating thier bid off wiki
[22:14] cfp: yeah true. which i suspect is what the copenhagan team is doing
[22:14] Seddon: but thats all theory 
[22:14] Seddon: no
[22:14] mpeel: I hear that there's one less european competitor to the bid now?
[22:15] Seddon: that bid is collapsing
[22:15] mpeel: ah - nm
[22:15] Tango42: ktc, sure, that will reduce numbers, but not so much that it's worth completely ignoring them.
[22:15] mpeel: lag between brain and hands
[22:15] cfp: really? i thought they were going to get it
[22:15] Seddon: mike_h says that it looks like a nordic bid isnt going to work atm
[22:15] cfp: internal conflicts?
[22:15] Tango42: also, people entering first year of uni will be doing the mad rush to get read thing around the beginning of sept - that's always fun!
[22:16] cfp: trans-national cooperation has failed!
[22:16] Seddon: partly yes
[22:16] mpeel: copenhagen dropped out to focus on Wikimedia Norway, I believe.
[22:16] mpeel: ah - Denmark, sorry.
[22:16] mpeel:
[22:17] Seddon: our bid needs alot of work
[22:17] cfp: perhaps we should have done the same thing...
[22:17] cfp: oh well.
[22:17] cfp: yes it does.
[22:17] AndrewRT: i think we need to buil the team
[22:17] AndrewRT: most important thing at the moment
[22:17] cfp: well it's only going to happen if there are multiple people on it.
[22:17] Seddon: could i ask that if any of you get some free time to do a little bit of work and also to linger on irc a little more
[22:18] • mpeel isn't sure it's possible for him to linger on irc any more that he already does...
[22:18] cfp: i have to connect to irc via a proxy, so it just doesn't occur to me. but i'm on gchat most of the time as you know
[22:18] AndrewRT: it would be useful if there was a section that people could go to
[22:18] AndrewRT: which lists small jobs people can pick up
[22:19] Seddon: sounds like a good plan 
[22:19] Tango42: yeah, a todo list would be good
[22:20] cfp: there are many todo's on the page
[22:20] cfp: sections deliberately left empty
[22:20] cfp: plus there's the "companies we should contact list"
[22:20] cfp: that's the main thing it'd be good to have people doing
[22:20] AndrewRT left the chat room. ("ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 3.0.5/2008120122]")
[22:20] cfp: going through that list and hassling people until they talk to a human being.