XSF Discussion - 2021-10-14

emus: what do you mean?

Still in a work meeting

Good morning

Hi all, please consider discussing the fiscal hosting applicant I emailed board@ about, thanks.

ralphm, I think emus is asking if your xmpp artworks are available somewhere for comm-team :)

It does not seem like we're having a board meeting this morning

I'm here, I just realised I didn't say so :)

I think I read ralphm's message as implying "be there in a minute", but I don't think that's what he meant

Yeah after around 9:15 I assume we're not going to have a meeting that day

Hi all; can I at least get an acknowledgement from the board that any of my messages have been seen, even if you're not going to discuss it yet? I'm starting to think something is just going on with my XMPP setup and/or email

I've seen them, and I haven't seen any replies. My previous emails to the board list have also been unanswered, so... valid question :)

Thanks, I appreciate it

This board term has been rather unsuccessful at meetings (not that the previous one was great, though it picked up towards the end). Partly I'm sure that's because we're one down due to resignation, but... yeah

I would rather lower expectations by switching to monthly, if it means people would actually turn up

One down should make scheduling easier :)

But yes, if it makes XSF business actually get done I'm all for it.

It's partly a schedule issue, due to timezones, this was nobody's favourite time slot

Just the least worst

But if we're going to say we meet at this time, we should meet at this time or accept the fact that we don't

Weekly meetings are pretty frequent for a board in any case (but then a lot of things get delegated to us as a group)

Random website PRs get blocked on us, etc.

It might make sense to maybe delegate some specific responsibilities to individuals

Obviously that requires a raised level of trust in those individuals, but if done sensibly and selectively, it might work for certain things

This is our first applicant for fiscal hosting, so I think it would be good to do that as a group

But e.g. once we build up a checklist of things we consider in these applications, I don't think it would hurt for an individual to run through that checklist and approve things without waiting for a meeting

I tend to agree, but there's something to be said for promptness too. If we can't even agree in a timely manner that they should or should not be hosted by the XSF I can't imagine how we'd actually pay out their money or something, which I suspect would make others not want to use the XSF's service.

I don't see how else to fix this bottleneck

(but yes, this first one in particular will need some thought as the criteria are figured out)

I guess I'll follow up with the applicant and let them know it may be a while

Silence is probably the worst thing we could do.

Sam, probably the best way to get this done is through disagreement: instead of waiting for a group to agree upon a good list, just rough out a list, say "this is it", and then ammend according to disagreements ;)

That's fine, but if the group in question can't meet at all there's not much point

once there's a checklist then it should be a simple box-checking exercise, so meetings wouldn't strictly be necessary

> wurstsalat wrote: > ralphm, I think emus is asking if your xmpp artworks are available somewhere for comm-team :) yes thanks

ralphm: