Conversation with #agm at 27.02.2011 03:01:40 on u60@irc.cacert.org (irc)
(03:01:40) #agm: Das Thema für #agm ist: CAcert Incorporated - Annual General Meeting
(03:02:36) u601 hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Ping timeout: 180 seconds).
(03:40:37) ernie hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Leaving).
(11:58:16) peter [Peter@softbank218183089118.bbtec.net] hat den Raum betreten.
(12:01:56) peter hat den Raum verlassen (quit: ).
(12:02:23) peter [Peter@softbank218183089118.bbtec.net] hat den Raum betreten.
(12:04:46) peter hat den Raum verlassen (quit: ).
(13:49:44) ernie [Ernestine@84-73-129-184.dclient.hispeed.ch] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:00:54) GolfRomeo [GolfRomeo@gr.homeunix.org] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:09:06) #agm: Modus (+o law) von aphexer
(15:46:13) hugi [hugi@84-73-129-184.dclient.hispeed.ch] hat den Raum betreten.
(15:48:34) LH [Q@k30092.upc-k.chello.nl] hat den Raum betreten.
(16:33:48) #agm: Modus (+o LH) von aphexer
(17:22:28) Natureshadow [nik@p3E9EACAA.dip.t-dialin.net] hat den Raum betreten.
(17:22:40) Natureshadow heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(17:27:50) ***DominikGeorge testet nur schon mal alles durch ;) ...
(17:33:27) aphexer heißt jetzt AlexanderPrinsier
(17:37:06) GolfRomeo heißt jetzt GuillaumeRomagny
(17:48:23) NaturalStasi_ [nik@merlin.naturalnet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(17:48:53) NaturalStasi_ hat den Raum verlassen (quit: ).
(17:56:32) nik [nik@merlin.naturalnet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(17:57:01) nik hat den Raum verlassen (quit: ).
(17:57:56) NaturalStasi_ [nik@merlin.naturalnet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(17:58:16) NaturalStasi_ hat den Raum verlassen (quit: ).
(17:59:00) NaturalStasi_ [nik@merlin.naturalnet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(18:44:07) NaturalStasi_ heißt jetzt NickForHugi
(18:46:08) NickForHugi heißt jetzt NiksTafelrunde_
(18:53:32) DominikGeorge hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Verlassend).
(19:09:27) doris [doris@85-127-105-5.dynamic.xdsl-line.inode.at] hat den Raum betreten.
(19:11:12) doris hat den Raum verlassen.
(19:40:25) LH hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Leaving.).
(19:41:12) patrick [chatzilla@adsl-068-209-111-027.sip.mia.bellsouth.net] hat den Raum betreten.
(19:42:09) patrick heißt jetzt PatrickPointu
(19:43:09) Q [Q@k30092.upc-k.chello.nl] hat den Raum betreten.
(19:43:39) magu|1 [magu@g224096188.adsl.alicedsl.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(19:48:08) magu heißt jetzt MartinGummi
(19:56:17) Nik [nik@dslb-084-060-216-103.pools.arcor-ip.net] hat den Raum betreten.
(19:56:36) Nik heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(19:57:48) pemmerik [pemmerik@524B2F04.cm-4-4a.dynamic.ziggo.nl] hat den Raum betreten.
(19:58:05) Sie heißen jetzt UlrichSchroeter
(19:59:21) pemmerik: help
(19:59:35) bdmc [bdmc@user-10lfclf.cable.mindspring.com] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:01:46) LH [LambertHof@k30092.upc-k.chello.nl] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:02:19) DominikGeorge hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Verlassend).
(20:02:37) Nik [nik@merlin.naturalnet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:02:43) Nik heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(20:02:55) law heißt jetzt MarioLipinski
(20:03:29) doris [doris@85-127-105-5.dynamic.xdsl-line.inode.at] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:03:30) AlexanderPrinsier: pemmerik: need help?
(20:05:36) AlexanderPrinsier!aphexer@pec.ulyssis.student.kuleuven.be: AlexanderPrinsier hat das Thema zu CAcert Incorporated - Annual General Meeting - Use FirstnameLastname as your nickname - http://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/Next abgeändert
(20:06:27) bdmc heißt jetzt BrianMcCullough
(20:06:41) pemmerik heißt jetzt PieterVanEmmerik
(20:07:59) DominikGeorge hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Ping timeout: 180 seconds).
(20:08:50) Q hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Leaving.).
(20:13:15) #agm: Modus (+v BrianMcCullough) von MarioLipinski
(20:14:02) #agm: Modus (+v GuillaumeRomagny) von MarioLipinski
(20:14:43) #agm: Modus (+v MartinGummi) von MarioLipinski
(20:15:14) #agm: Modus (+v PatrickPointu) von MarioLipinski
(20:15:20) Nik [nik@merlin.naturalnet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:15:24) Q [Q@k30092.upc-k.chello.nl] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:15:30) Nik heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(20:16:32) doris heißt jetzt DorisSteinbichler
(20:17:25) Werner [Werner@dsl72bA246.sdtnet.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:18:56) #agm: Modus (+v DominikGeorge) von MarioLipinski
(20:19:25) #agm: Modus (+v DorisSteinbichler) von MarioLipinski
(20:20:00) JS [bachusii@ip4da9f84b.direct-adsl.nl] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:20:02) #agm: Modus (+v PieterVanEmmerik) von MarioLipinski
(20:20:35) Guy [Guy@rob92-9-88-161-112-114.fbx.proxad.net] hat den Raum betreten.
(20:23:24) #agm: Modus (+v UlrichSchroeter) von MarioLipinski
(20:25:01) PhilippDunkel: Hi everyone,
(20:25:09) AlexanderPrinsier: hi
(20:25:13) PhilippDunkel: Did one of you just phone me from Germany
(20:25:16) Werner: Hi Philipp
(20:25:16) nb: hi
(20:25:18) u60: Hi PhilppDunkel 
(20:25:19) DominikGeorge: moin
(20:25:26) nb heißt jetzt NickBebout
(20:25:29) u60: I phoned PD ;-)
(20:25:34) GuillaumeRomagny: moin, it has been a while
(20:25:38) PhilippDunkel: Soory, just missed it
(20:25:48) PhilippDunkel: Mario? 
(20:26:02) #agm: Modus (+v PhilippDunkel) von NickBebout
(20:26:08) PhilippDunkel: Alexander, are you irc-admin?
(20:26:13) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, i am
(20:26:17) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, what do you need?
(20:26:21) #agm: Modus (+v NickBebout) von NickBebout
(20:27:00) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, oh, voices in #vote
(20:27:01) PhilippDunkel: How can I register my logi-user (phidelta) with a password? And can you then set me to permanent moderator on #agm-vote
(20:27:04) PhilippDunkel: ?
(20:27:21) PhilippDunkel: Sory #vote not #agm-vote
(20:27:43) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, let me see....... i have to remember how to do admin stuff on chanserv
(20:27:49) ***NickBebout usually just uses god mode
(20:28:57) INOPIAE heißt jetzt MarcusMaengel
(20:29:49) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, /msg nickserv help register
(20:30:04) DominikGeorge heißt jetzt Nik
(20:30:31) Werner heißt jetzt WernerDworak
(20:30:35) NickBebout: ah crap, it doesn't like me to do stuff as nickbebout
(20:30:36) NickBebout heißt jetzt nb
(20:30:47) Guy: Good evening
(20:32:18) #agm: Modus (+vv MarcusMaengel WernerDworak) von MarioLipinski
(20:32:27) JS heißt jetzt JSteijlen
(20:32:31) Nik heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(20:32:32) DorisSteinbichler: good evening
(20:32:35) PhilippDunkel heißt jetzt phidelta
(20:32:43) MarioLipinski heißt jetzt law
(20:32:51) nb heißt jetzt NickBebout
(20:33:01) NickBebout heißt jetzt nb
(20:33:15) DominikGeorge heißt jetzt Nik
(20:33:15) nb: /ns identify e33805IC
(20:33:24) nb: oops
(20:33:25) nb: shit
(20:33:27) AlexanderPrinsier: :D
(20:33:40) nb: there, password changed
(20:33:41) AlexanderPrinsier: nb: would that allow me irc operator privs ;)
(20:33:50) nb: AlexanderPrinsier, nope, thats not my /oper password
(20:33:53) nb: thats just my nickserv password :)
(20:33:55) AlexanderPrinsier: ok ;)
(20:33:57) nb: or rather, was
(20:34:09) Nik heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(20:34:49) DominikGeorge heißt jetzt Nik
(20:34:57) phidelta heißt jetzt PhilippDunkel
(20:35:13) #agm: Modus (+o nb) von ChanServ
(20:35:18) nb: PhilippDunkel, try /chanserv op #agm
(20:35:19) Nik heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(20:35:42) nb: NOTE: I will conform with the nick policy when the meeting starts
(20:35:52) nb: chanserv and nickserv don't like me doing admin stuff without using my normal nick
(20:36:15) DominikGeorge heißt jetzt Natureshadow
(20:36:31) nb heißt jetzt NickBebout
(20:36:33) #agm: Modus (+o PhilippDunkel) von ChanServ
(20:36:43) Natureshadow heißt jetzt DominikGeorge
(20:36:44) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, i'll add you to the rest in a second
(20:37:10) law heißt jetzt MarioLipinski
(20:37:21) NickBebout: -ChanServ- PhilippDunkel added to #vote access list as CHANOP.
(20:38:19) NickBebout: -ChanServ- PhilippDunkel added to #agm-vote access list as CHANOP.
(20:38:28) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, do i need to add phidelta also?
(20:38:52) AlexanderPrinsier!aphexer@pec.ulyssis.student.kuleuven.be: AlexanderPrinsier hat das Thema zu CAcert Incorporated - Annual General Meeting - Use FirstnameLastname as your nickname - http://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/Next - Also join #vote abgeändert
(20:39:00) LH: Hi all, please also connect to #vote, for our voting bot
(20:39:48) NickBebout: LH, so we are not using #agm-vote?
(20:39:56) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(20:39:57) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 1 votes.
(20:39:57) VoteBot:     NAYE had 0 votes.
(20:39:58) VoteBot:     AYE had 0 votes.
(20:40:17) LH: NickBebout: Philipp wants to use #vote
(20:40:28) NickBebout: LH, ok
(20:40:31) NickBebout: i will close #agm-vote
(20:40:35) Guy heißt jetzt guyscharinger
(20:42:10) PhilippDunkel: Nick, can you also make sure that there is a full log of #vote happening (For double checking and auditing)
(20:42:29) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, sure, my client automatically does that
(20:42:46) LH: Philipp: I'm also logging
(20:42:47) PhilippDunkel: Yes, but what if your connection drops. I was thinking Server Side
(20:42:52) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, that is not supported
(20:43:02) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, but it is done by my server (I use a proxy)
(20:43:11) NickBebout: so even if my actual client drops, the logging will continue
(20:43:15) PhilippDunkel: Whatever, just making sure that someone has a complete log
(20:43:46) ***DominikGeorge is also logging #agm and #vote through NiksTafelrunde_ on a server
(20:43:50) guyscharinger heißt jetzt GuyScharinger
(20:44:09) DominikGeorge: see hostname for explanation on the nick ;)
(20:44:17) JSteijlen: \me also logs both
(20:44:37) JSteijlen: (to much windows use. sigh)
(20:45:06) dirk_on_server: <-- logs only ...
(20:45:29) LH heißt jetzt LambertHofstra
(20:45:29) doc_dirk: <-- will change it's name later ... ;-)
(20:46:18) #agm: Modus (+v LambertHofstra) von NickBebout
(20:46:22) #agm: Modus (-o NickBebout) von NickBebout
(20:46:37) NickBebout: wytze, please change nick to FirstnameLastname
(20:47:29) wytze heißt jetzt WytzevanderRaay
(20:47:41) #agm: Modus (+v WytzevanderRaay) von NickBebout
(20:47:45) #agm: Modus (+v GuyScharinger) von NickBebout
(20:47:55) #agm: Modus (+v HansVerbeek) von NickBebout
(20:47:59) Wombat heißt jetzt JohanVanSelst
(20:48:21) LambertHofstra: Hi Nick, would be good to allow me to talk
(20:48:39) NickBebout: well, we aren't moderated (yet, at least)
(20:48:44) LambertHofstra: :-)
(20:49:00) NickBebout: LambertHofstra, as chair, would you like it set so only members can speak in here?
(20:49:07) NickBebout: that is easlily possible
(20:49:21) LambertHofstra: Not until the meeting starts
(20:50:10) NickBebout: LambertHofstra, sure
(20:50:19) NickBebout: LambertHofstra, i should op you here
(20:50:28) #agm: Modus (+o LambertHofstra) von NickBebout
(20:50:55) PhilippDunkel: Ok, should I explain how voting works?
(20:51:02) doc_dirk: yep
(20:51:03) PatrickPointu: why not
(20:51:14) LambertHofstra: Yes, please
(20:51:29) PhilippDunkel: If we have a vote, I will both open an close voting.
(20:51:30) DominikGeorge: Chocolate, anybody?
(20:51:34) doc_dirk heißt jetzt DirkAstrath
(20:51:40) PhilippDunkel: Voting takes place in #vote
(20:51:49) PhilippDunkel: So go there to get voiced!
(20:52:15) PhilippDunkel: When voting opens, the VoteBot will announce this in #vote
(20:52:39) DirkAstrath heißt jetzt dirkastrath
(20:52:46) PhilippDunkel: Last year we had 2 Minutes for voting with a reminder 30 seconds before closing
(20:52:57) PhilippDunkel: I think we should do the same this year
(20:53:17) WernerDworak: True, that was fine
(20:53:19) dirkastrath: <-- does not like capital letters ....
(20:53:20) ***NickBebout agrees
(20:53:27) PhilippDunkel: You can vote by simply sending AYE or NAYE or ABSTAIN to #vote
(20:53:35) PhilippDunkel: VoteBot does confirm your vote
(20:53:51) PhilippDunkel: So if you see the confirmation you are OK
(20:53:59) PatrickPointu: let's decide if someone got disconnected during the meeting, if he's connecting back less than 10min later, should he be allowed to vote on the issues already voted on during these 10 minutes
(20:54:15) PatrickPointu: I remember it happened last year
(20:54:19) PhilippDunkel: I will Open a test vote in 30 seconds
(20:54:26) NickBebout: PatrickPointu, i would think yes
(20:54:50) PatrickPointu: yes, but we need to make it formal to make sure that we are not changing the rule in the middle.
(20:54:52) u60: how does the proxy vote works ?  name proxy vote ?
(20:55:00) PatrickPointu: Last year there were some close calls on vote results
(20:55:25) AlexanderPrinsier: JSteijlen: can you change your nick to FirstnameLastname please
(20:55:41) JSteijlen heißt jetzt JoostSteijlen
(20:55:46) AlexanderPrinsier: thanks
(20:56:26) u60: how does the proxy vote works ?????????
(20:56:50) PhilippDunkel: Hold Ulrich
(20:57:52) PhilippDunkel: Ulrich: 
(20:57:54) PhilippDunkel: PROXY member:UlrichSchroeter: NAYE
(20:57:59) PhilippDunkel: PROXY member:UlrichSchroeter: AYE
(20:58:15) PhilippDunkel: Also:
(20:58:29) PhilippDunkel: PROXY FirstnameLastname: VOTE
(20:58:38) PhilippDunkel: Test Vote ends in 00:30
(20:59:21) BrianMcCullough: Phillip, it appears that only that last form works.
(20:59:23) PhilippDunkel: I am closing the test vote
(20:59:29) #agm: Modus (+vv JohanVanSelst JoostSteijlen) von MarioLipinski
(20:59:30) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(20:59:30) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 3 votes.
(20:59:32) VoteBot:     NAYE had 10 votes.
(20:59:32) VoteBot:     AYE had 6 votes.
(20:59:45) PatrickPointu: Also, could we decide beforehand to make a 5 min break on the hour every hour.
(20:59:56) PhilippDunkel: Yes Brian
(21:00:06) DominikGeorge: PatrickPointu, sure, pat your dog from me ;)
(21:00:09) #agm: Modus (+v dirkastrath) von MarioLipinski
(21:00:18) PhilippDunkel: the member: bit was done when I copy pasted (by my client)
(21:01:02) PhilippDunkel: Does someone have an link to the agenda for me
(21:01:10) ***dirkastrath has cola ... but the popcorn is missing ... ,-(
(21:01:21) u60: :-Q
(21:01:45) NickBebout: Is there any member here who thinks they are eligible to vote but is not voiced?
(21:02:23) francois heißt jetzt FrancoisMarier
(21:02:44) FrancoisMarier: NickBebout: I believe I am eligible to vote
(21:02:47) TooTea heißt jetzt TomasTrnka
(21:03:04) #agm: Modus (+v FrancoisMarier) von NickBebout
(21:03:08) NEOatNHNG heißt jetzt MichaelTaenzer
(21:03:24) LambertHofstra: Nick, Francois is eligible
(21:03:26) #agm: Modus (+vv MichaelTaenzer IanGrigg) von NickBebout
(21:03:33) NickBebout: they both are according to the membership register
(21:03:40) NickBebout: TomasTrnka, is he?
(21:03:44) MichaelTaenzer: NickBebout: yupp thanks
(21:03:50) NickBebout: yeah
(21:03:50) #agm: Modus (+v TomasTrnka) von NickBebout
(21:03:57) NickBebout: LambertHofstra, shall i moderate the channel now?
(21:04:03) LambertHofstra: Hi all, welcome
(21:04:04) NickBebout: so only members can speak?
(21:04:11) LambertHofstra: nick
(21:04:14) LambertHofstra: yes, please do
(21:04:17) #agm: Modus (+m ) von NickBebout
(21:04:37) NickBebout: done
(21:04:39) LambertHofstra: Hi All, I'd like to welcome you to the CAcert Inc AGM
(21:04:59) LambertHofstra: Our agenda for today will be:
(21:05:05) #agm: Modus (+v PeterYuill) von NickBebout
(21:05:14) LambertHofstra: * Confirm the minutes of the annual general meeting 2010-01-30
(21:05:15) LambertHofstra:  * Report of the Committee on the activities during the financial year
(21:05:15) LambertHofstra:     July 2009 to June 2010
(21:05:15) LambertHofstra:  * Election of office-bearers of the association and ordinary
(21:05:15) LambertHofstra:     members of the committee
(21:05:16) LambertHofstra:  * Receiving and considering the statement which is required to be
(21:05:16) LambertHofstra:     submitted to members under section 26(6) of the act.
(21:05:18) LambertHofstra:  * Resolution: form a sub-committee (proposed by Ian Grigg)
(21:05:18) LambertHofstra:     
(21:05:20) LambertHofstra:  * (Consideration of) Special Resolution: Transfer to a non-trading
(21:05:20) LambertHofstra:     Cooperative NSW (by Daniel Black)
(21:05:37) LambertHofstra: Are there any questions regarding this agenda?
(21:06:04) LambertHofstra: Ok, thanks
(21:06:34) LambertHofstra: Let's start with the first item. confirm the minutes of the annual meeting 2010-01-30
(21:06:48) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(21:07:11) MarioLipinski: shouldnt we first talk about proxies?
(21:07:20) VoteBot hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Excess Flood).
(21:07:20) VoteBot [root@dunkel.org] hat den Raum betreten.
(21:07:34) #agm: Modus (+v VoteBot) von NickBebout
(21:07:37) ***DominikGeorge hasnt seen the vote start
(21:07:51) LambertHofstra: I think we need an official vote on the minutes
(21:08:01) LambertHofstra: but it seems the voting has already started
(21:08:18) TomasTrnka: VoteBot wasn't there...
(21:08:22) dirkastrath: my vote was not counted?
(21:08:52) WernerDworak: I get an error of votebot: not allowed
(21:08:53) LambertHofstra: Please ignore the votebot for now, as we did not define 1) voting, and 2) what to vote for
(21:08:57) TomasTrnka: We probably should start over...
(21:08:58) DorisSteinbichler: says i cannot cast a vote
(21:09:13) DominikGeorge: VoteBot tells me there is no vote running
(21:09:26) WytzevanderRaay: same for me, let's consider this as a test
(21:09:31) GuillaumeRomagny: Yes I have 3 proxies
(21:09:45) WytzevanderRaay: I have 1 proxy
(21:10:10) LambertHofstra: What I'd like to do first, is define the "rules", to make sure we 're all aware how votes are counted
(21:10:24) LambertHofstra: And also, we need to confirm what proxy's exist
(21:10:51) LambertHofstra: So, first: you will be able to vote "AYE", and "NAYE".
(21:11:01) LambertHofstra: The first one means you agree
(21:11:09) LambertHofstra: the second one means you do not agree
(21:11:27) MichaelTaenzer: no abstain?
(21:11:34) LambertHofstra: When you forget to vote, or vote "ABSTAIN", you leave the decision to the others
(21:11:43) LambertHofstra: and your vote will not be counted
(21:11:53) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting is closing
(21:12:01) TomasTrnka: \\
(21:12:06) FrancoisMarier: is it case sensitive?
(21:12:16) LambertHofstra: It is good to vote "Abstain" instead of not voting, because it is a confirmation you casted your vote
(21:12:17) NickBebout: no
(21:12:45) LambertHofstra: Philipp, it seems not all votes were counted, can you check it, and report back?
(21:12:58) LambertHofstra: Now, we need to list proxies
(21:13:14) LambertHofstra: Mario, can you please confirm proxies?
(21:13:15) MarioLipinski: OK.
(21:13:18) MarioLipinski:  * Wytze van der Raay
(21:13:18) MarioLipinski:   * Bastiaan Franciscus van den Dikkenberg
(21:13:19) MarioLipinski:  * Ulrich Schröter
(21:13:19) MarioLipinski:   * Markus Warg
(21:13:19) MarioLipinski:   * Wolfgang Kasulke
(21:13:20) MarioLipinski:  * Guillaume Romagny
(21:13:21) MarioLipinski:   * John Cagnol
(21:13:23) MarioLipinski:   * Gary Lee Adams
(21:13:25) MarioLipinski:   * Daniel Black (for any item no early vote received)
(21:13:27) MarioLipinski:  * Lambert Hofstra
(21:13:29) MarioLipinski:   * Gary Lee Adams (in case Guillaume Romagny is not able to act on his behalf)
(21:13:59) MarioLipinski: I will enter early votes using proxy.
(21:14:00) GuillaumeRomagny: MArio : still I will vote according to Daniel will
(21:14:45) LambertHofstra: Guillaume, Daniel sent his early votes, and asked you to be his proxy for all such motions that were not known upfront
(21:15:07) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : yes sure, the list of vote is ready
(21:15:46) LambertHofstra: ok. Mario, then it's best Guillaume uses his proxy to register early votes of Daniel
(21:15:48) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : how the vote will be counted ?
(21:15:56) GuillaumeRomagny: ok
(21:16:02) LambertHofstra: Guillauime, do you have Dan's early votes list?
(21:16:11) MarioLipinski: ok, less work for me.
(21:16:23) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : I have all the votes of DAniel at hands
(21:16:49) LambertHofstra: Philipp, can you let us know what the status is of the votebvot?
(21:18:43) LambertHofstra: Philipp, I see a new vote entered on "Test". I guess you ask us all to cast a vote?
(21:18:47) PhilippDunkel: I am doing a final test
(21:18:59) LambertHofstra: Good, can everyone cast his/her vote?
(21:19:27) dirkastrath: vote works again ... nice ... ;-)
(21:19:52) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(21:20:09) #agm: Modus (+v KurtAlbershardt) von MarioLipinski
(21:21:26) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting is closing
(21:22:35) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting is closing
(21:22:36) LambertHofstra: Philipp, can you let us know the outcome of the test
(21:22:56) LambertHofstra: Rest, can you let me know if you were not able to vote?
(21:22:56) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(21:22:56) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 8 votes.
(21:22:58) VoteBot:     NAYE had 6 votes.
(21:22:58) VoteBot:     AYE had 18 votes.
(21:23:04) PhilippDunkel: OK
(21:23:36) LambertHofstra: No problems?
(21:23:38) dirkastrath: the last vote counts ... correct?
(21:23:49) LambertHofstra: Disk: yes
(21:23:52) DominikGeorge: everything fine
(21:24:00) LambertHofstra: Good
(21:24:21) LambertHofstra: No further questions regarding the counting of aye, naye, and abstain/no vote?
(21:24:33) KurtAlbershardt: looks ok rom here
(21:25:09) LambertHofstra: Then I'd like to have the the first official vote: Confirm the minutes of the annual general meeting 2010-01-30
(21:25:29) PatrickPointu: motion to approve
(21:25:32) NickBebout: second
(21:25:57) PhilippDunkel: First can you republish teh URL to the Agenda please
(21:26:05) #agm: Modus (+v MatthiasSubik) von MarioLipinski
(21:26:22) DominikGeorge: http://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/Next
(21:27:20) LambertHofstra: https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert-members/2011-02/msg00021.html
(21:27:28) LambertHofstra: This is the mail from the secretary
(21:27:39) LambertHofstra: I copied the agenda
(21:27:56) LambertHofstra: The link that Dominik sent has more detail on the board candidates
(21:28:40) LambertHofstra: So, I move we approve the minutes of the annual general meeting 2010-01-30
(21:28:53) BrianMcCullough: second
(21:29:04) PhilippDunkel: Opening the vote 
(21:29:25) VoteBot hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Excess Flood).
(21:29:25) VoteBot [root@mail.dunkel.org] hat den Raum betreten.
(21:29:55) DominikGeorge: don't say it crashed again ...
(21:29:55) TomasTrnka: votebot failed?
(21:29:55) GuillaumeRomagny: vote is not opened
(21:30:02) KurtAlbershardt: VoteBot is single threaded?
(21:30:05) LambertHofstra: Philipp, it seems your votebot has trouble keeping up
(21:30:10) PhilippDunkel: Hold
(21:30:53) VoteBot hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Remote host closed the connection).
(21:30:54) VoteBot [root@dunkel.org] hat den Raum betreten.
(21:31:46) KurtAlbershardt: mybe wait for ACKs before voting?
(21:32:13) PhilippDunkel: OK
(21:32:40) GuillaumeRomagny: PhilippD : thanks for handling the voting system
(21:33:18) PhilippDunkel: Ok if you were among the first to vote, please vote again just to make sure
(21:33:24) ***NickBebout needs to disable flood protection
(21:33:28) ***NickBebout looks to see how
(21:33:32) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(21:34:08) DominikGeorge: NickBebout: giving OP to VoteBot should do the trick
(21:34:12) MatthiasSubik: can somebody voice me in the vote?
(21:34:14) PhilippDunkel: CLosing vote !
(21:34:15) DominikGeorge: ChanServ normally does not flood-protect Ops
(21:34:19) PhilippDunkel: Yes 
(21:34:37) NickBebout: it was not chanserv, it was the ircd itself
(21:34:40) NickBebout: but i'll op it anyway
(21:34:52) PhilippDunkel: Mathias please vote
(21:34:54) DominikGeorge: oh ok sorry NB, didn't see that ;)
(21:35:25) #agm: Modus (+v VoteBot) von NickBebout
(21:35:33) NickBebout: oh, it couldn't talk in here to give us the results :(
(21:35:34) PhilippDunkel: VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(21:35:34) PhilippDunkel: [21:35] VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 8 votes.
(21:35:34) PhilippDunkel: [21:35] VoteBot:     NAYE had 0 votes.
(21:35:34) PhilippDunkel: [21:35] VoteBot:     AYE had 25 votes.
(21:35:41) LambertHofstra: I declare it carried
(21:35:59) LambertHofstra: Next item,. the AGM report
(21:36:18) ***DominikGeorge missed the link to the report
(21:36:20) LambertHofstra: We can either vote for the elements, or vote for the complete report
(21:36:31) NickBebout: i move we approve the report
(21:36:36) TomasTrnka: seconded
(21:36:39) LambertHofstra: second
(21:36:39) NickBebout: (the complete report)
(21:36:40) PhilippDunkel: thirded
(21:36:45) DominikGeorge: NickBebout, can you point me to it again?
(21:36:47) WernerDworak: indeed
(21:37:20) ***NickBebout looks for the link
(21:37:30) WytzevanderRaay: does the "complete" report include the financial report??
(21:37:58) LambertHofstra: Ok, Philipp, can we vote on: Approve  the  Report of the Committee on the activities during the financial year July 2009 to June 2010
(21:38:00) GuillaumeRomagny: I second Wytze
(21:38:13) ***DominikGeorge thinks at least community report and board report should be seperated
(21:38:21) DominikGeorge: team/member reports could as well be counted as one
(21:38:35) MatthiasSubik: how many documents are there?
(21:38:55) PhilippDunkel: Lambert, not really, since it has not yet been presented, and the Question by Wytze has not been answeref
(21:39:23) AlexanderPrinsier: http://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/TeamReports/2010
(21:39:28) AlexanderPrinsier: http://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/MembersReports/2010
(21:39:32) AlexanderPrinsier: http://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/BoardReport/2010
(21:39:37) AlexanderPrinsier: http://wiki.cacert.org/AGM/FinancialReport/2010
(21:39:41) DominikGeorge: oh, no fancy PDF report this year ;) ?
(21:40:06) AlexanderPrinsier: there is one, but since we seem to be handling things separately I thought the wiki URL would be easier :)
(21:40:06) GuillaumeRomagny: Dominik : Sorry Teus left the association board
(21:40:20) NickBebout: my motion i was intending to include all the reports without the finanical report
(21:40:24) MatthiasSubik: can we vote on each report, since there are four documents presented by alexander?
(21:40:25) NickBebout: a separate vote on the financial report
(21:40:32) ***DominikGeorge seconds NickBebout
(21:40:32) u60: given that it is incomplete and it got announced 5 mins after the meeting started ...
(21:40:52) WytzevanderRaay: seconds UlrichSchroeter
(21:41:04) GuillaumeRomagny: seconds UlrichSchroeter
(21:41:06) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, important thing is we all got our own cats ;)
(21:41:11) KurtAlbershardt: So we have two motions on the table, and nobody has called the question?
(21:41:15) LambertHofstra: Ok, I move we vote on the team reports, the member reports, the board report, and the diary, and then have a second vote on the finance report
(21:41:20) MarioLipinski: There is a fancy PDF report, but since time is short, it does not have the latest info
(21:41:36) AlexanderPrinsier: LambertHofstra: second that
(21:41:38) TomasTrnka: second Lambert
(21:41:53) KurtAlbershardt: I believe someone needs to withdraw the first motion
(21:42:05) GuillaumeRomagny: note : I won't be able to split Daniel vote
(21:42:10) LambertHofstra: I withdraw my first motion, because it was not clear to everyone
(21:42:12) NickBebout: I withdraw my motion
(21:42:14) KurtAlbershardt: thank you
(21:42:25) NickBebout: I second lambert's motion
(21:42:28) GuillaumeRomagny: note : I will vote the same for the 2 parts
(21:42:29) KurtAlbershardt: (just trying to keep up)
(21:42:31) NickBebout: <LambertHofstra> Ok, I move we vote on the team reports, the member reports, the board report, and the diary, and then have a second vote on the finance report
(21:42:46) KurtAlbershardt: second
(21:42:48) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, if he gave you one vote for all, casting two identical votes on the parts should be fine?
(21:42:54) DominikGeorge: second
(21:43:00) u60: second
(21:43:06) GuillaumeRomagny: Dominik : ok as I wanted to do
(21:43:36) LambertHofstra: Then Philipp, can you open the votes  for the team reports, the member reports, the board report, and the diary?
(21:43:41) PhilippDunkel: OK
(21:44:04) LambertHofstra: Please all vote
(21:44:11) KurtAlbershardt: this looks like a vote on all four - or is it a vote to separate into four votes?
(21:44:25) LambertHofstra: No, vote for all four
(21:44:37) KurtAlbershardt: ok
(21:44:54) DominikGeorge: KurtAlbershardt, but board report != financial report!
(21:44:56) LambertHofstra: Actually there is not much to vote. Most of it has been created by members and is just what it is
(21:45:21) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(21:45:53) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(21:45:53) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 1 votes.
(21:45:55) VoteBot:     NAYE had 1 votes.
(21:45:55) VoteBot:     AYE had 31 votes.
(21:46:07) LambertHofstra: Ok, I declare it carried
(21:46:20) LambertHofstra: Next on the agenda is the Financial report
(21:46:32) KurtAlbershardt: discussion?
(21:46:42) u60: what is the content ?
(21:46:44) LambertHofstra: This is a bit of an issue: so here is some background, explaining why it came this late
(21:46:46) GuillaumeRomagny: I have comment 
(21:47:01) LambertHofstra: Pleaee let me explain, and I'll open up the discussion
(21:47:13) KurtAlbershardt: please do
(21:47:28) GuillaumeRomagny: From Daniel and I :
(21:47:37) LambertHofstra: Due to personal circumstances of the sole signatory we lost access to our bank
(21:47:40) GuillaumeRomagny: there is 6 months of activty not documented.
(21:47:40) GuillaumeRomagny: Please make seasons - summer/winter refer to actual time periods rather than 
(21:47:40) GuillaumeRomagny: seasons that read differently depending on the hemisphere of the reader/writer.
(21:47:54) LambertHofstra: and have Guillaume, I will open up later
(21:47:55) GuillaumeRomagny: (sorry Lambert)
(21:47:58) KurtAlbershardt: good point
(21:48:22) LambertHofstra: We've worked hard to ghet access back, and are now in the final stages
(21:49:00) LambertHofstra: as a result we did not have all the details of bank transactions (specifically transactions from february 2010 to June 2010
(21:49:05) LambertHofstra: )
(21:49:45) LambertHofstra: we do have the current balance, and have worked to reconstruct the transactions that took place in FY 2009/2010 (so from february 2010 to June 2010)
(21:50:10) KurtAlbershardt: how much of that reconstruction (if any) is represented in the report?
(21:50:12) LambertHofstra: The report therefore took us a bit longer than normally required
(21:50:23) LambertHofstra: .
(21:50:46) WytzevanderRaay: according to the report the balance of the Australian accounts shown is NOT current, but per 29.01.2010
(21:50:48) LambertHofstra: We've entered all the data in teh report, and published a summary
(21:51:10) KurtAlbershardt: Is there any discrepancy over, say, $200?  Or is there a more appropriate threshold?  I'm just curious if anything significant is not visible in the report.
(21:51:31) LambertHofstra: Wytze, correct. I expect to regain access next week, or the week after. It's now at the legal department of our bank
(21:52:04) LambertHofstra: Kurt, our calculations show it should be less than $200 difference
(21:52:09) KurtAlbershardt: thank you
(21:52:15) WytzevanderRaay: How can we be sure that there were no transactions carried out after 29.01.2010? Or were there?
(21:52:16) LambertHofstra: However, this could change a bit due to exchange rates
(21:52:37) AlexanderPrinsier: WytzevanderRaay: the transactions to the bank accounts are booked until 29/1/2010. However, we know other expenses were made, and those were booked as liability (debt). So the report shows it as if we have been collecting bills, and not paying them.
(21:52:41) KurtAlbershardt: I'm just trying to be sure there isn't something for $$$$ which is not shown
(21:52:48) GuillaumeRomagny: Comments from Daniel and I :
(21:52:48) GuillaumeRomagny: there is 6 months of activty not documented.
(21:52:48) GuillaumeRomagny: Please make seasons - summer/winter refer to actual time periods rather than 
(21:52:48) GuillaumeRomagny: seasons that read differently depending on the hemisphere of the reader/writer.
(21:52:49) LambertHofstra: Wytze: because of the current value on the bank
(21:52:58) GuillaumeRomagny: Comments from me :
(21:52:58) GuillaumeRomagny: Why the AGM is always after 7-8 month, why not within 6 month, as asked from law.
(21:52:58) GuillaumeRomagny: Sorry, but nobody could present something like this, with the bank-balance as at Jan 2010
(21:52:58) GuillaumeRomagny: If you will "construct" something without a statement - and you know the balance at the bank as at 30-Jun 2010, you must follow some logic, and you have consider things right.
(21:52:58) GuillaumeRomagny: *Open liabilities
(21:52:58) GuillaumeRomagny: Something is there strange ... Why is there 6 month hosting was open - but this amount is not 6 month hosting
(21:53:00) GuillaumeRomagny: Hosting-cost
(21:53:00) GuillaumeRomagny: Mhh - seems only 6 month as costs - where are the the other six month ?
(21:53:41) LambertHofstra: Guillaume, I will try to answer question by question.
(21:53:56) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert ok
(21:53:56) MatthiasSubik: can we have one question after another? 
(21:54:03) LambertHofstra: 6 months not documented: we documented up to June 2010
(21:54:07) MatthiasSubik: it is hard to read when pushed to the channel
(21:54:09) LambertHofstra: What is missing?
(21:54:25) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : from June to now
(21:54:34) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : what has happened ?
(21:54:39) LambertHofstra: From june to now should not be in the report.
(21:54:50) LambertHofstra: The finance report is from July 2009 to June 2010
(21:54:52) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : whatever, we paid travel fees
(21:55:18) LambertHofstra: Guillaume: is this a question?
(21:55:29) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : the finance report should be one full year
(21:55:41) NickBebout: GuillaumeRomagny, the committee received approval from the director-general of fair trading to have the AGM before the end of february
(21:55:42) NickBebout: that is why
(21:55:54) NickBebout: therefore it is within the law
(21:56:04) LambertHofstra: Guillaume: correct: it follows our financial year: July 1st, 2009 to June 30, 2010
(21:56:09) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : so we have an overview of what has happened between June 2010 and now
(21:56:11) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, CAcerts businness year is July to June
(21:56:32) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, it is just not the topic of this meeting. This meeting covers July 2009 - June 2010.
(21:56:43) KurtAlbershardt: so if I'm reading this right, there are additional unknowns after June 2010 but this report (which we are being asked to approve) does not address or endorse those? 
(21:56:49) LambertHofstra: We included an overview, because the members would like to know, but it is not part of the finance report of FY 2009/2010
(21:56:54) NickBebout: KurtAlbershardt, true
(21:56:57) KurtAlbershardt: ok
(21:57:00) GuillaumeRomagny: Dominik : so we are blind from June 2010 to now
(21:57:07) WytzevanderRaay: Can you please explain why Internet hosting services (6351) are only 50% of the amount charged in the previous fiscal year?
(21:57:21) LambertHofstra: Guilaume: no, it's not in this report, and should not be in this report
(21:57:25) GuillaumeRomagny: I seconds Wytze
(21:57:30) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, we arent, you can ask the board for data from that period, but this meeting does not cover it explicitly
(21:57:37) dirkastrath: @wytze when were the servers moved to the other datacenter?
(21:57:56) MarioLipinski: WytzevanderRaay: Just a guess but I think it is caused by hosting being invoiced irregulary.
(21:57:58) LambertHofstra: Wytze, keep that question, I want to answer all in sequesncer
(21:58:05) LambertHofstra: Next question is: Why the AGM is always after 7-8 month, why not within 6 month, as asked from law.
(21:58:38) LambertHofstra: It should be within 6 months, however, we asked the OFT for a delay, because of our bank access issues
(21:58:42) LambertHofstra: This was approved
(21:58:52) LambertHofstra: We have another month to send it in
(21:59:03) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : it is the second time we request a delay
(21:59:07) WytzevanderRaay: MarioLipinski: could be, but the CAcert treasurer should take care of that in the books by allocating the charges to the appropriate fiscal year
(21:59:14) KurtAlbershardt: so do we have a current balance on the account?
(21:59:20) LambertHofstra: BNext question: Something is there strange ... Why is there 6 month hosting was open - but this amount is not 6 month hosting
(21:59:24) LambertHofstra: Guilaume: please explain?
(21:59:49) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : it is the same question Wytze asked ?
(22:00:03) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : why a dropped in hosting expenses ?
(22:00:09) GuillaumeRomagny: s/dropped/drop
(22:00:31) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : because we increased the hosting ?
(22:00:38) LambertHofstra: We can ask Oophaga for details, but thi is based on the invoice from Oophaga.
(22:00:42) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : has all hosting been paid  ?
(22:00:52) LambertHofstra: One thing is clear: power costs were a lot lower
(22:01:26) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert, Wyzte : the new servers are less power consuming ?
(22:01:26) LambertHofstra: Next question: Lambert : from June to now
(22:01:26) LambertHofstra: (09:54:39 PM) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : what has happened ?
(22:01:35) LambertHofstra: Is not in the report
(22:02:02) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : I blame the board for this
(22:02:10) LambertHofstra: (09:57:13 PM) WytzevanderRaay: Can you please explain why Internet hosting services (6351) are only 50% of the amount charged in the previous fiscal year?
(22:02:41) LambertHofstra: Wytze: This is based on the invoices we received from Oophaga
(22:03:00) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : we could be bankrupt currently without knowing !!!
(22:03:04) WytzevanderRaay: Have those invoices been booked correctly? I mean:
(22:03:22) LambertHofstra: (09:59:19 PM) KurtAlbershardt: so do we have a current balance on the account?
(22:03:24) AlexanderPrinsier: WytzevanderRaay: Booked as expense for this finance report are Q3+Q4 of 2009 + Q1+Q2 of 2010
(22:03:35) LambertHofstra: Yes
(22:03:53) AlexanderPrinsier: In the liability part you can still see the Q1+Q2 of 2009, because the payment of this invoice was done after 29/1/2010
(22:03:53) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : the Board cannot ask for a vote, which will not include the whole year
(22:03:54) LambertHofstra: (10:00:47 PM) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : has all hosting been paid  ?
(22:03:55) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, look at the expected balance .... certainly not all that could have gone to hosting behind the scenes, right ;) ?
(22:04:01) WytzevanderRaay: AlexanderPrinsier: that sounds right, so how can there be such a big difference with last year?
(22:04:08) KurtAlbershardt: and the bank (to which we apparently do not have access) gave us that?
(22:04:40) LambertHofstra: Guillaume: we received the invoice over 2010 less than a month ago. So no, it has not been paid
(22:04:45) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : you cannot do the financial report if you don't disclose the bank account balance up to now
(22:04:57) NickBebout: GuillaumeRomagny, yes we can
(22:04:58) KurtAlbershardt: agreed
(22:05:04) NickBebout: this meeting only goes through the end of the financial year
(22:05:06) LambertHofstra: (10:02:08 PM) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : I blame the board for this
(22:05:09) MarioLipinski: Who cares about now? Or is now 30th of June 2010?
(22:05:16) LambertHofstra: I'm not sure what you mean
(22:05:27) GuillaumeRomagny: MArio : we can be bankrupt now
(22:05:27) LambertHofstra: (10:03:05 PM) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : we could be bankrupt currently without knowing !!!
(22:05:57) LambertHofstra: No. Absolutely not. We still have enough for 5 years of hosting, and no further big liabilities
(22:05:58) KurtAlbershardt: If we know the current balance, and we have accounting for the period since 201006, we can work backward
(22:06:06) MarioLipinski: Even if we just used the funds we currently have access to we could pay all open liabilities until today I would estimate.
(22:06:15) LambertHofstra: (10:03:59 PM) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : the Board cannot ask for a vote, which will not include the whole year
(22:06:18) ***NickBebout moves that the chair now call a vote on the question before the meeting.
(22:06:28) KurtAlbershardt: just trying to clear up if there is anything amiss in the 'dark period'
(22:06:30) LambertHofstra: Guillaume: it includes a full year, as mentioned a few times now
(22:06:47) MatthiasSubik: second nickBebout
(22:07:01) KurtAlbershardt: please repeat the question
(22:07:08) NickBebout: KurtAlbershardt, to approve the financial report
(22:07:12) KurtAlbershardt: thank you
(22:07:18) PhilippDunkel: A VOTE HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED
(22:07:19) ***DominikGeorge moves to have Guillaume write "Our year ends in June." 100 times.
(22:07:21) LambertHofstra: Are there any further questions (not just remarks)?
(22:07:40) ***PhilippDunkel seconds DG
(22:07:46) LambertHofstra: Then I'd like to open the voting
(22:07:53) GuillaumeRomagny: yes
(22:08:08) MatthiasSubik: I would like to second DG, but I doubt it is valid without arbitration ;)
(22:08:11) GuillaumeRomagny: why we could say, they will have access for funds - which will cover 5 year hosting
(22:08:11) GuillaumeRomagny: not true - paypal is not enough
(22:08:48) LambertHofstra: Last remark: current balance on the bank is over 10K, we'll have acces again in one or two weeks
(22:08:59) LambertHofstra: So we have enough for 5 year
(22:09:19) DominikGeorge: What about caring about what we *know* right now and look at the rest in some board meeting or, should that be necessary, an SGM once we have access again and can let alone those speculations?
(22:09:24) KurtAlbershardt: for the record, I'm not doubting the report, I just don't have enough information at this point to approve it from where I sit.
(22:09:25) LambertHofstra: Voting has started
(22:09:42) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:09:43) WytzevanderRaay: KurtAlbershardt: I agree
(22:09:45) KurtAlbershardt: yes, I abstained for the reson just stated
(22:09:46) #agm: Modus (+v FrancoisMarier) von MarioLipinski
(22:10:17) PhilippDunkel: Closing Vote
(22:10:23) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:10:23) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 7 votes.
(22:10:25) VoteBot:     NAYE had 8 votes.
(22:10:25) VoteBot:     AYE had 14 votes.
(22:10:50) LambertHofstra: Ok, 14 votes aye, 8 votes naye, I declare it carried
(22:11:13) GuillaumeRomagny: Lambert : you are in a bad shape with the OFT
(22:11:22) KurtAlbershardt: OFT?
(22:11:23) MatthiasSubik: I would say we can meet up in an SGM when the numbers are complete, right?
(22:11:27) DominikGeorge: OFT?
(22:11:33) LambertHofstra: Next is the voting for board candidates
(22:11:34) PhilippDunkel: Office of Fair Trading
(22:11:35) NickBebout: office of free trading i think he means
(22:11:38) NickBebout: or fair
(22:11:39) KurtAlbershardt: ah, OK thanks
(22:11:45) LambertHofstra: Yes
(22:11:46) GuillaumeRomagny: I second MAtthias
(22:11:56) LambertHofstra: We still have a few things to do, we still have 4 weeks
(22:12:10) DominikGeorge: second matthias
(22:12:12) LambertHofstra: Now, for board candidates
(22:12:28) GuyScharinger:     question in the future will we be protected  against loss of access to bank account?
(22:12:33) LambertHofstra: Matthias, are you calling for a vote?
(22:12:33) PhilippDunkel: Can you explain the Election Mode!
(22:12:56) NickBebout: will the election be like normal? aye and naye for each person and highest vote-getters win
(22:12:57) NickBebout: ?
(22:13:03) LambertHofstra: Or is this a suggestion to the future board?
(22:13:05) PhilippDunkel: @GuyScharinger only if we find people that don't run away
(22:13:10) MatthiasSubik: I will call for an SGM when the time comes ... I don't think it needs a vote. 
(22:13:13) MarioLipinski: GuyScharinger: we have some plans to prevent this.
(22:13:18) DominikGeorge: LambertHofstra, if he isn't, I am
(22:13:18) #agm: Modus (+v PhilippGuehring) von MarioLipinski
(22:13:22) TomasTrnka: Shouldn't we do Ian's subcommitee resolution first? It can influence the elections...
(22:13:30) DominikGeorge: MatthiasSubik, ok
(22:13:40) GuillaumeRomagny: Guy is reliable 
(22:13:42) ***DominikGeorge seoncds TomasTrnka 
(22:14:03) LambertHofstra: PLease all: I'll summarize
(22:14:10) ***JoostSteijlen seconds TomasTrnka
(22:14:11) LambertHofstra: We have a motion to call fior a SGM
(22:14:12) MarioLipinski: I am not sure how this should influence the board votes...
(22:14:31) LambertHofstra: Ans we have a motion to first ask for the proposal of Ian
(22:14:44) ***NickBebout objects to a motion to call for a SGM: 1) It is not on the agenda, 2) An AGM does not have the power to call an SGM
(22:14:49) MarioLipinski: As Ians resolution requires a member who gets elected right now to resign...
(22:14:55) PhilippDunkel: An SGM does not need a Motian at the AGM
(22:14:59) DominikGeorge: NickBebout, it has long been dropped ...
(22:15:12) PhilippDunkel: It get's called by a number of members and EndOfStory
(22:15:18) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, agreed
(22:15:21) PhilippDunkel: This does not need to be dealt with now
(22:15:28) NickBebout: or an SGM may be called by resolution of the committee
(22:15:39) LambertHofstra: Matthias, Dominik: I think both Nick and Philipp are right, we cannot ask for a SGM
(22:15:45) PhilippDunkel: @NB: Right
(22:15:49) LambertHofstra: but you can ask for it outside the meeting
(22:16:01) DominikGeorge: LambertHofstra, we got that
(22:16:07) MatthiasSubik: that's what I thought.
(22:16:09) DominikGeorge: Still we have a motions to change the order of the agenda
(22:16:10) TomasTrnka: Mario, I think eventual failure of that resolution could shift the preferences towads AU candidates to stay compliant...
(22:16:10) LambertHofstra: Second question is the change of voting for members and for Ian's proposal
(22:16:20) MatthiasSubik: I just wanted to reflect my intention ...
(22:16:32) LambertHofstra: I asked if the agenda was OK, and nobody replied at that time
(22:16:42) LambertHofstra: So I'd like to stick to the current sequence
(22:16:59) MatthiasSubik: seconds lambert ... we have an agenda.
(22:17:05) TomasTrnka: oK Lambert, sorry, I missed that, I thought we usually do elections last...
(22:17:10) MatthiasSubik: (I know, I it wasn't a motion)
(22:17:37) LambertHofstra: Now, as Nick asked: we vote per person. Aye is a yes, and number of aye's count
(22:17:52) LambertHofstra: Naye, Abstain, or Novote are all treated identical
(22:18:01) LambertHofstra: In the end the higest number of votes counts
(22:18:11) LambertHofstra: Questions regarding this voting system?
(22:18:18) MatthiasSubik: Lambert, please give the last list of accepted nominations ...
(22:18:20) NickBebout: please give us a complete list of candidates
(22:18:29) NickBebout: (accepted that is)
(22:18:29) LambertHofstra: Ok, one moment
(22:18:33) KurtAlbershardt: are we limited to a specific number of AYEs?
(22:18:37) NickBebout: KurtAlbershardt, no
(22:18:43) NickBebout: you could vote aye to all of them if you like
(22:18:43) KurtAlbershardt: thanks
(22:19:09) KurtAlbershardt: seems slightly wrong from a voting math standpoint, but I don't think it will cause any realworld issue
(22:19:20) MarioLipinski: OK, I have received consent from Dominik George to become a member quite recently. Rules require as of my interpretation this to be sent 7 days in advance. Should he be considered as candidate?
(22:19:40) NickBebout: MarioLipinski, which rule requires this?
(22:19:54) MarioLipinski: rule 16 (1)
(22:20:00) MarioLipinski: must be made in writing or by digitally signed email, signed
(22:20:01) MarioLipinski: by 2 members of the association and accompanied by the
(22:20:01) MarioLipinski: written or digitally signed email consent of the candidate
(22:20:01) MarioLipinski: (which may be endorsed on the form of the nomination),
(22:20:04) PhilippDunkel: @Mario: No the candidates can be nominated at any time
(22:20:05) KurtAlbershardt: and can we vote around that rule, or is there a bylaw issue?
(22:20:10) TomasTrnka: I don't think this should be a problem...
(22:20:13) MarioLipinski: devlivered 7 days before meeitng.
(22:20:16) NickBebout: oh
(22:20:31) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, according to the rules i don't believe they can?
(22:20:50) NickBebout: At SGM's to remove directors they can
(22:20:50) TomasTrnka: so let's motion to override that and consider Dominik?
(22:20:56) NickBebout: because you are filling vacancies
(22:21:06) KurtAlbershardt: seconded
(22:21:16) MarioLipinski: If less than 7 (number of seats) members are nominated, nominations of candidates can be done during the meeting.
(22:21:23) PhilippDunkel: Give me a second please
(22:21:40) ***NickBebout would have to say (although I'd like to vote for Dominik), that he being elected to the committee would be invalid
(22:21:44) NickBebout: because of the rules
(22:22:15) TomasTrnka: Oh, IANAL...
(22:22:16) LambertHofstra: The following persons are candidate:
(22:22:19) LambertHofstra: Lambert Hofstra
(22:22:19) LambertHofstra: Mario Lipinski
(22:22:19) LambertHofstra: Ian Grigg  (AU)
(22:22:19) LambertHofstra: Peter Yuill (AU)
(22:22:19) LambertHofstra: Guillaume Romagny
(22:22:20) LambertHofstra: Guy Scharinger
(22:22:20) LambertHofstra: Dirk Astrath
(22:22:22) LambertHofstra: Piers Lauder  (AU)
(22:22:22) LambertHofstra: Alexander Prinsier
(22:22:26) PhilippDunkel: I am trying to reconstruct. We did some rule changes last time. And I think that was one of them,
(22:22:53) LambertHofstra: I'd like to piont out that according to the new rules of the NSW OFT we HAVE to have 3 AU persons in the board
(22:23:00) MatthiasSubik: Does have somebody the correct dates, when Dominik was nominated and seconded?
(22:23:10) KurtAlbershardt: can I get clarification on the (AU) - does this mean that if someone does not have an (AU) after their name they are not located in AU?
(22:23:22) LambertHofstra: Kurt: correct
(22:23:45) KurtAlbershardt: and the FTwhatever requires how many AU members in order keep us valid?
(22:23:48) LambertHofstra: So you might want to consider this when you vote
(22:23:49) GuillaumeRomagny: Gary & I did nominate him
(22:23:52) LambertHofstra: 3
(22:23:57) KurtAlbershardt: aha
(22:24:13) MatthiasSubik: Guillaume, when was that?
(22:24:29) LambertHofstra: (Ian's proposal is a way to address it, but we don't know whether it will pass)
(22:24:33) GuillaumeRomagny: hum let me see
(22:24:35) MarioLipinski: I think nominations have been received in time.
(22:24:41) PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume: That is what Mario said. But his consent was not received until 2 days ago
(22:25:03) LambertHofstra: PD: correct
(22:25:03) MatthiasSubik: Mario, Philipp does the rule say nomination or consent?
(22:25:16) PhilippDunkel: @Lambert: WHih is why I donÄt understand why you disagree with doing that first
(22:25:24) MatthiasSubik: since his nomination was known in time?
(22:25:24) NickBebout: MatthiasSubik, nominations include consent
(22:25:24) GuillaumeRomagny: *
(22:25:38) GuillaumeRomagny: We nominated Dominik on Feb 20th 2011
(22:25:40) NickBebout: MatthiasSubik, ....and accompanied by the
(22:25:40) NickBebout: written or digitally signed email consent of the candidate
(22:25:50) dirkastrath: @GR at which time?
(22:25:51) LambertHofstra: Both nomination and consent
(22:25:53) MatthiasSubik: thx @ nick.
(22:26:00) MatthiasSubik: thx lambert.
(22:26:01) LambertHofstra: 7 days before
(22:26:25) KurtAlbershardt: so no issue, or a problem?
(22:26:47) MatthiasSubik: can I call a motion to accept him still, since only the consent was late, or would that outside the rules?
(22:26:49) GuillaumeRomagny: if was later than 23.00
(22:26:53) LambertHofstra: At this point the rules do not allow for Dominik to be candidate
(22:27:01) GuillaumeRomagny: it was at 23.00 for me
(22:27:05) PhilippDunkel: Ok, I have checked what I can find: AS far as I can tell Rule 16 has not been changed. Therefore unless The consent was received by last Sunday the nomination was not on time
(22:27:08) GuillaumeRomagny: a bit later for Gary
(22:27:15) PhilippDunkel: Mario. When was the consent received?
(22:27:46) ***NickBebout wishes we could vote to let him be a candidate, but i don't really see how
(22:27:59) MichaelTaenzer: I propose to vote whether Dominik is accepted as candidate
(22:27:59) LambertHofstra: nb: agree
(22:28:02) ***PhilippDunkel seconds NB thoughts
(22:28:08) GuillaumeRomagny: The problem is Dominik declined
(22:28:17) TomasTrnka: PD, thanks, that's it...Too bad for Domininik, but we can't ignore the rules
(22:28:24) MarioLipinski: 2011-02-26 07:50 PST
(22:28:25) WernerDworak: Why not just vote if Dominik is aggreed as acandidate?
(22:28:33) LambertHofstra: Ok, please see the candidates:
(22:28:33) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, could the meeting vote to interpret that rule as meaning that the nomination has to be in before 7 days but that the consent just has to be received before the meeting?
(22:28:33) TomasTrnka: GR, what?
(22:28:34) GuillaumeRomagny: But Dominik change his mind now
(22:28:34) LambertHofstra: Lambert Hofstra
(22:28:34) LambertHofstra: Mario Lipinski
(22:28:34) LambertHofstra: Ian Grigg  (AU)
(22:28:34) LambertHofstra: Peter Yuill (AU)
(22:28:34) LambertHofstra: Guillaume Romagny
(22:28:36) LambertHofstra: Guy Scharinger
(22:28:36) LambertHofstra: Dirk Astrath
(22:28:38) LambertHofstra: Piers Lauder  (AU)
(22:28:38) LambertHofstra: Alexander Prinsier
(22:28:48) TomasTrnka: Oh...
(22:28:52) ***NickBebout doubts we could
(22:28:57) PhilippDunkel: @Nick 
(22:29:13) PhilippDunkel: yes we could, but I donÄt think we do. I for one don't interpret it that way
(22:29:20) TomasTrnka: yeah, let's not try to pretend there are no rules...
(22:29:22) MatthiasSubik: Yeah, I think the train has left the station ...
(22:29:32) PhilippDunkel: If we did vote such, we'd be going places where we should fear to tread
(22:29:46) LambertHofstra: Ok, then I'd like to call for a vote on Lambert Hofstra
(22:29:51) PhilippDunkel: OK
(22:30:10) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, true.  i agree
(22:30:21) KurtAlbershardt: someone could easily challenge this with the OFT I think if we did
(22:31:38) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:32:10) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:32:10) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 3 votes.
(22:32:13) VoteBot:     NAYE had 0 votes.
(22:32:13) VoteBot:     AYE had 32 votes.
(22:32:41) PhilippDunkel: Next is Mario Lipinski
(22:32:43) LambertHofstra: Ok, I'd like to call for a vote on Mario Lipinski
(22:34:25) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:34:58) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:34:58) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 2 votes.
(22:34:59) VoteBot:     NAYE had 1 votes.
(22:34:59) VoteBot:     AYE had 32 votes.
(22:35:10) LambertHofstra: Ok, I'd like to call for a vote for Ian Grigg (AU)
(22:37:06) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:37:37) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:37:37) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 5 votes.
(22:37:37) VoteBot:     NAYE had 6 votes.
(22:37:37) VoteBot:     AYE had 22 votes.
(22:37:44) LambertHofstra: Ok, I'd like to call for a vote on Peter Yuill (AU)
(22:37:58) WernerDworak: aye
(22:38:12) KurtAlbershardt: don't know if the votebot is in or not
(22:38:24) AlexanderPrinsier: KurtAlbershardt: votebot announces it when it starts
(22:38:25) LambertHofstra: Sorry guys, votebot wasn't started yet
(22:38:39) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:38:41) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 0 votes.
(22:38:41) VoteBot:     NAYE had 0 votes.
(22:38:43) VoteBot:     AYE had 0 votes.
(22:39:08) PhilippDunkel: forget this
(22:39:16) PhilippDunkel: i restarted
(22:39:36) PhilippDunkel: A minute left on Peter Yuill
(22:40:30) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:40:52) KurtAlbershardt: need a filter for the status messages in the votebot script I think
(22:41:04) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:41:04) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 0 votes.
(22:41:05) VoteBot:     NAYE had 0 votes.
(22:41:05) VoteBot:     AYE had 33 votes.
(22:41:06) ***DominikGeorge has 63 seconds lateny on his GPRS line.
(22:41:16) DominikGeorge: Hope it will not affect my votes
(22:41:18) AlexanderPrinsier: impressive result
(22:41:27) MatthiasSubik: indeed.
(22:41:37) LambertHofstra:  Ok, I'd like to call for a vote on Guillaume Romagny
(22:41:54) MatthiasSubik: unfortunately i can't gratulate him here ...
(22:43:31) KurtAlbershardt: bot?
(22:43:55) PhilippDunkel: Yes
(22:44:00) PhilippDunkel: We have 10 seconds
(22:44:07) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:44:07) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 5 votes.
(22:44:09) VoteBot:     NAYE had 17 votes.
(22:44:09) VoteBot:     AYE had 9 votes.
(22:44:26) LambertHofstra: Ok, I'd like to call for a vote on Guy Scharinger
(22:46:07) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:46:38) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:46:38) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 13 votes.
(22:46:39) VoteBot:     NAYE had 6 votes.
(22:46:39) VoteBot:     AYE had 13 votes.
(22:46:47) LambertHofstra: Ok, I'd like to call for a vote on Dirk Astrath
(22:48:32) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:49:04) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:49:04) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 4 votes.
(22:49:05) VoteBot:     NAYE had 3 votes.
(22:49:05) VoteBot:     AYE had 27 votes.
(22:49:18) LambertHofstra: Ok, I'd like to call for a vote on Piers Lauder  (AU)
(22:49:42) MarioLipinski: GuillaumeRomagny: please make sure you cast your votes for proxies as directed (if i saw this right you already corrected it)
(22:50:56) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:51:35) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:51:35) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 2 votes.
(22:51:35) VoteBot:     NAYE had 0 votes.
(22:51:37) VoteBot:     AYE had 30 votes.
(22:51:50) LambertHofstra: Ok, I'd like to call for a vote on Alexander Prinsier
(22:53:51) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(22:54:01) PhilippGuehring: aye
(22:54:15) PhilippDunkel: PG: Please vote in #vote
(22:54:20) NickBebout: phillipguehring, #vote please
(22:54:23) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(22:54:23) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 8 votes.
(22:54:25) VoteBot:     NAYE had 3 votes.
(22:54:25) VoteBot:     AYE had 22 votes.
(22:54:42) PhilippDunkel: 33 Peter Yuill (AU)
(22:54:42) PhilippDunkel: 32 Lambert Hofstra
(22:54:43) PhilippDunkel: 32 Mario Lipinski
(22:54:43) PhilippDunkel: 30 Piers Lauder  (AU)
(22:54:43) PhilippDunkel: 27 Dirk Astrath
(22:54:44) PhilippDunkel: 22 Ian Grigg  (AU)
(22:54:44) PhilippDunkel: 22 Alexander Prinsier
(22:54:45) PhilippDunkel: 13 Guy Scharinger
(22:54:45) PhilippDunkel: 9  Guillaume Romagny
(22:55:02) LambertHofstra: Thanks for the summary, I was just counting :-)
(22:55:03) DominikGeorge: my dream board ;)
(22:55:12) TomasTrnka: great :)
(22:55:15) NickBebout: :(
(22:55:19) NickBebout: not great
(22:55:25) NickBebout: but oh well, that wasthe vote
(22:55:27) GuillaumeRomagny: Dominil : the board of CAcert collapse !
(22:55:27) WernerDworak: excellent!
(22:55:30) PhilippDunkel: Where is the cut off?
(22:55:38) LambertHofstra: Next topic is Ian's proposal
(22:55:41) AlexanderPrinsier: PhilippDunkel: we need the top 7
(22:55:46) PhilippDunkel: How many board members are we electing
(22:55:49) DominikGeorge: Who's Dominil? Is he entitled to vote :o ?
(22:55:57) LambertHofstra: 7, so Peter to Alexander
(22:56:03) NickBebout: Dominik i think he meant :)
(22:56:25) KurtAlbershardt: no comments, but I am most interested in how this org (or a recreated one) is going to move forward as I greatly value the existence of an alternative to the current model of security by large multinational corporations  
(22:56:25) GuillaumeRomagny: Dominik I meant
(22:56:35) LambertHofstra:  * Receiving and considering the statement which is required to be
(22:56:35) LambertHofstra:     submitted to members under section 26(6) of the act.
(22:56:42) PhilippDunkel: Congratulations Peter Yuill, Lambert Hofstra, Mario Lipinski, Piers Lauder, Dirk Astrath, Ian Grigg, Alexander Prinsier
(22:57:09) GuillaumeRomagny: And thanks to all Ian puppets
(22:57:43) LambertHofstra: I think this refers to http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/sessionalview/sessional/act/2009-7.pdf
(22:57:50) MatthiasSubik: Guillaume, was that a motion?
(22:57:52) PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume don't you think your comments may reflect back on you. Please contemplate the legitimacy of opinions differing from your own.
(22:57:57) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, could you stop getting insulting in here, please?
(22:58:02) GuillaumeRomagny: Matthias : yes
(22:58:18) GuillaumeRomagny: It was a thank not an insult
(22:58:21) KurtAlbershardt: Unfortunately, I've got to get to another meeting here in a few minutes.
(22:58:43) GuillaumeRomagny: But thanks to avoid me to be on the same board as Ian Grigg
(22:59:12) TomasTrnka: GR, I doubt anyone's interested in this discussion anymore, please stop...
(22:59:30) TomasTrnka: Back to the subcommitee proposal...
(22:59:41) MatthiasSubik: can we have a vote on that?
(22:59:43) ***NickBebout moves we now vote on the subcommittee proposal
(22:59:53) ***DominikGeorge moves to unvoice GuillaumeRomagny for this meeting for being insulting and troublesome
(23:00:03) DominikGeorge: oh ok, motion already open
(23:00:18) LambertHofstra: One question, regarding the current topic
(23:00:18) PhilippDunkel: Is this proposal necessary at this time ?
(23:00:31) PhilippDunkel: Please feel free to discuss
(23:00:40) NickBebout: Or, is IanGrigg willing to withdraw the motion since there are 3 AU's on the board now?
(23:00:44) LambertHofstra: The agenda item was:
(23:00:46) LambertHofstra: * Receiving and considering the statement which is required to be
(23:00:47) LambertHofstra: (10:56:40 PM) LambertHofstra:     submitted to members under section 26(6) of the act
(23:00:48) WernerDworak: I see no need for the proposal since we have 3 AU member anyway
(23:00:53) DominikGeorge: I think we do not need to discuss the subcommitte as three AUs legitimately were elected
(23:00:59) LambertHofstra: Why was this on the agenda?
(23:01:04) TomasTrnka: PD, given the average lifetime of our board members, I'd like to pass the resolution anyway to be safe
(23:01:08) dirkastrath: @pd i would say: no ... but the board has to work out a stable solution within the next months ... (IMHO)
(23:01:10) MarioLipinski: It is on the agenda, therefore it has to be voted on.
(23:01:17) PhilippDunkel: @T2: You are probably right
(23:01:20) KurtAlbershardt: does it serve a legitimate purpose for the future?
(23:01:28) MatthiasSubik: yep, I dont want to be back here, just because one AU is missing.
(23:01:38) KurtAlbershardt: my question exactly
(23:01:43) NickBebout: MarioLipinski, if no one moves the motion, it doesn't
(23:01:45) LambertHofstra: I move we vote on Ian's proposal
(23:01:49) KurtAlbershardt: second
(23:01:50) TomasTrnka: It's on the agenda so let's vote, it's not that difficult :)
(23:01:51) u60: the next time we have only 2 AU residents, we need to appoint one !
(23:01:54) NickBebout: plus, the board does not need a resolution from the members to make a subcommittee
(23:01:57) MarioLipinski: But the business has to be tabled.
(23:02:01) LambertHofstra: Philipp, the motion is:
(23:02:17) LambertHofstra:  Resolved that, in view of our international character, if the
(23:02:17) LambertHofstra:     committee finds itself needing to make adjustments to meet the
(23:02:17) LambertHofstra:     requirements of the Associations Act 2009, that we the Association
(23:02:17) LambertHofstra:     consider the following as appropriate:
(23:02:17) LambertHofstra:      (a)  that the committee appoints such members to the committee as
(23:02:18) LambertHofstra:         are needed to meet requirements, and
(23:02:18) LambertHofstra:      (b)  in the event that any members of the committee, being duly
(23:02:20) LambertHofstra:         voted in by the Association, find it necessary to resign
(23:02:20) LambertHofstra:         because of (a) above, that
(23:02:22) LambertHofstra:          i.  the committee form a single sub-committee under Rule 22,
(23:02:22) LambertHofstra:          ii. the committee appoint said resigned members who were duly
(23:02:24) LambertHofstra:            voted in by the Association to the sub-committee,
(23:02:24) LambertHofstra:          iii. the deliberations of that sub-committee be incorporated
(23:02:26) LambertHofstra:            into the deliberations of the committee, to the extent
(23:02:26) LambertHofstra:            possible under R22, and
(23:02:28) LambertHofstra:          iv.  the committees together be known as the Board, and their
(23:02:28) LambertHofstra:            members be known as Directors.
(23:02:39) dirkastrath: are there questions about this motion?
(23:02:42) KurtAlbershardt: and it has been seconded.  I call the question (mostly because I have to leave soon)
(23:02:54) PhilippDunkel: Please Vote
(23:04:19) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(23:04:53) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(23:04:53) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 6 votes.
(23:04:53) VoteBot:     NAYE had 8 votes.
(23:04:53) VoteBot:     AYE had 17 votes.
(23:05:02) LambertHofstra: Ok, I declare it carried
(23:05:08) KurtAlbershardt: close
(23:05:18) LambertHofstra: Now, for the next topic we need two votes
(23:05:34) GuillaumeRomagny: didn't pass
(23:05:41) KurtAlbershardt: hope we don't have to avail ourselves of it going forward, but I suppose it is good to have in the arsenal just in case
(23:05:41) LambertHofstra: The topic at hand is a proposal from Daniel Black. He did submit it in time to the board
(23:05:42) GuillaumeRomagny: you need 75 %
(23:06:09) PhilippDunkel: Guillaume: No, because it is not a rule change
(23:06:10) LambertHofstra: Guillaume, as it was a normal resolution, we only need 50%
(23:06:21) GuillaumeRomagny: no it is a rule change
(23:06:23) PhilippDunkel: Simply a formation of a subcommittee under current rules
(23:06:24) LambertHofstra: However, we had more than 2/3rd
(23:06:28) DominikGeorge: right
(23:06:29) GuillaumeRomagny: not a simple motion
(23:06:33) GuillaumeRomagny: we change the rules
(23:06:34) NickBebout: KurtAlbershardt, it would actually be in the arsenal even if the members didn't vote for it
(23:06:36) DominikGeorge: the current rules have a point about subcommitees
(23:06:41) KurtAlbershardt: ah
(23:06:48) NickBebout: KurtAlbershardt, forming a subcommittee is done by resolution of the commitee, not by the emmbers
(23:06:50) NickBebout: members
(23:06:56) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, it is in accord with the current rules. We jsut voted if we follow the rules or not.
(23:07:12) GuillaumeRomagny: Dominik : I strongly disagree
(23:07:15) LambertHofstra: Can we get back to Daniel's motion?
(23:07:16) DominikGeorge: GuillaumeRomagny, and found out that we do
(23:07:19) NickBebout: LambertHofstra, please present the motion from daniel
(23:07:23) PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume we simply instructed the Board on how to solve this problem if it arises, It was the simplest of motions
(23:07:25) ***DominikGeorge seconds LambertHofstra 
(23:07:27) GuillaumeRomagny: The motion has failed
(23:08:00) PhilippDunkel: @Guillaume: Please read the rules. Once you have, you will see that you are simply wrong in fact.
(23:08:06) WernerDworak: guillaume, give peace!
(23:08:07) MatthiasSubik: please present the new motion ... and Guillaume, please make your remarks when the protocol of this meeting is presented in the next AGM/SGM.
(23:08:13) LambertHofstra: I have two votes: One is whether we accept the motion. It was presented in time, however, because it was presented in August/september, it was somehow forgotten
(23:08:15) PhilippDunkel: Lambert please present the Motions
(23:08:32) MatthiasSubik: lambert please present the motions
(23:08:33) LambertHofstra: So we first need to vote whether we accept the motion (I suggest we do)
(23:08:39) LambertHofstra: Then vote on the motion itself
(23:08:43) MarioLipinski: GuillaumeRomagny: It does not really matter if the motion failed or not. If the question arises it is up to the board how to interpret the instructions from the association...
(23:08:44) KurtAlbershardt: what motion?
(23:08:51) PhilippDunkel: @Lambert: Forgetting is pur problem. The motion was on time and it therefore must be included.
(23:08:55) LambertHofstra: We cannot just vote on it since it is a special motion
(23:09:04) MarioLipinski: GuillaumeRomagny: Furthermore, this resolution was announced as Resolution (NOT special)
(23:09:12) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, agreed
(23:09:32) TomasTrnka: so move to consider Daniel's proposal
(23:09:32) PhilippDunkel: However since it is a special resolution it had an effect of announcing the AGM
(23:09:43) PhilippDunkel: Which we did not do on time for special resolutions
(23:09:45) LambertHofstra: So, do we all agree it was in time? The we can just vote for the motion
(23:09:50) PhilippDunkel: So we cannot vote on this
(23:09:54) NickBebout: I MOVE TO CONSIDER DANIEL'S PROPOSAL
(23:09:54) DominikGeorge: LambertHofstra, yes
(23:10:00) ***DominikGeorge seconds NickBebout 
(23:10:01) TomasTrnka: second Nick
(23:10:02) LambertHofstra: second
(23:10:03) GuillaumeRomagny: seconds
(23:10:13) PhilippDunkel: What we can do here is chastise the people who forgot about it and call an SGM
(23:10:30) DominikGeorge: PhilippDunkel, Waht we can do is follow the voice of the community and start a vote
(23:10:32) MarioLipinski: what does considering mean for us? I left it intentionally open when writing it down...
(23:10:34) PhilippDunkel: @NickBebout: Even if that passes, we can consider it, but never actuially pass it
(23:10:48) KurtAlbershardt: can someone please restate the motion which we are considering?
(23:10:55) MatthiasSubik: we can't ignore the rules.
(23:11:17) MarioLipinski: Do we vote on the special resolution here or do we want to have an SGM for it if the association thinks it it appropriate
(23:11:17) LambertHofstra:  Special Resolution: Transfer to a non-trading
(23:11:18) LambertHofstra:     Cooperative NSW (by Daniel Black)
(23:11:18) LambertHofstra:        proposed in
(23:11:18) LambertHofstra: https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert-members/2010-09/msg00022.html
(23:11:18) LambertHofstra:        "I hereby ask that the membership as an ordinary business of the
(23:11:18) LambertHofstra:        association accept this special resolution as being legitimatly
(23:11:18) LambertHofstra:        presented to the assocation. This will occur before being asked
(23:11:20) LambertHofstra:        to accept the special resolution as a separate voting item."
(23:11:31) #agm: Modus (+v PiersLauder) von NickBebout
(23:11:38) KurtAlbershardt: thanks
(23:11:58) PhilippDunkel: @Lambert: According to the rules we do not have a choice here
(23:12:00) AlexanderPrinsier: I move we consider Daniel's special resolution as urgent business and consider (vote) on it in this AGM
(23:12:02) LambertHofstra: Ok, so according to the rules we can vote to accept, but then need a SGM to vote on the actual motion?
(23:12:04) dirkastrath: we cant't vote an 'or'-question ...
(23:12:11) NickBebout: we can consider it urgent business
(23:12:17) NickBebout: unless i'm mistaken
(23:12:18) KurtAlbershardt: I need a bit of clarification, as I do not understand AU law at all
(23:12:20) PhilippDunkel: Even if we vote on this "Special Resolution" it cannot possibly take effect
(23:12:23) NickBebout: if PhilippDunkel withdraws his objection
(23:12:30) AlexanderPrinsier: PhilippDunkel: why not?
(23:12:39) NickBebout: PhilippDunkel, do AGM's not have the urgent businiess exception like committee meetings do?
(23:13:02) KurtAlbershardt: How does a Co-operative differ form the current organizational structure? 
(23:13:03) PhilippDunkel: Because a GM that contains a Special Resolution must be announced to the members 21 days in advance
(23:13:04) MatthiasSubik: It is a game changer ...
(23:13:11) TomasTrnka: But please everyone remember that as this is a Special Resolution (rule change), it will probably require an avalanche of changes to make the Rules compliant...
(23:13:20) PhilippDunkel: This has not happened. Therefore thiis AGM may not pass Special Resolutions
(23:13:30) PhilippDunkel: Any Special Resolution we did pass would be invalid
(23:14:03) KurtAlbershardt: 6 mins and I am outta here
(23:14:06) LambertHofstra: What we can do is vote on it. If passed, we know that a SGM has a chance?
(23:14:09) MatthiasSubik: I second the view of Phillipp.
(23:14:18) AlexanderPrinsier: Ok, I agree with Philipp
(23:14:26) PhilippDunkel: So if we want to pass this we have to discuss it in a meeting that meets the criteria
(23:14:47) AlexanderPrinsier: LambertHofstra: agree, let's see if the members are interested in this topic, so we know if we will need an SGM
(23:14:48) TomasTrnka: I'm afraid PD has a point here...
(23:14:49) PhilippDunkel: The fact that we forgot about this is bad. And we need to "chastise" thos that have forgotten
(23:14:50) MarioLipinski: Hmm... to give it a try: I move that the association thinks it is appropriate to to further consideration of the proposed special resolution during this general meeting.
(23:14:51) ***NickBebout has an idea
(23:15:00) NickBebout: why don't we vote, and then (b) where it is made to appear to the Director- General that it is
(23:15:00) NickBebout: not practicable for the resolution to be passed in the manner
(23:15:00) NickBebout: specified in paragraph (a) if the resolution is passed in a
(23:15:00) NickBebout: manner specified by the Director-General.
(23:15:04) KurtAlbershardt: fine with me, I need to understand more if I am to vote on something this important I think 
(23:15:11) MarioLipinski: I move that the association thinks it is appropriate to do further consideration of the proposed special resolution during this general meeting.
(23:15:13) NickBebout: make application to the director-general to allow us to consider that as passage
(23:15:18) NickBebout: MarcusMaengel, second
(23:15:21) NickBebout: MarioLipinski, second
(23:15:21) PhilippDunkel: Then the board needs to call an SGM with 21 days notice for this
(23:15:28) KurtAlbershardt: ok
(23:15:50) ***NickBebout moves that we vote on the resolution at this meeting, and then file an application with the Director-General of Fair Trading to allow that as passage of the special resolution
(23:15:52) LambertHofstra: NickBebout: the motion in itself is not urgent (has been waiting for mionths now) and would require a lot of other changes as well
(23:16:13) GuillaumeRomagny: I seconds Nick
(23:16:17) KurtAlbershardt: I believe I am still in the dark as to the implications of this
(23:16:26) GuillaumeRomagny: s/seconds/second
(23:16:28) LambertHofstra: But voting to accept it for consideration would be a step
(23:16:48) AlexanderPrinsier: I move that the next committe organises an SGM to handle Daniel's special resolution
(23:17:01) PhilippDunkel: Please be aware that this means that we no longer value our own statutes. A letter to that effect could also be sent to the Director-Genera(OFT)
(23:17:09) MarioLipinski: I think there is too few information to vote in favour of this motion anyway.
(23:17:10) LambertHofstra: Alexander: this we cannot do: only members can call for a SGM, not the AGM
(23:17:26) NickBebout: AlexanderPrinsier, we could send calls to the secretary
(23:17:28) AlexanderPrinsier: LambertHofstra: my motion is asking the committee
(23:17:30) KurtAlbershardt: +1 MarioLipinski
(23:17:32) PhilippDunkel: How about this!
(23:17:34) ***NickBebout actually prepares to email one
(23:17:41) GuillaumeRomagny: From Daniel :
(23:18:03) GuillaumeRomagny: it is a vote to consider further investigation for the next Board
(23:18:06) MarioLipinski: And unless there is further information i do not even want the bureaucracy required by this.
(23:18:35) MarioLipinski: (for SGM)
(23:18:37) LambertHofstra: Guillaume: ok, so it's not a vote on the proposal itself, but a vote to ask the next cvommittee to consider it?
(23:18:41) LambertHofstra: That I can second
(23:18:51) NickBebout: LambertHofstra, there are already motions on the floor!
(23:18:54) PhilippDunkel: It is resolved that this AGM instructs the Board, which has failed to announce this meeting in time for a duly submitted Special Resolution, to call a Special General Meeting to deal with that resolution as soon as the bylaws allow.
(23:18:55) GuillaumeRomagny: It was too late to propose it properly
(23:18:57) KurtAlbershardt: please restate
(23:19:09) KurtAlbershardt: motion under consideration is?
(23:19:18) MarioLipinski: LambertHofstra: The Business as proposed states: "I hereby ask that the membership as an ordinary business of the association 
(23:19:18) MarioLipinski:        accept this special resolution as being legitimatly presented to the 
(23:19:18) MarioLipinski:        assocation. This will occur before being asked to accept the special 
(23:19:18) MarioLipinski:        resolution as a separate voting item."
(23:19:21) ***NickBebout moves that we vote on the resolution at this meeting, and then file an application with the Director-General of Fair Trading to allow that as passage of the special resolution
(23:19:32) NickBebout: it was seconded by GuillaumeRomagny 
(23:19:36) KurtAlbershardt: hm
(23:19:40) PhilippDunkel: Was it?
(23:19:43) PhilippDunkel: It is resolved that this AGM instructs the Board, which has failed to announce this meeting in time for a duly submitted Special Resolution, to call a Special General Meeting to deal with that resolution as soon as the bylaws allow.
(23:19:44) KurtAlbershardt: T-minus one here; best of luck, all - I will have to read the digest later today.
(23:19:56) NickBebout: <GuillaumeRomagny> I seconds Nick
(23:19:58) KurtAlbershardt: out
(23:20:00) NickBebout: yes it was
(23:20:06) AlexanderPrinsier: PhilippDunkel: that looks ok to me
(23:20:16) GuillaumeRomagny: John, Gary also second
(23:20:26) KurtAlbershardt hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Leaving.).
(23:20:33) AlexanderPrinsier: PhilippDunkel: second that motion
(23:20:36) LambertHofstra: Nick: wSo, we have two motions: one is the one by Nick, second is the one by Philipp
(23:20:40) NickBebout: yeah
(23:20:51) PhilippDunkel: Now we have 2 alternate options that have been moved and seconded
(23:21:06) MarioLipinski: I have moved and seconded one also... 
(23:21:14) LambertHofstra: I'd like a vote on the first one, Nick, can you please restate?
(23:21:14) PhilippDunkel: Which is?
(23:21:19) ***NickBebout moves that we vote on the resolution at this meeting, and then file an application with the Director-General of Fair Trading to allow that as passage of the special resolution
(23:21:32) MarioLipinski: but it was more intended to cut this discussion short to see if there is a need for discussions..
(23:21:49) LambertHofstra: Second one is from Philipp: can you repeat yours?
(23:22:00) PhilippDunkel: It is resolved that this AGM instructs the Board, which has failed to announce this meeting in time for a duly submitted Special Resolution, to call a Special General Meeting to deal with that resolution as soon as the bylaws allow.
(23:22:23) LambertHofstra: Mario, do you want yours here as well, before we start a vote on the first one?
(23:22:38) MarioLipinski: I would withdraw it, but it has been seconded....
(23:23:05) LambertHofstra: Philipp, can we start the vote on Nick's proposal?
(23:24:05) AlexanderPrinsier: LambertHofstra: we have 2 mutually exclusive proposals
(23:24:07) AlexanderPrinsier: what if both pass?
(23:24:14) AlexanderPrinsier: I suggest we only compare the "aye" votes
(23:24:18) MatthiasSubik: fun ensures ...
(23:24:25) DominikGeorge: AlexanderPrinsier, then the association is mad
(23:24:27) AlexanderPrinsier: the one with most "ayes" will be the way to go
(23:24:28) PhilippDunkel: No each one would need to pass on it's own
(23:24:40) LambertHofstra: Correct
(23:24:41) PhilippDunkel: If both pass we have to do both
(23:24:48) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(23:24:59) MatthiasSubik: first motion is to ignore the rules, second to follow it ...
(23:25:01) TomasTrnka: this one isn't probably going to pass, so the question is moot...
(23:25:15) MatthiasSubik: i second the view that the association can't make up it's mind ...
(23:25:19) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(23:25:19) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 3 votes.
(23:25:21) VoteBot:     NAYE had 14 votes.
(23:25:21) VoteBot:     AYE had 8 votes.
(23:25:33) LambertHofstra: Ok, motion has not passed.
(23:25:33) DominikGeorge: look, no harm done ;)
(23:25:47) LambertHofstra: Philipp, can we start the vote on your proposal?
(23:25:59) NickBebout: MatthiasSubik, wouldn't be ignoring the rules, the rules say that the director-general can make exceptions :)
(23:26:03) NickBebout: but it failed anyway so....
(23:26:36) NickBebout: LambertHofstra, for reference, please point us to daniel's resolution
(23:26:59) PhilippDunkel: Daniels Resolution: https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert-members/2010-09/msg00022.html
(23:27:06) NickBebout: looks like we will be having a special general meeting soon :)
(23:27:21) LambertHofstra: (I'm afraid I had to vote aye on this one, hope Philipp's punishment for us is bearable...)
(23:27:33) PhilippDunkel: ;)
(23:27:50) PhilippDunkel: ATTENTION! Voting will close in 30 Seconds
(23:28:03) MarioLipinski: That is why I voted naye. Holding a SGM for a motion which is unlikely to pass in its current state.
(23:28:23) VoteBot: I have counted all the votes and reached the following result:
(23:28:23) VoteBot:     ABSTAIN had 8 votes.
(23:28:25) VoteBot:     NAYE had 6 votes.
(23:28:25) VoteBot:     AYE had 16 votes.
(23:28:33) LambertHofstra: I declare it carried
(23:28:44) PhilippDunkel: The problem is we are obligated to deal with it. Even if we don't like it
(23:28:50) MarioLipinski: although i appreciate the possibility to vote on the special resolution in a proper called meeting.
(23:28:52) GuillaumeRomagny: Thank you for Daniel Black
(23:29:22) LambertHofstra: Ok, I think this addresses Daniel's request to the best we can, and in line with our rules
(23:29:50) LambertHofstra: This concludes the AGM. Are there any remaining questions before I close the meeting?
(23:29:55) PhilippDunkel: Wow!
(23:30:08) PhilippDunkel: And before Midnight European time
(23:30:11) AlexanderPrinsier: amazing
(23:30:12) PhilippDunkel: That's a first
(23:30:13) ***NickBebout suggests members send formal requests to the secretary to call the SGM also
(23:30:20) NickBebout: since the board could theoreticlally ignore that resolution
(23:30:22) MarioLipinski: We started one our earlier I think ;)
(23:30:35) NickBebout: we only need 5% of members to force a SGM
(23:30:50) AlexanderPrinsier: No questions?
(23:30:58) LambertHofstra: Ok, I see no further questions. 
(23:31:00) PhilippDunkel: All the members present have called for this SGM with this vote
(23:31:01) MarioLipinski: As members voted for it during this AGM i would see it as clear mandate from the members.
(23:31:01) LambertHofstra: Thanks all
(23:31:06) MatthiasSubik: thanks lambert,
(23:31:10) LambertHofstra: I hereby close the meeting
(23:31:13) PhilippDunkel: since more than 5% are present the SGM has been called 
(23:31:21) NickBebout: hmm true
(23:31:22) PhilippDunkel: The Secretary now only has to announce
(23:31:36) MatthiasSubik: thanks secretary, thanks votebot, thanks chair!
(23:31:39) DominikGeorge: To LambertHofstra :
(23:31:43) GuillaumeRomagny: I second PhilippD
(23:31:49) MarioLipinski: Board needs to set a date first and we need a secreatary for it ;)
(23:32:00) GuillaumeRomagny: Thank you so much Philipp D for the help
(23:32:04) NickBebout: true, 5% is only 3.85 members, and 16 voted aye
(23:32:16) DominikGeorge: MatthiasSubik, can you give LambertHofstra his present? My client doesnt let me .,... :(
(23:32:24) TomasTrnka: thanks everyone involved, good night all...
(23:32:26) LambertHofstra: ???
(23:32:37) MatthiasSubik: ok, here is the delivery boy for dominik:
(23:32:40) MatthiasSubik:                       .-~~-.--.
(23:32:40) MatthiasSubik:                      :         )
(23:32:40) MatthiasSubik:                .~ ~ -.\       /.- ~~ .
(23:32:41) MatthiasSubik:                >       `.   .'       <
(23:32:41) MatthiasSubik:               (         .- -.         )
(23:32:42) MatthiasSubik:                `- -.-~  `- -'  ~-.- -'
(23:32:42) MatthiasSubik:                  (        :        )           _ _ .-:
(23:32:43) MatthiasSubik:                   ~--.    :    .--~        .-~  .-~  }
(23:32:43) MatthiasSubik:                       ~-.-^-.-~ \_      .~  .-~   .~
(23:32:45) MatthiasSubik:                                \ \'     \ '_ _ -~
(23:32:45) MatthiasSubik:                                 `.`.    //
(23:32:47) MatthiasSubik:                        . - ~ ~-.__`.`-.//
(23:32:47) MatthiasSubik:                    .-~   . - ~  }~ ~ ~-.~-.
(23:32:49) MatthiasSubik:                  .' .-~      .-~       :/~-.~-./:
(23:32:49) MatthiasSubik:                 /_~_ _ . - ~                 ~-.~-._
(23:32:50) LambertHofstra: What Nik? You're trying to send me a virus?  ;-)
(23:32:51) MatthiasSubik:                                                  ~-.<
(23:32:53) ***NickBebout moves this meeting do now adjourn.
(23:32:57) MatthiasSubik: card reads:"this is a thank you for holding such a hard session in order"
(23:33:04) LambertHofstra: Meeting adjourned
(23:33:06) ***JohanVanSelst waves good night
(23:33:10) JohanVanSelst hat den Raum verlassen.
(23:33:21) DominikGeorge: LambertHofstra, jsut a beatlebug with the flower ;)
(23:33:28) DominikGeorge: thank you, fleurop-Mathias ;)I
(23:33:29) FrancoisMarier: good night / morning
(23:33:36) ***FrancoisMarier goes back to work
(23:33:46) ***WytzevanderRaay till next time
(23:33:47) LambertHofstra: Good night /evening / morning all
(23:34:02) WytzevanderRaay hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Leaving.).
(23:34:07) dirkastrath: when will be the next board-meeting? ;-)
(23:34:15) MichaelTaenzer heißt jetzt NEOatNHNG
(23:34:23) DominikGeorge heißt jetzt Nik
(23:34:25) MarioLipinski: dirkastrath: should we call one right now?
(23:34:36) MatthiasSubik hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: MatthiasSubik).
(23:34:37) dirkastrath: just asking ... 
(23:34:43) GuyScharinger: Good night to all the world
(23:34:47) NEOatNHNG heißt jetzt Guest15
(23:34:49) HansVerbeek: Bye!
(23:34:54) HansVerbeek hat den Raum verlassen.
(23:34:58) LambertHofstra: I propose we have a meeting next sunday
(23:34:59) LambertHofstra: same time
(23:35:12) dirkastrath: same time as usual or as today?
(23:35:18) TomasTrnka hat den Raum verlassen.
(23:35:22) FrancoisMarier hat den Raum verlassen.
(23:35:28) MarioLipinski: as today seems to fit the aussies better?
(23:35:42) MarioLipinski: But this probably would be something to discuss then...
(23:36:13) LambertHofstra: I will send out a email asking everyone
(23:36:36) MarioLipinski: Thanks, Lambert
(23:37:23) dirkastrath: okay ... let us say: next sunday ... the exact time we'll define via mail ...
(23:37:26) VoteBot hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Remote host closed the connection).
(23:37:43) LambertHofstra: yes
(23:38:26) PhilippDunkel heißt jetzt VoteBot
(23:39:30) NickBebout heißt jetzt nb
(23:42:15) PieterVanEmmerik heißt jetzt pemmerik
(23:42:18) dirkastrath heißt jetzt doc_dirk
(23:43:54) PatrickPointu heißt jetzt Patrick
(23:52:52) IanGrigg heißt jetzt iang
(23:53:02) Sie heißen jetzt u60
(23:53:12) MarioLipinski heißt jetzt law
(00:00:34) JoostSteijlen heißt jetzt JS
(00:00:39) JS hat den Raum verlassen.
(00:02:59) GuyScharinger hat den Raum verlassen.
(00:03:20) iang hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: iang).
(00:04:08) Q hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Leaving.).
(00:04:15) PhilippGuehring hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Verlassend).
(00:06:09) LambertHofstra hat den Raum verlassen (Leaving.).
(00:09:05) VoteBot hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: VoteBot).
(00:10:14) phidelta [phidelta@dsl-stat-43-2.mmc.at] hat den Raum betreten.
(00:12:23) DorisSteinbichler hat den Raum verlassen.