=== ScottK changed the topic of #kubuntu-devel to: Kubuntu - 10 years of friendlyness | Status: Applications 15.04.1 Wily: http://goo.gl/valbQd | https://trello.com/kubuntu | http://qa.kubuntu.co.uk/ | Kubuntu Kickoff: http://tinyurl.com/kubuntukickoff | Kubuntu will be at SELF! http://www.southeastlinuxfest.org/ | |Kubuntu meeting May 16 @ 1500 UTC https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2015-May/009563.html === ahoneybun changed the topic of #kubuntu-devel to: Kubuntu - 10 years of friendlyness | Status: Applications 15.04.1 Wily: http://goo.gl/valbQd | https://trello.com/kubuntu | http://qa.kubuntu.co.uk/ | Kubuntu will be at SELF! http://www.southeastlinuxfest.org/ | |Kubuntu meeting May 16 @ 1500 UTC https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2015-May/009563.html === ahoneybun changed the topic of #kubuntu-devel to: Kubuntu - 10 years of friendlyness | Status: Applications 15.04.1 Wily: http://goo.gl/valbQd | https://trello.com/kubuntu | http://qa.kubuntu.co.uk/ | Kubuntu at SELF! http://www.southeastlinuxfest.org/ | Kubuntu meeting May 16 @ 1500 UTC https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2015-May/009563.html === ]Relic[ is now known as [Relic] [06:37] Good morning. [06:38] morning, lordievader [06:38] well, good $timeofday [06:38] closing in on midnight here [06:39] Hey valorie, I know. I was in that timezone yesterday :P [06:48] woah! welcome to jetlag city, lordievader [06:49] I'm still doing rather okay in jetlag city ;) [06:51] cool [06:51] I usually only have it one day going from W > E [06:52] but days and days coming home from Europe === yofel changed the topic of #kubuntu-devel to: Kubuntu - 10 years of friendlyness | Status: Applications 15.04.1 Wily: http://goo.gl/valbQd | https://trello.com/kubuntu | http://qa.kubuntu.co.uk/ | Kubuntu at SELF! http://www.southeastlinuxfest.org/ | Kubuntu meeting May 26 @ 1500 UTC https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2015-May/009563.html [07:28] May 26, not 16 [07:41] #tardismeeting [07:41] heh === dav is now known as Guest96052 [13:44] hmm danyone has problems with shutting down and logout in 15.04 on PC ? [14:18] soee I sometimes do [14:20] I'll be a bit late to the meeting [14:20] leaving work now [14:20] will get home in about an hour [14:27] sitter: can the "Notifying CI" part of the hooks on git.debian.org be done asynchronously? it's a bit annoying that it takes forever. [14:29] I rather thought it was forked [14:31] debfx: should be now, I am not sure that git actually will return before the childs have returned though === ahoneybun_ is now known as ahoneybun === aaron is now known as Guest4586 [14:38] sitter: thanks. I don't have unpushed commits to test though [14:39] me either [14:39] always the problem with them git hooks [14:44] je suis ici :D [14:47] that wasn't an hour Oo [14:47] I was fast :P [14:48] I got my frind to drive [14:48] so I'm in the passenger seat on my laptop [14:48] ah, smart [14:52] not in a smart, I hope? [14:55] BMW [14:55] '89 [14:59] smart choice [15:00] :s [15:00] hello [15:00] Hello. [15:00] hiyas [15:00] o/ [15:01] o/ [15:01] break dance contest? [15:01] * seaLne idles [15:01] o/ [15:01] o/ === sitter changed the topic of #kubuntu-devel to: meeting in progress https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2015-May/009563.html [15:01] o/, for support [15:01] thank you my dear sitter [15:01] * vHanda waves! [15:01] :* [15:02] yo [15:02] hi everybody, and thanks for joining for the meeting of the Kubuntu Council [15:02] KC members present are: [15:02] * Mamarok waves [15:03] Hello everyone, I am here to answer any questions raised for the Community Council or Canonical Community Team, but I will otherwise avoid interrupting the meeting, so don't take my silence on any point as approval or disaproval [15:03] * yofel waves [15:03] * Riddell on council [15:03] mhall119: we can see that later on, right now we would like to start our meeting [15:03] * valorie on Council [15:04] * ovidiu-florin waves [15:04] * ScottK is here. [15:04] I'm here [15:05] gresat, so are all here, nice we could all make it :) [15:05] sorry, my typing sucks at time, will try to re-read before sending [15:05] for the record: the Kubuntu council is composed of democratically elected members of the Kubuntu community [15:06] \o/ Democracy [15:07] We have 4 items on our list today: [15:07] 1. Leadership questions [15:08] ScottK: I think you prepared informations for our members, could you please provide them here? [15:08] Here you go [15:08] https://skitterman.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/information-exchange-between-the-ubuntu-community-council-and-the-kubuntu-council/ [15:09] This will be on planet ubuntu momentarily too. [15:09] Sorry it's long, but I did try to put the most important bits, the official dicussions between the KC, the CC, and the SABDFL first. [15:10] summary? [15:11] I think it's important for people to read for themselves. [15:11] Howdy all [15:11] since, as ScottK nicely put it in his blog, we do things in a transparent fashion, we think it is our duty to inform the Kubuntu Community members of the current situation [15:12] ScottK: if it's too much trouble, could you highlight the quoted parts of the email in another colour. It's a little hard to read right now. [15:12] maybe light green or light grey [15:12] Sorry, that would take a really long time. [15:13] ScottK: perhaps due to the tought readability a TL;DR? [15:13] tough* [15:13] The first few are the important ones. [15:14] ...also in spite of not waiting for everyone to read it, a tl;dr would be nice ;) [15:15] TL:DR the CC believe Riddell has acted in such a bad way towards them that they have "requested" he step down from the Kubuntu Council and any leadership role in Kubuntu. [15:15] Mark Shuttleworth (SABFL) has endorsed that as "not a request". [15:15] all of this in secret, without consulting with the Council [15:16] at all, ever [15:16] for the record, AFAIK, none of the Kubuntu Council members were informed on any problems with Jonathan, be this privatley or in public, nor were there any mentions in our meeting on March 19 [15:16] it's an unprecedented and astonishing move in reponse to me asking two really quite simple questions [15:17] I've been making enquiries about these issues for the last three years and they are still ongoing [15:17] Question: has anybody from the Kubuntu Council gotten specific samples of proof for the accusations? [15:17] since Jonathan only speaks on our behalf to get these very old questions answered, the move of the CC is astonishing to say the least [15:17] But the main point, IMO isn't what Riddell did or didn't do, but the utter disregard (imo) the CC used in dealing with whatever it may have been. [15:17] sebas: none whatsoever [15:17] ^^ [15:17] the threads on the ubuntu-community-team have got the issues to a point where I'm mostly satisfied with the responses but now it turnes out they're after me [15:18] I did enquire at the last UOS about a culture of fear in the ubuntu project where people are threatened with blacklisting if they speak their mind, seems I'm a victim of that now [15:18] Riddell: please let's keep this to facts [15:18] we should also emphasize that these two questions have been asked first many months ago, and it was quite difficult to get satisfying asnwers, the last having arrived yesterday [15:19] sebas: the CC gave a list of things, but did not reference individual emails, no [15:19] I've followed it, unsatisfying answers to very real problems affecting the future of Kubuntu and its status as Free software [15:19] mhall119: is that the list posted in ScottK's blog? [15:19] I've never been agressive, never taken private comms public, never even got findings that I'm claimed to have not accepted, never knowingly misrepresented the statements and positions of others, never made accusations about the integrity and honesty of members of the [15:19] community [15:19] indeed [15:19] sebas: yes, in the first email [15:20] it's bullying and intimidation that I've had for a few months now by the ubuntu cc [15:20] I have no idea why they find it difficult to understand the canonical ip policy being incompatible with the ubuntu promise or why they find it difficult to understand I have an issue with collecting donations we never had any consultation on never mind use of [15:20] the good news is I've never claimed to be leader of anything [15:21] so it's not actually a practical change [15:21] or more importantly, no accounting of [15:21] mhall119: I haven't fully read everything, but that's a very vague statement without any sort of backup or proof, I understand that this is not perhaps wanted in public (dirty clothes etc.), but not even involving the members of the kubuntu council makes this very hard to deal with in a democratic and transparant manner -- while that's in the interest of the ubuntu CC as well, no? [15:21] sebas: I don't understand the question, can you rephrase? [15:22] why on earth did you not come to us? [15:22] because it was not the KC's behavior that was in question [15:22] the community council and mark saying "we don't recognize you as the leader of this subcommunity" without involving the rest of the kubuntu council, but without giving anybody the actual information what the decision is based on is not a transparant process [15:23] Well, both issues that lay at the base (as I deduce, but can't verify due to lack of data you gave) are highly relevant to kubuntu council [15:23] mhall119: he was and is speaking for us [15:23] so excluding them from a decision-making process makes this very hard to understand [15:23] it's not even following the rules of ubuntu community, nobody has claimed I've broken the CoC which is what would normally cause this sort of sanction [15:24] +1 [15:24] sebas: to reiterate what is in the emails, the topics he raised are valid concerns that we did do our best to address. This action is not a consequence of those topics [15:24] and the first sign of it anybody gets is a "this is final", I wonder how that relates to the values of the community [15:24] mhall119: The leadership CoC says, "We gather opinions, data and commitments from concerned parties before taking a decision." Did you not think the KC would be a concerned party? [15:24] again I am here only to answer questions, I don't mean to side-track the meeting [15:25] mhall119: nobody except those with the data you base it on can follow if they're valid concerns, and the impressions are to say the least ... not the same for everybody [15:25] mhall119: i guess what people is trying to say is "noone knows what this action is consequence of" [15:25] ^ [15:25] Riddell: Not only that but even when a member has in the past very blatantly violated the CoC the CC has stood action less which is even more concerning. I think back to when Jono publicly bashed the distinguished Richard Stallmann.... No asking Canonical to take Jono out of his leadership role within the project [15:26] and we have asked this questions, as a Council, to the CC, with no answer [15:26] What does the KC want to happen now? [15:26] Laney: we would like the CC to withdraw this request [15:26] and talk with us about whatever problem they might have [15:27] mhall119: If you're here to answer questions, I'd appreciate an answer to mine? [15:27] mhall119: second, the decision also affects the KC very deeply, so they're again involved in a central role, yet left out of the loop of communication and decision making (or even verifying the decision) [15:27] ScottK: we did not believe that the KC was responsible for Jonathan's behavior, no [15:28] That's not my question. [15:28] My question is didn't you think we'd be a concerned party with him being removed? [15:28] mhall119: so a concrete question: how will the CC make their line of thinking more transparant and involve all stakeholders as to come to a mutually acceptable solution and way forward? [15:28] ScottK: the KC is a concerned party in the consequences, but not the cause [15:28] no one is saying we're the cause [15:29] sebas: the CC is open to discussion with the KC on how to procede [15:29] mhall119: The CC decided the consequences without consulting what you agree is a concerned party. That's clearly contrary to the leadership CoC. [15:29] mhall119: erm, we Kubuntu COuncil members are all democratically elected, and Joanthan speaks for us, in our name, so how does the cause not concern us? [15:29] it's also concerned in the cause, since Jonathan often speaks as part of the community council (I can say for myself that Jonathan asked questions about licensing of binaries also on my behalf as a community member) [15:29] mhall119: No. You are unwilling to discuss the one topic that actually matters. [15:30] ( As has been repeatedly mentioned in the emails ) [15:30] again, I am here to answer questions only [15:30] we've had this discussion on email alread [15:31] if that was so, we wouldn't have needed this meeting [15:31] anybody who wants to discuss the reasons for the decision can contact the CC as a whole [15:31] so question: can you provide us with exact details on Joanthan's actions that lead you to take this decision? That is a question I asked in my reply, and never got an answer for it [15:31] several days ago [15:31] * mck182 seconds that question [15:31] mhall119: Question: Did Jonathan violate the CoC or LCoC if so could you point out which portion the CC figures he violated so the KC at least knows that? [15:31] thirds === sitter changed the topic of #kubuntu-devel to: meeting in progress https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2015-May/009563.html --> context https://skitterman.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/information-exchange-between-the-ubuntu-community-council-and-the-kubuntu-council/ [15:32] sitter: thank you [15:32] some of those emails are private conversations [15:33] It would require consent of all involved to release them [15:33] Riddell: Do you have any objection to release of any emails you've had with the CC? [15:33] I' m happy for those to be released, I have nothing to hide [15:33] mhall119: Could you also please clarify how the CC can unilaterally decide such a harsh measure without checking with the relevant subcommunity (KC or individual members) before the decision is declared final? [15:33] It feels to me like you indicted someone who did their job in representing their community, so you've indicted that community by proxy [15:33] sebas: well, the decision is final [15:34] atleast that's how I've read it [15:34] especially since all Kubuntu council members are elected by the Kubutnu Community, not by the CC [15:34] mhall119: could you answer mine then regarding whether Jonathan violated the CoC/LCoC the guiding rules of our community and which portion? [15:34] sebas: My interpretation is that based on what Mark said in his reply to Riddell, the CoC doesn't apply to the CC. [15:34] bkerensa: it is the judgement of the CC that he did [15:34] That's the only way I can square the circle. [15:34] mhall119: getting this consent falls under your (the CC's) responsibility, since a) nobody else has the information to get that consent, b) you are liable to support a measure like this with actual data [15:34] sebas: you should address the whole CC with that question, please [15:34] mhall119: That was in the first mail the KC sent to the CC. [15:35] Still unresponded to. [15:35] * mgraesslin just finished reading through all those mails and /me is missing any evidence on what Riddell is supposed to have done. mhall119 can you point me to each individual pieces of evidence so that I can interpret myself? [15:35] mhall119: well, we're here in this meeting, I'm asking questions, it's not too useful to deflect it to "email them", or I misunderstand your role / presence here (please clarify) [15:35] mgraesslin: They aren't available. [15:35] I'm quite an outsider, so i have what is probably a quite stupid question, so bear with me. but.. looking from the outside it looks to me that if the kc is behind the current lead, but he gets removed on what it looks like "from above".. it looks like quite a serious problem in the autodetermination of the kubuntu community itself [15:35] mgraesslin: again, some of those are private conversations [15:35] we all want that mgraesslin [15:35] notmart: I agree. [15:35] notmart: you have read the situation precisely [15:36] mhall119: that is then very unfortunate and I don't think that's an honest process then... [15:36] mgraesslin: they are not disclosing that because "privacy" unlike the KC the CC does not operate openly [15:36] notmart: Yep, that's what I meant with indictment-by-proxy too [15:36] mhall119: at least provide those that are not private [15:36] notmart: that's pretty much the situation - except that the CC doesn't seem to understand that [15:36] sebas: those are on ubuntu-community-team and ubuntu-devel lists [15:36] Also, I think the transparency requirements of Ubuntu governance override "it was private" in this case. [15:37] mhall119: we have gone through all these, and haven't seen evidend of any violation of the CoC [15:37] evidence,*, even [15:37] mhall119: yes, but there are thousands of emails, which pieces are relevant from your point of view is impossible to see [15:37] so, pointers and quotes would be needed (along with explanations why the behavior ticks the boxes you say they tick) [15:37] ^ agreed ScottK . For the sanctity of Kubuntu and it's Community and elected leadership. [15:38] or a simple summary would do too...that surely would not involve private emails? [15:38] that's also needed to give Riddell the chance to reply to it - it's all mail communication and things might have been read the wrong way [15:38] also, if the Ubuntu community expressed they had a problem with the Kubuntu community decisions/directions, could have been something unfortunate, but i would have understood it, at least the dynamic [15:38] we can see exasperation from Jonathan having to ask questions over and over again without getting answers, but no violations of any CoC, be this the Ubuntu or the KDE one [15:38] mhall119: I don't think you're going to get away with not filling this information vacuum and documenting your decision, considering there's clearly no community consensus for your decision [15:38] from the outside, is hard to even parse a move like that [15:39] This is now a public topic, I can't see how this doesn't blow up if not handled a lot better from the CC :/ [15:39] almost sounds like some kind of personal dislike, especially if they won't disclose the reasons [15:40] mhall119: just imagine how it will look like if media picks it up as "Ubuntu sanctions Kubuntu member for asking questions" [15:40] mgraesslin: It's the press' *duty* to investigate this, pretty much [15:40] mgraesslin: I am aware of how this will be spun [15:40] that is no reason, if there are people who don't like questions they should not be in the body that gets those questions [15:40] Well, "spun" due to a lack of evidence that it actually followed a sound process [15:41] Actually, since it was Mark who gave the final "it's final", it'll be Mark Shuttleworth and Canonical ... [15:41] mhall119: then why not avoid that by distilling the same openness and collaboration the CC calls for on its own wiki page? The KC has been diligent in trying to get the CC to be reasonable on this topic? [15:41] you can't really blame anybody but the CC if their lack of following due process turns on them [15:41] ScottK: this action was not taken by Canonical [15:41] It was endorsed by Mark. [15:41] Mark is a member of the CC [15:41] mhall119: in all fairness the CC is picked by Mark (who owns Canonical) and the CC if half Canonical employees [15:42] Some of the CC members supporting it work for Canonical, so Canonical is involved. [15:42] bkerensa: less than half [15:42] mhall119: the CC is not a community appointed body [15:42] I read that email from Mark as leaving the decision with the CC [15:42] I think the CC could still reverse or put this on hold if it wanted to [15:42] mhall119: You have not even been willing to disclose which CC members supported this. [15:42] I don't believe it was all of them. [15:42] another thing to consider: we as the Kubuntu Community, be this as developers or contributors or users see this move by the CC as being very destructive to us, and it has a very negative impact on our motivations [15:42] therefore the CC *can* withdraw their request [15:42] Mamarok: Yeah - 'This is a statement from the CC that we no longer recognise you as the leader of the Kubuntu community.' is very bizarre, you'd think the Kubuntu community gets a word in that [15:43] valorie: It's pretty clear the CC can do whatever they want. [15:43] I have to leave now, sorry for that. mhall119 please work towards providing justification for such a step [15:43] thanks for your input sebas [15:43] we will get more reactions on this since the Community as a whole has now insight in it, but I very much doubt anyone will see this as being cosntructive [15:43] Also, thanks for taking the time to respond here [15:43] sebas: we will do what we can [15:43] thank you sebas [15:43] thank you sebas, for your input [15:43] \o [15:43] mhall119: There's only one thing that needs doing. [15:43] And you can. [15:45] I suppose we can close this topic now? [15:45] and move to the next one? [15:45] well, we've not fully covered "leadership questions" [15:45] it doesn't sound very closed [15:45] to get the meeting back on track: we have now informed our community about the current situation and will likely get more feedback in the days to come, but it seems obvious that we , as the Kubuntu COuncil, can not accept the request made by the CC without further evidence. [15:46] ah ok, there's more :) [15:46] Phase two of agenda item 1 [15:46] Mamarok: I agree [15:46] Mamarok: I agree with your summation [15:46] also, since we contest the validity of this decison because a) there is lack of concrete evidence, whcih we already asked in our first reply to the CC [15:47] and b) we were never consulted or even informed on a possible problem with Jonathan before this decisions [15:48] we consider this move to be not valid in the Ubuntu spirit, and contrary to the openness principle in Free Software, dear to all of us [15:48] I'm not sure why the Kubuntu Council has to listen to the CC anyway, is it still tied to Canonical somehow ? [15:48] I am pretty sure that Canonical stiill owns the Kubuntu trademark. [15:48] BluesKaj: that will be the second item on the agenda [15:48] BluesKaj: we use the ubuntu foundations [15:49] BluesKaj: ^ They own the trademark and other stuff they claim as intellectual property including the compiled binaries [15:49] upstream might have a thing or two to say about that [15:49] Their right to the Kubuntu trademark is clear, however. [15:50] So we are bound to use it within the license provided regardless of how poor we think the license is until it's fixed. [15:50] indeed, the compiled binaries of KDE are GPL and LGPL to some extend, intellectual property is one of the 2 questions we have been asking since quite some time [15:50] ok so what role does BlueSystems have in all this other than a "support position" , then I suppose it's up to them to acquire the trademark [15:51] as the statement by Canonicalk violates the GPL to that extend [15:51] BluesKaj: This is about Kubuntu, so kind of off topic. [15:51] BluesKaj: please don't jump the gun [15:51] nobody is leaving [15:51] BluesKaj: I don't think this is part of the current meeting, I am afraid we can't asnwer all questions [15:52] let's get back to point 1: the Leadership considerations [15:52] valorie, well I'm not as informed as I should be about the Canonical and it's relationship to Kubuntu so I aplologise for my directness [15:52] summary I have just given above, any comments from the other KC members, something I forgot? [15:53] looks good to me [15:53] I completely agree that the CC's actions are contrary to both the Ubuntu CoC and the Ubuntu leadership CoC. [15:53] Well to transition to getting back on track, the KC should be prepared to formalize some contigincy plans if the answers coming (or apparntly not comming) from Ubuntu leadership and the CC are deemed un-justifiable by the KC. [15:53] yep [15:53] ronnoc: of course [15:53] Although that would be in a future meeting, ofc [15:54] As such, I think they could be ignored as invalid, except for the SABDFL override. [15:54] That concerns me. [15:54] so this leads us to the second item on our agenda: [15:54] 2. Kubuntu Council constitution clarification [15:54] the council constitution can be found here: http://www.kubuntu.org/kubuntu-council [15:55] I move for a vote. [15:55] ScottK: what is your motion regarding the constitution [15:55] "I move that...." [15:56] I move that we vote to accept the proposed modification of the KC constitution. [15:56] Thanks. [15:56] ScottK: is a copy of the diff available? [15:56] I don't have one. [15:57] +1 [15:57] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2015-May/009565.html [15:58] +1 [15:58] +1 from me as well [15:58] +1 from me. [15:58] +1 [15:58] * shadeslayer pokes yofel [15:59] though we have quorum don't we [15:59] we do [15:59] anyway, we have quorum, so the change is accepted [15:59] the motion passes unanimously with the quorum present [15:59] +1 from me [15:59] than you bkerensa :) [15:59] even better, elt me rephrase that: [16:00] the motion passes unanimously with all Kubuntu Council mmbers present [16:00] members* [16:00] gosh, one would think that my typing would improve with age... [16:00] \o/ [16:00] Would someone please update kubuntu.org. [16:00] so, we arrive at point 3 of the agenda: [16:01] 3. Benjamin Kerensa's membershp application [16:01] membership* [16:01] Grilling time? [16:01] hi Ben, do you have a link to your application? [16:01] bkerensa: maybe a short introduction? [16:01] Hello all [16:01] wiki.ubuntu.com/bkerensa/KubuntuMembership_Application [16:01] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/bkerensa/KubuntuMembership_Application [16:01] I'm not sure how to update kubuntu.org [16:01] so maybe Riddell can do that [16:02] bkerensa: impressive, but we oldtimers already know you since quite some time :) [16:02] Any questions? [16:02] He lives in Portland, +1 from me ! [16:03] lol [16:03] bkerensa: I see you also work on a Qt-based application, nice! [16:03] I have yes [16:03] * valorie could do with some stumptown about now.... [16:03] ScottK: pardon my ignorance - what does SABDFL stand for? [16:03] and oversaw Firefox Release Management and Thunderbird for certain channels for that matter [16:03] mck182: Self Appointed Benelovent Dictator for Life [16:03] heavily advocating for distros to be better supported upstream [16:03] ah thank you [16:04] There, he types faster. [16:04] bkerensa: it's great to have you with us, what first attracted you to the kubuntu project rather than any other part of ubuntu? [16:04] Riddell: the community [16:04] I feel like Kubuntu distills the strong support for FOSS values and the Ubuntu spirit [16:05] I will not go into that further to refrain from FUD ;) [16:05] I don't understand, what are the changes in the Kubuntu council constitution? [16:05] ovidiu-florin: see the mail shadeslayer sent to kubuntu-devel [16:05] ovidiu-florin: Since we don't have a diff handy you can just grab the old one and compare it to the new one which is available on the mailing list. [16:05] ^^ [16:06] Riddell: and my request is to essentially transfer membership so that my membership is recognized by Kubuntu Project [16:06] versus tapping into Ubuntu directly as it currently does [16:06] I am all for it [16:06] +1 [16:07] +1 [16:07] +1 from me too. [16:07] +1 [16:07] * sitter pokes yofel [16:07] his eye is busy [16:07] +1 also from me [16:08] +1 [16:08] welcome, ben [16:08] \o/ [16:08] welcome bkerensa \o/ [16:08] whoop whoop [16:08] I feel like I did in 2011 when I got my Ubuntu Membership [16:08] yay [16:08] unanimously, congratualtions and welcome, bkerensa :) [16:09] Congratulations! [16:09] yay bkerensa! [16:09] one last item we should clarfy in this meeting: [16:09] regarding the lack of evidence provided by the CC to remove Joanthan from the Kubuntu Council [16:09] Mamarok: one sec [16:10] I move that the KC resolve that the request by the CC is invalid and that Jonathan will continue to be a part of the Kubuntu Council as elected. [16:10] ;) [16:10] thank you, bkerensa :) [16:11] any 2nd for that motion? [16:11] I second that [16:11] seconded [16:11] I think my previous summary in point 1. of the agenda sums that up, and I support that motion [16:11] yep [16:11] +1 [16:11] so let's vote: [16:11] +1 [16:11] +1 [16:11] +1 [16:12] +0 [16:12] +1 [16:12] * Mamarok ppokes ScottK [16:12] * ovidiu-florin finally caught up [16:12] all kubuntu members, feel free to +1 if you agree [16:12] for the record [16:12] +1 [16:12] +1 [16:12] +0. I agree 100% about how the decision was made by the CC and that being invalid, but I'm afraid the way things work, the fact that it was SABDFL'ed can't be ignored. [16:13] indeed, since this is about a community elected KC member, you can all chime in, we have quorum from the Council anyway [16:13] I have deep concerns [16:13] I would hope that the CC withdraws their request [16:13] ScottK: sgclark: time will tell [16:13] so we can talk [16:13] I do hope he changes his mind. [16:14] +1 [16:14] What are our alternatives? [16:14] mhall119: Thanks for keeping up with the barrage of questions. [16:15] anyway a +1 from me only in support of our team. [16:15] Quintasan: I am happy to help however I can [16:15] bkerensa: Added. Welcome to the team. [16:15] I updated the constitution [16:15] mhall119: indeed, thanks for being here :) [16:15] on the website [16:15] Riddell: thank you :) [16:15] mhall119: thank you for showing up [16:16] ovidiu-florin: without Riddell, do you mean? [16:16] so we st5ill have the point Q&A, any other questions to the Kubutnu COuncil? [16:16] mhall119: thanks for taking yout time to be here [16:16] any other misc. motions? [16:16] ovidiu-florin: because we're keeping our Che Riddell [16:16] :-) [16:16] În case they/he doesn't change their minds [16:17] I move that I am awesome! [16:17] I have to run, thanks all for showing up for the meeting, laters [16:17] lol [16:17] How will that affect us? [16:17] sitter: +0 :P [16:17] hola chicos, soy Riddell de la Casa Riddell en Valparaiso [16:17] ovidiu-florin: I guess that would be their move to make then [16:17] sitter: everyone's awesome [16:17] indeed [16:17] bye yofel, thanks for your participation [16:18] sitter: that we know already, but since Riddell lives in Spain,w e should call him spanish names [16:18] how about? El Comandante [16:18] I second the spanish name calling [16:18]