[Community] summary of today's (4/25/2007) call

[Eugene Eric Kim]

Thanks to everyone who participated in this morning's call: Nick
Givotovsky, Eugene Eric Kim, Joaquin Miller, Dan Perry, Drummond Reed,
Mary Ruddy, and Bill Washburn.

= Removing Stewards =

Last week's discussion about removing Stewards kicked off a good email
discussion, which we revisited this morning.  I started by addressing
Bill's question about why we would have a clause for dechartering a
Working Group but not a Steward.  My argument was that you want to
delegate that power to the Working Group itself, not to the Stewards Council.

I posed a scenario to ponder: What if there were a Steward representing
an active WG who was actively disruptive on the Steward calls and on the
mailing list?  After discussing this scenario, we seemed to converge on
handling this through community process on a case-by-case basis (with
dechartering with cause as a last resort) rather than trying to
pre-dictate policy.  Nick noted that dealing with unruly Stewards is a
management issue.  Dan backed up the legality of handling it as such.
also cited similar cases regarding HOAs.

In particular, Drummond suggested the following steps (which, Joaquin
noted, should be captured on the Wiki as guidelines):

  * Talk to the Steward directly
  * Talk to the WG about selecting a new Steward
  * Dechartering as a last resort.

Dan noted the importance of having a policy for the basis of removal
clearly laid out.  He suggested the following four bases:

  * Violation of Purpose and Principles
  * Abuse of IP
  * Voluntary resignation
  * Inactivity (see the section on Bylaw Revisions below)

= Bylaw Revisions =

Dan posted a new draft of the bylaws on the Wiki.  Major changes:

  * Renumbered the paragraphs.

  * He gutted the indemnification clause.  It doesn't seem to have a lot
    of teeth, given our small size (and minute legal budget), and he
    wanted to be intellectually honest about it.  He also said if we
    avoid recklessness, we won't have any reason to fear retribution.

  * Article V.10 needs redrafting in light of our discussion.  In
    particular, we need to decide on an inactivity clause?

Joaquin suggested we use language "cease to recognize" rather than
"decharter."

We had some discussion over whether there needs to be specific process
defining inactivity in the bylaws.  The alternative would be to describe
what we consider inactivity on the Wiki, and to go through the existing
Bylaw mechanism for ceasing to recognize a WG -- due notice + majority
vote.  I proposed some general language for giving a WG due notice if
they're up for dechartering.  Currently, the only language we have
regarding notice is for giving Stewards due notice prior to votes.

Dan will play with the language and produce another draft.

= Fundraising =

Dan's only received one check (mine), with Drummond's in the mail.
Joaquin and Kaliya are going to politely remind folks about their
previous pledges.  We also decided to use IIW as a platform for fundraising.

I reminded folks that fundraising is a collective issue.  No one person
is going to solve this dilemma for it, and we all need to take
responsibility if we want this thing to get off the ground.

= Next Call =

Next Wednesday, May 2, 2007, 9am PDT / 12pm EDT.

-- 
=========================================================================
Eugene Eric Kim ................................... http://xri.net/=eekim
Blue Oxen Associates ........................... http://www.blueoxen.com/
=========================================================================