[13:44]  * ogra_ wonders if popey noticed the return of karl larsen ...
[13:47] <popey> i did
[13:47]  * popey wonders who let those mails through
[13:47] <popey> (It wasnt me)
[14:01]  * persia waits for maco to take charge
[14:02] <Laney> :-)
[14:04] <Laney> Looks like the agenda wasn't refreshed after last meeting
[14:09] <persia> Does that mean that the only item before us is confirming that we all read my email until the TB gets back to us?
[14:09] <Laney> I think there's #2 too.
[14:09] <Laney> and confirming that #3 is deferred
[14:10] <persia> If so, I'll recuse myself, as I already imposed my voting system on everyone once, and don't feel strongly enough that it's the only working system to argue it, as the apparent lack of comprehensibility seems to count against it.
[14:11] <persia> Ah.  I'm happy to sit for the interview for #2: I certainly need more information than I'm finding to have a strong opinion.
[14:11] <Laney> From what I read of your summary, it's what I understood practice to be anyway.
[14:11] <Laney> I certainly don't find it confusing anyway
[14:12] <persia> Thanks :)
[14:12] <persia> But I presume some folk find it confusing, or there wouldn't have been such discussion about it.
[14:12] <Laney> I suppose that it's never been written down in a permenant enough place led to varying interpratations being held
[14:13] <persia> Probably.  Mind you, I'm all in favour of us having varying interpretations of the necessary criteria to approve applications, but the system only works if we agree on what we mean when we vote.
[14:13] <Laney> right
[14:14] <Laney> anyway, I'll go back to writing slides in the absence of a quorum. ping me if people show up :-)
[14:15] <persia> From what I see on the mailing list, we need 4 to decide on #2.
[14:34]  * persia is tired, and decides to review the interview log later, if an interview happens