XSF Discussion - 2021-10-14


  1. ralphm

    emus: what do you mean?

  2. ralphm

    Still in a work meeting

  3. arc

    Good morning

  4. Sam

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

  5. wurstsalat

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

  6. arc

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

  7. MattJ

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

  8. MattJ

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

  9. arc

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

  10. Sam

    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

  11. MattJ

    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 :)

  12. Sam

    Thanks, I appreciate it

  13. MattJ

    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

  14. MattJ

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

  15. Sam

    One down should make scheduling easier :)

  16. Sam

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

  17. MattJ

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

  18. MattJ

    Just the least worst

  19. MattJ

    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

  20. MattJ

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

  21. MattJ

    Random website PRs get blocked on us, etc.

  22. MattJ

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

  23. MattJ

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

  24. MattJ

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

  25. MattJ

    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

  26. Sam

    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.

  27. MattJ

    I don't see how else to fix this bottleneck

  28. Sam

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

  29. Sam

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

  30. Sam

    Silence is probably the worst thing we could do.

  31. theTedd

    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 ;)

  32. Sam

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

  33. theTedd

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

  34. emus

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

  35. emus

    ralphm: