EVE Search - 24/5/2008 Opening CSM formal meeting complete

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

24/5/2008 Opening CSM formal meeting complete - Minutes to follow

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.05.29 07:31:00 - [61] For those of you who'd like to see the chat log go to http://www.eve-csm.com/#csmmeetings and click on the link under CSM Meetings titled Chatlog. Regards, Windjammer
AltBier Blue. Blue Federation	Posted - 2008.05.29 08:13:00 - [62] Edited by: AltBier on 29/05/2008 08:16:18 Originally by: Serenity Steele If I can work out an efficient way to make it into HTML and readable, I'll do that :) Forgot to say, I do have a program which will make it into HTML so it looks the same as it would in notepad. However, most browsers will simply show a text file in the same way as notepad would anyway. Many RFCs are published this way.
Drykor Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.29 11:57:00 - [63] I hope next time maybe Darius can be a little more mature and less obstructionistic and the meeting could actually go somewhere. I truely don't believe this was his intention from the start but bitterness and prejudice can go a long way in ruining the effectiveness of these meetings. I realize I may be biased but I tried to read the log with an open mind and I was utterly disgusted by the time I got to the end.
Athre The HIgher Standard	Posted - 2008.05.29 13:58:00 - [64] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Originally by: Athre That was interesting. It is unfortunate that 2 Representatives decided they would not hold to traditional meeting methods and practices. Maybe they should not have run. You were there? I don't see any minutes/chatlogs posted yet. look up Originally by: Serenity Steele Since 7/9 CSM members agreed, I've put them up on the eve-csm.com site under the CSM Meeting Logs section.
Darius JOHNSON GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.05.29 18:59:00 - [65] Originally by: Drykor I hope next time maybe Darius can be a little more mature and less obstructionistic and the meeting could actually go somewhere. I truely don't believe this was his intention from the start but bitterness and prejudice can go a long way in ruining the effectiveness of these meetings. I realize I may be biased but I tried to read the log with an open mind and I was utterly disgusted by the time I got to the end. Public meeting. Let me force a vote on an irrelevant and previously unmentioned topic then tell you to shut up when you voice opposition. I look forward to your "mature" response. In the meantime I'm going to continue to voice my opinion, whether you like it or not, regarding attempts to work outside the system in any way. The initial "discussion" also ocurred over 1.5 hours into the meeting. FYI. The point of the council is for people to discuss and explain things. Not to say I HAVE AN IDEA LET ME HAVE THIS RIGHT THAT MEANS NOTHING AND VOTE NOW. VOTES. SOMEONE TALKS SHUT UP AND VOTE YOU"RE BEING BITTER. Nobody gets to decide that and everyone gets to talk. It's a council not a soap box.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.29 19:12:00 - [66] Originally by: Drykor I hope next time maybe Darius can be a little more mature and less obstructionistic and the meeting could actually go somewhere. I truely don't believe this was his intention from the start but bitterness and prejudice can go a long way in ruining the effectiveness of these meetings. I realize I may be biased but I tried to read the log with an open mind and I was utterly disgusted by the time I got to the end. I actually didn't think Darius was behaving that badly. I've been at meetings before where I've gotten blindsided by things(I remember one particularly nasty teleconference where my cell phone cut out as I was shouting points of order - that meeting sucked), and I've seen others in similar situations. One simple "What the **** am I voting on?" is actually among the better behaviour I've seen from people blindsided by a motion they don't like. I'm not saying that any of the others are at fault either - meetings tend to degenerate in my experience if you allow informality and acrimony to mix - but Darius is hardly to blame. As for the motion at hand, the correct way to deal with it would be to have the meeting minutes go out to the rest of the Council as soon as Ankh finishes writing them up, allow time for comments on amendments to the minutes, put them all to the Council for approval at the next meeting, and then post them on the website. Chatlogs should probably be dealt with similarly - give people time to agree on what to redact, and then approve their posting at the next meeting(or, in extreme cases, agree not to). Meetings are weekly, so it wouldn't be an unreasonable delay. And to fill the gap, post a quick summary of motions considered - "Voted on thread #123456, Nerf Ships, passed", or something like that. People will get a bit whiny about the delays, but you want a clean paper trail, and this is the best way to ensure it. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Maggot Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.05.29 20:25:00 - [67] Aye, agreement on previous minutes is pretty standard practice as the first agenda item in any meeting.
Farrqua Turbo Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.05.29 20:42:00 - [68] I think that was the tamest meeting I have ever seen. I read the entire thing and this what I saw and this is my view of course. 1- Unorganized. First thing should have been done before the meeting ever took place (especially the first one), an outlined agenda should have been written out and agreed upon by the body. The chair and everyone else was was all over the place and I can see a lot of frustration by the members. And the CSM officers were wrong in to trying to muscle throughout the meeting. 2- Inanna Zuni / Alison Wheeler, seemed to be the most qualified member to be the Chair. She obviously is organized and pays attention to what is going on the most. And she seems to be able to work with everyone on the board whether in agreement or not. 3- The Goon issue. Yea, I can see right away that Bane and Darius react to and look at things differently. They might be in the same alliance or crop, but there is a difference of views between these two. Unfortunately most people with a bias slant to one member or not will spin something out of nothing. And For over 20+ years I have been on volunteer community committees, corporate boards, and publicly elected posts. And I can honestly say that this group is really mellow, almost totally passive. I have been in meetings where one of the officers had to be pepper sprayed and cuffed. Yay for the city council. Like it or not every member on that council has an opinion and it is not always the most popular one. And people will get defensive and argue their stance. That is what is supposed to happen. You will see all sorts of colorful fireworks and grandstanding. Its apart of the process. What does not work however is the over reacting and silencing of the members. Jade man, I am sorry but you came off a little heavy when it was not needed. It just sets you up for problems later. Let things develop and work it self out. IF you run out of time you move agendas to the next meeting. Trying to rush through them makes mistakes and creates issues. If the issue is that important for further discussion tabling it only should apply if more information is needed or specific time constraints prohibit the conclusion of the topic. If you have that much discussion there is a reason for it. Step back listen and watch where it goes. You will get more out of it. and better solutions will present it self.
Miner Nine	Posted - 2008.05.29 23:16:00 - [69] I think Darius has a legit issue. The way our minutes have always been handle, is the secretary/clerk records them. Sends them to everyone 48 hours before the next meeting(usually sends the minutes out a few hours after our meeting is over, our clerk is awesome). Start of next meeting, Someone motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. There is discussion on the motion and possible changes/corrections to the minutes. Then there is a vote. It's 2/3's for our minutes but that doesn't really matter. Giving the Chair the right to sign off on the minutes, also gives the Chair the right to not sign off on minutes thus vetoing them. It also adds extra responsibility on Jade Constantine that if you fail in some way, would deem that they should be remove from CSM. If the Chair and the Vice Chair are moderators, then they should also have to remain neutral thru out the discussion. I know with our Chair, they only get to vote if there is a tie and they have to remain neutral. But whatever, you guys aren't allow to talk about fixing lag. So my highest hope from CSM is already gone. There other smaller issues I have, but I doubt anyone would care. Meeting may work better by doing it over Teamspeak and people just type they want to speak and Jade just goes down thru the list in order.
AltBier Blue. Blue Federation	Posted - 2008.05.30 14:58:00 - [70] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto As for the motion at hand, the correct way to deal with it would be to have the meeting minutes go out to the rest of the Council as soon as Ankh finishes writing them up, allow time for comments on amendments to the minutes, put them all to the Council for approval at the next meeting, and then post them on the website. While I agree with you, there was a disagreement (most of the CSM thought the chair should sign), and I wonder how else the issue could have been resolved if not through a vote there and then.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.30 15:59:00 - [71] Originally by: AltBier Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto As for the motion at hand, the correct way to deal with it would be to have the meeting minutes go out to the rest of the Council as soon as Ankh finishes writing them up, allow time for comments on amendments to the minutes, put them all to the Council for approval at the next meeting, and then post them on the website. While I agree with you, there was a disagreement (most of the CSM thought the chair should sign), and I wonder how else the issue could have been resolved if not through a vote there and then. I'm not taking issue with the existence of a vote, I'm taking issue with the results. There's a pretty standard process for minutes the world 'round, and it's standard because it works. I'm saying that the CSM should adopt it. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Poreuomai Mirkur Draug'Tyr	Posted - 2008.05.31 10:10:00 - [72] Edited by: Poreuomai on 31/05/2008 10:11:01 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto There's a pretty standard process for minutes the world 'round, and it's standard because it works. There does seem to have been some disagreement about what the standard way actually is: Quote: [ 2008.05.24 18:42:40 ] Jade Constantine > its how these things work Darius [ 2008.05.24 18:42:47 ] Jade Constantine > in committees [...] [ 2008.05.24 18:47:51 ] Serenity Steele > I think we're getting into a little positioning here. A person who chairs a meeting needs to QA the minutes and get them sent off. [ 2008.05.24 18:48:15 ] Ankhesentapemkah > Exactly, Serenity. This is what happens in real life too. [...] [ 2008.05.24 18:48:47 ] Inanna Zuni > I am wondering here whether those of us who have set on many bodies in our country are bringing that to this table assuming other countries / bodies do exactly the same
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.31 15:24:00 - [73] Originally by: Poreuomai Edited by: Poreuomai on 31/05/2008 10:11:01 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto There's a pretty standard process for minutes the world 'round, and it's standard because it works. There does seem to have been some disagreement about what the standard way actually is: Quote: [ 2008.05.24 18:42:40 ] Jade Constantine > its how these things work Darius [ 2008.05.24 18:42:47 ] Jade Constantine > in committees [...] [ 2008.05.24 18:47:51 ] Serenity Steele > I think we're getting into a little positioning here. A person who chairs a meeting needs to QA the minutes and get them sent off. [ 2008.05.24 18:48:15 ] Ankhesentapemkah > Exactly, Serenity. This is what happens in real life too. [...] [ 2008.05.24 18:48:47 ] Inanna Zuni > I am wondering here whether those of us who have set on many bodies in our country are bringing that to this table assuming other countries / bodies do exactly the same You know, that might well be true - my assumption that it's standard around the world is just that, an assumption, and given the nationality of the CSM(seriously, how the hell did we get more Dutch than Americans?), it's entirely possible they have different experiences. I still think it's a better method than the one they picked, but I can't rightfully claim universal approval when I do so. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Ankhesentapemkah Aliastra	Posted - 2008.05.31 17:56:00 - [74] Originally by: Miner Nine Start of next meeting, Someone motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. There is discussion on the motion and possible changes/corrections to the minutes. Then there is a vote. It's 2/3's for our minutes but that doesn't really matter. This is common, but would have been impossible in this case as it's the secretary's reponsibility and duty to publish the minutes within 3 days according to the official CSM document. With meetings one week apart, it would have been impossible to comply with the requirements. --- Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.05.31 20:02:00 - [75] Originally by: Farrqua What does not work however is the over reacting and silencing of the members. Jade man, I am sorry but you came off a little heavy when it was not needed. It just sets you up for problems later. Let things develop and work it self out. IF you run out of time you move agendas to the next meeting. Trying to rush through them makes mistakes and creates issues. If the issue is that important for further discussion tabling it only should apply if more information is needed or specific time constraints prohibit the conclusion of the topic. If you have that much discussion there is a reason for it. Step back listen and watch where it goes. You will get more out of it. and better solutions will present it self. Jade certainly didn't over react and only made attempt to silence Darius after Darius made his objections well known including his objection to a vote being taken AND after Darius had said he had nothing more to say when asked if he did. When Jade did call for Darius to be quiet, it was ONLY so a vote could be taken. This is hardly heavy handed and asking Darius to pipe down so a vote could be taken was solidly within the mandate of the Chair. If Jade hadn't done so, he would not have been upholding his responsibility to moderate the meeting. The CSM does not have years to achieve its goals or even establish what those goals are. It has weeks and at the outside most, six months. For one member to repeatedly object to a vote being taken and allowed to successfully block a vote with that methodology cannot be allowed. The filibuster is a political tactic the CSM cannot afford to indulge. On another post you said you'd read the chat log three times. Yet you continue to defend Darius's actions and at the same time, incredibly, you fault Jade. I don't know where this bias stems from since it is not supported by what can be seen in the chat log. Jade was not heavy handed, was certainly not the only one done with Darius's performance, didn't try to railroad or rush a vote and, in point of fact, made every reasonable effort to obtain input prior to the vote being taken. The first point of your post was titled "Unorganized". You make some good observations and suggestions there. Perhaps you are unaware that Jade put together an informal meeting before the official meeting to try to achieve some of what you suggest. All CSM members were invited to the get together. No decisions to be made, just a meeting to brain storm how the first CSM meeting should be handled and organized. This was vigorously opposed by Darius who felt the only meetings that should be held were the official meetings. Tell you anything about the guy? Windjammer
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.31 21:24:00 - [76] Originally by: Windjammer The first point of your post was titled "Unorganized". You make some good observations and suggestions there. Perhaps you are unaware that Jade put together an informal meeting before the official meeting to try to achieve some of what you suggest. All CSM members were invited to the get together. No decisions to be made, just a meeting to brain storm how the first CSM meeting should be handled and organized. This was vigorously opposed by Darius who felt the only meetings that should be held were the official meetings. Tell you anything about the guy? Windjammer If what you say is true(and I'm not saying that it's not, merely that I haven't seen mention of this before), it tells me that he's probably pretty inexperienced at making a political organization work. The only way a group like this is functional is if at least 2/3 of the work is done ahead of time, either by delegation, a committee, or an informal brainstorming session of the type mentioned. 9 isn't a large organization, but it's too large for just sitting down and hashing things out at the formal meeting, if you want it to be done in a reasonable amount of time. You need to make use of delegation and informality if you want it to function properly, and neither can be done at a meeting of the whole organization. Frankly, what I'd suggest is that before every meeting, every CSMer make a post in every thread to be debated(or a similar comment on an internal list, if they don't want to be pinned to one position publicly), so that all the positions are at least a little bit known in advance and everyone has some idea of what to expect. I'll wait to see today's chatlog before I get too uppity about insisting upon that, but it seems like the easiest way of streamlining the actual meeting. This is doubly true for an international body like this one, since time zones are a major concern, and people can't always debate in real time, which makes the forum/email structure very convenient. Just my 2(or 20) cents... ------------------ Fix the forums!
Miner Nine	Posted - 2008.06.01 01:00:00 - [77] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Miner Nine Start of next meeting, Someone motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. There is discussion on the motion and possible changes/corrections to the minutes. Then there is a vote. It's 2/3's for our minutes but that doesn't really matter. This is common, but would have been impossible in this case as it's the secretary's reponsibility and duty to publish the minutes within 3 days according to the official CSM document. With meetings one week apart, it would have been impossible to comply with the requirements. Impossible is something quiter says. CSM document doesn't say it can't be amended. There also no reason why you can't have more then one meeting a week. You can have the normal meeting and then a approvel of the minutes meeting 2 days later. Either way, saying it's impossible thus why your way is the only way seems very weak to me.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.06.01 01:07:00 - [78] Originally by: Miner Nine Impossible is something quiter says. CSM document doesn't say it can't be amended. There also no reason why you can't have more then one meeting a week. You can have the normal meeting and then a approvel of the minutes meeting 2 days later. Either way, saying it's impossible thus why your way is the only way seems very weak to me. You're being horribly unfair here - they found a solution. A functional one, at that. It's not the default one used in most councils, but it suits their needs just fine. And if chat logs go up as soon as the meeting ends, then the minutes are next to irrelevant anyways. It's fine, leave it alone. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Miner Nine	Posted - 2008.06.01 01:21:00 - [79] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Originally by: Miner Nine Impossible is something quiter says. CSM document doesn't say it can't be amended. There also no reason why you can't have more then one meeting a week. You can have the normal meeting and then a approvel of the minutes meeting 2 days later. Either way, saying it's impossible thus why your way is the only way seems very weak to me. You're being horribly unfair here - they found a solution. A functional one, at that. It's not the default one used in most councils, but it suits their needs just fine. And if chat logs go up as soon as the meeting ends, then the minutes are next to irrelevant anyways. It's fine, leave it alone. A solution that changes the CSM document that CSMcrazyname says they can't approve the minutes next meeting due to the very same CSM document. It's not fine cause the logic behind the change is wrong. CSM document says minutes must be out 3days after the meeting. Thus change CSM document to allow Chair to sign off on the minutes. They acted like this was the only solution and Darius was made the bad guy cause he wanted all the members to voted on it. I remember countless times of our minutes being mess up, while logs are good it's quite clear there were problems with communcation in that meeting. They are setting up the ground work for future CSM. I think there are good reasons why most bodies that produce minutes have the voting members approve them, thus allowing them a chance to correct minutes or misunderstanding. Clerks make mistakes, if you look at the motion they were making. It was very unclear, yet Jade was trying to push a vote and probably didn't even know the question themselves since they had CrazyCSMname person say it. I do think it's interesting I'm unfair for speaking my opinion and pointing out this is how majority of the world does it. The logic is wrong and I'm more then free to point it out.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.06.01 02:45:00 - [80] Originally by: Miner Nine A solution that changes the CSM document that CSMcrazyname says they can't approve the minutes next meeting due to the very same CSM document. It's not fine cause the logic behind the change is wrong. CSM document says minutes must be out 3days after the meeting. Thus change CSM document to allow Chair to sign off on the minutes. They acted like this was the only solution and Darius was made the bad guy cause he wanted all the members to voted on it. I remember countless times of our minutes being mess up, while logs are good it's quite clear there were problems with communcation in that meeting. They are setting up the ground work for future CSM. I think there are good reasons why most bodies that produce minutes have the voting members approve them, thus allowing them a chance to correct minutes or misunderstanding. Clerks make mistakes, if you look at the motion they were making. It was very unclear, yet Jade was trying to push a vote and probably didn't even know the question themselves since they had CrazyCSMname person say it. I do think it's interesting I'm unfair for speaking my opinion and pointing out this is how majority of the world does it. The logic is wrong and I'm more then free to point it out. Letting the chair sign off on the minutes is hardly a change to the CSM document. It's a stopgap that was approved by the Council, and as such meets most rules of order I've ever seen. And Darius's objection sure didn't seem to me to be about the lack of a vote - the vote was being called, and that was his objection. He wanted more time, not more democracy. He also objected to the chair having power somebody else didn't, of course, but that explains what his vote was, not so much the debate around the voting. As for what they should do in future, I'd agree that they should seek a change to the structure of the minutes to allow them to be approved at the subsequent meeting, as most other organizations do, and use the chatlogs to fill the three-day rule. It seems almost backwards to have the more detailed version come out first, but it's probably the right solution. The unfair part was "Impossible is something quiter says" - something is against their constitution, thus they don't do it. That's not quitting, that's the rule of law, and attacking them for it is stupid - and, yes, unfair. Also, it's way easier to type "Ank" or "Ankh" than "CSMcrazyname". When it's too long or unpronounceable, just abbreviate it ------------------ Fix the forums!

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.