Meeting Notes 2017 10 24 - Revision history

45.27.31.166: /* Discussion */

2017-10-25T18:41:13Z

Discussion

Zach: /* Discussion */

2017-10-25T08:08:49Z

Discussion

192.241.210.237: Clarified trent's "who am i" entry

2017-10-25T07:43:29Z

Clarified trent's "who am i" entry

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:43, 25 October 2017
Line 31:		Line 31:
	* Katherine - Wearables and working in the sewing area		* Katherine - Wearables and working in the sewing area
	* Chris - I am chris, I do stuff		* Chris - I am chris, I do stuff
	* Trent - Started the python class, developing python courses, and other stuff.		* Trent - Started the current python class, developing python courses, and other stuff.
	* Ryan - Noisebridge philanthropist, interested in just about everything, multidisciplinary specialist - love helping at nb and usually here every Tuesday for the unityversity gamebridge class.		* Ryan - Noisebridge philanthropist, interested in just about everything, multidisciplinary specialist - love helping at nb and usually here every Tuesday for the unityversity gamebridge class.
	* Will - 3D printing		* Will - 3D printing

192.241.210.237: added raw notes

2017-10-25T05:46:22Z

added raw notes

Show changes

163.172.140.123 at 15:18, 19 October 2017

2017-10-19T15:18:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:18, 19 October 2017
Line 123:		Line 123:
	** How consensus isn't a legislative process		** How consensus isn't a legislative process
	** Why consensus isn't applicable to some things like conflict resolution, resolution of time sinks, and the like.		** Why consensus isn't applicable to some things like conflict resolution, resolution of time sinks, and the like.
			** I was a late bloomer- that was the polite way to say I didn't hit puberty until I was almost 17- it was discussed at the dinner table which made me feel ashamed of my body. It was a point of teasing in school making me need to be more flamboyant and over the top to show "them" I didn't care what they said- but it started to creep in like an infection first in my brain then my heart. When I did get breasts I went from nothing to DD in less than 3 months- new rumors started.
	== [[ Consensus Items History \| Proposals from last week ]] ==		== [[ Consensus Items History \| Proposals from last week ]] ==
	''(Add any items which are consensed upon or someone has raised a principle objection for to the [[Consensus Items History]] page.)''		''(Add any items which are consensed upon or someone has raised a principle objection for to the [[Consensus Items History]] page.)''

Phong: Created new meeting page

2017-10-18T22:14:40Z

Created new meeting page

New page

----------->8----------
DELETE EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE WHEN YOU POST THE MEETING MINUTES KTHX!!!

= Instructions =

Congratulations and/or condolences! You're reading this because you're participating in a meeting of Noisebridge!

Meetings should be limited to an hour when possible. Shorter is fine, but avoid rushing.

You should read this instructional section thoroughly, and treat them as a guideline for how to host a meeting of Noisebridge. There are three ingredients to an [[Excellent]] meeting: A number of note takers, some facilitators, and participants.

Meetings are just one of the tools used at Noisebridge to create net forward progress on whatever it is we're all trying to do. Meetings aren't the only way to make decisions or have discussions, and in fact its usually a much better idea to talk about things outside the meeting before dragging the entire community kicking and screaming into it.

== Note Takers ==
# Confirm last meeting was saved
# Take new notes
# Save and share the notes at the end of the meeting (instructions at the bottom).

== Facilitators ==

There are generally two kinds of facilitator roles at a Noisebridge meeting:

* Stack taker - Useful when a lot of folks want to hop on the discussion stack. This gives everyone a turn to have their feelings heard. Usually only works when there is exactly one stack taker.
* Moderators - Keeps the meeting moving and prevents everyone from wasting too much time on one subject. Anyone is free to pick up moderation and move the meeting along.

In general, moderators should:
* Understand the structure of Noisebridge [[consensus|decision-making]]
* Make sure everyone gets a chance to speak.
* Speak only minimally yourself.
* Keep the meeting moving, and avoid getting bogged down.
* Identify discussion items, arrange times limits for talking about each item.
* Identify and summarize consensus, suggest things that need to be done.
* '''Get the [[membership binder]] and ensure that it is returned safely.'''

== Participants ==

Everyone at a Noisebridge meeting who has consented to participating in one is a participant!

* Say your name before you talk.
* Remain on-topic, and speak as concisely as possible.
* Assist the note-taker with any links or corrections that are needed.
* Remain respectful of other participants, their time, and the consensus and moderation process.

DELETE EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE WHEN YOU POST THE MEETING MINUTES KTHX!!!
----------->8----------

These are the notes from the [https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Category:Meeting_Notes The XXXth Meeting of Noisebridge]. Date: FIXME THE DATE HERE Note-taker: FIXME YOUR NAME HERE; Moderators: FIXME THEIR NAME HERE.
* '''One or two bullet points of high-level meeting summary.'''

== Meeting Summary ==
FIXME FILL OUT AT END OF MEETING AND SEND TO MAILING LIST
TLDR what happened at the meeting:
* Announcements:
* Finances:
* New members:
* New philanthropists:
* Consensus Items:
* Discussion Items:

= Introductions =

* '''Invite a knowledgeable volunteer to explain''' [[Noisebridge_Vision|what Noisebridge is about]]:
<blockquote>Noisebridge is a 501c3 nonprofit that provides a space for creation, collaboration, and learning about technology and creative projects. Noisebridge provides space, power tools, and infrastructure to help the public learn new skills and create cool things. Noisebridge continues to exist through and depends entirely on membership fees and donations. Our code of conduct is 'Be excellent to each other'."</blockquote>
* Introduce any experimental or unusual moderation techniques that may be using during the meeting like: direct responses, limited speaking time, orderless stack, &c.
* Round of introductions (remember, announcements come later):
** What's your name
** What do you do
** What do you maintain at Noisebridge?
** if you are new: how did you hear about Noisebridge?

= Short announcements and events =
* Cool new projects? Something you'd like people to know? Say now, but keep it short! One or two sentences please!
* Any happenings at the space of which members should be made aware.
* Don't hog everyone's time since we all just want to hack!

= Safe Space =

'''Note:''' This section is experimental. We discussed it at [[Meeting_Notes_2016_06_28]]. We're going to try it for the next meeting, and see how it goes, and then discuss in the discussion section how it went, and how we'd like to tweak it.

Noisebridge is a safe space. '''Invite a volunteer to describe''' what that means.

Some specific points you might prompt the group to touch on, if it doesn't happen naturally:
* What to do if you feel uncomfortable.
* Noisebridge strives to be radically inclusive. What does that mean?
* Noisebridge has an antiharassment policy. What does that mean?

= Participation =

Invite a knowledgable volunteer to describe who can participate at Noisebridge, including:
* Describe how to get an rfid key for the door system
* Describe how to get access to slack

= [[Philanthropist|Philanthropists]]=
* '''Invite a knowledgeable volunteer to describe''' [[Philanthropist/Pledge|Philantropy]], and the application process.
* Read off any names from the binder for the past month. Any applicants must have their sponsor present to vouch for them.
* If there are no objections, they're a philanthropist! Their pledge should be handed over to the [[Secretary]] posthaste, after which their token will be updated to give them the 24/7 access they've earned(?)

= [[ Membership Binder ]] =

* '''Invite a knowledgeable volunteer to describe''' [[membership]], and the application process.
<blockquote>Being a member of Noisebridge is not like being a member of a gym or your local chess club. Anyone can come to Noisebridge to hack and learn: you don't need to be a member for that. At Noisebridge, membership is something different: it means taking responsibility and committing to help to maintain, improve, and govern Noisebridge. As a member of Noisebridge, you don't just come here to hack and learn, you actively work to improve what you see around you, help to deal with problems, and make this community and space better than it is today.</blockquote>
* Read off any names from the binder for the past month. Mark down a check or other indicator on every open application to keep track of how many weeks they've been read out.
* Anyone eligible to join this week should
** introduce themselves,
** answer any questions members may have for them, then
** leave the area in search of gifts (traditionally beer and a lime, or cookies) for the rest of the group.
* The rest of the meeting should reach consensus on whether they may join.
* Remember to applaud new members when they return.

= Financial Report =
* Funds in bank:
* Noisetor (See the bulletpoints at the bottom of http://noisetor.net/finances/#summary):
* Any other details by those participating in handling our financials

= Consensus =

* '''invite a knowledgeable volunteer to give '''[[Consensus Process|a brief primer on consensus process]]
* It is important that everyone in attendance understands at least:
** Blocking with verbalized principled objections.
** Why we use consensus over other approaches to decision making.
** How consensus isn't a legislative process
** Why consensus isn't applicable to some things like conflict resolution, resolution of time sinks, and the like.

== [[ Consensus Items History | Proposals from last week ]] ==
''(Add any items which are consensed upon or someone has raised a principle objection for to the [[Consensus Items History]] page.)''

== [[ Current Consensus Items | Proposals for next week ]] ==
''(Add any new items for consensus to the [[Current Consensus Items]] page.)''

= Discussion =

Longer discussion items belong here. This is the last part of the meeting so that people can break off and continue their discussion afterwards.

== Discussion Items ==

If any important discussion happens, it should be happening after forward progress is made during consensus.

= End of Meeting =

# Return the [[membership binder]] to its rightful location.
# Discuss any items for which there was not time during the meeting.
# Enjoy the company of your fellow hacker, robot, or robothacker.

== Note taker posts the notes ==
# Clean and tidy the meeting notes including removing all these really verbose instructions.
# Fill out the short summary at the top listing just announcements, consensus items, discussion topics, and names of new members and philanthropists.
# Copy paste the notes to the [http://www.noisebridge.net//Next_meeting next meeting] page. (They will become [[Last meeting]] at midnight.)
# Email the meeting summary to [mailto:noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net?subject=MeetingNotes Noisebridge Discuss] and [mailto:noisebridge-announce@lists.noisebridge.net?subject=MeetingNotes Noisebridge Announce] lists.
# CC on the email treasurer@noisebridge.net and secretary@noisebridge.net if there are new members and philanthropists.
# Edit the [[Current_Consensus_Items|Current Consensus Items]] if anything is proposed for consensus next week.
# Edit the [[Consensus_Items_History|Consensus Items History]] if anything was reached consensus or failed to reach consensus this week.

== Fun things to do after ==
* Reprise of the [[Hackernationale]]. [This is anarchy - we do what the wiki says!]
* [[PGP|PGP Key Signing]] could happen now (if it doesn't happen '''before''' any given Meeting). Ask others around the space or check the [[PGP|list]] to see who wants in on the action.

[[Category:Meeting Notes]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:41, 25 October 2017
Line 219:		Line 219:
	Longer discussion items belong here. This is the last part of the meeting so that people can break off and continue their discussion afterwards.		Longer discussion items belong here. This is the last part of the meeting so that people can break off and continue their discussion afterwards.

	Zach - A discussion on how consensus works at Noisebridge.		Zach - Proposes a discussion on how consensus works at Noisebridge.

	Trent - During the process of the elevator consensus item, people believed that this consensus item was passed at the meeting last week, but others felt that it hadn't reached consensus. This created a really big miscommunication due to people having different versions of the consensus process that was "the" way. In my view of what happened, we have a rich oral culture that breaks down when the wiki differs from the oral history. This lead to the situation being ripe for a miscommunication which, in my view, is what happened for this consensus item. This lead me to believe that we need a more conrete definition of what consensus is. Oral culture isn't going to cut it and we need a way that doesn't involve having to talk to every single person in the community.		Trent - During the process of the elevator consensus item, people believed that this consensus item was passed at the meeting last week, but others felt that it hadn't reached consensus. This created a really big miscommunication due to people having different versions of the consensus process that was "the" way. In my view of what happened, we have a rich oral culture that breaks down when the wiki differs from the oral history. This lead to the situation being ripe for a miscommunication which, in my view, is what happened for this consensus item. This lead me to believe that we need a more conrete definition of what consensus is. Oral culture isn't going to cut it and we need a way that doesn't involve having to talk to every single person in the community.

Line 227:		Line 228:

	Adrian - It's good to get things on the wiki to have a record of how consensus works. But on the wiki you don't get notified when things change, and I don't check the wiki to see that things have changes. I agree that a slack channel would help.		Adrian - It's good to get things on the wiki to have a record of how consensus works. But on the wiki you don't get notified when things change, and I don't check the wiki to see that things have changes. I agree that a slack channel would help.

	~~Zach -~~

	Travis - I have a question. Is it just me, or does it seem like the meeting notes haven't been going out to noisebridge-discuss.		Travis - I have a question. Is it just me, or does it seem like the meeting notes haven't been going out to noisebridge-discuss.
Line 238:		Line 237:
	Adrian - there is a bias against people not using slack.		Adrian - there is a bias against people not using slack.

	Zach - I want to talk about my view on how the process worked and my take away on it. Talking to people in person has been super helpful and made things way better. There's a few things I want to address. Firstly, does consensus require slack? I have been treated very differently as a noisebridge member for not using a program that is not ~~used~~ by noisebridge. This has influenced my ability to pass a consensus item. There is a huge divide between people who use Slack and those who do not. To try and follow the consensus, I read the consensus process wiki page and talked with many long time members. The ~~consus~~ process wiki page is marked do not edit and seems like a good ~~regerence~~. I saw that this consensus process on the wiki process -- there was lots of discussions, lots of meetings about how people deliberately tried to manipulate the consensus process for shady ends. I think there is also a misunderstanding that we as a community have about how the consensus ~~proces~~ works. I started this as a little c consensus item and I asked J if I could start a consensus item and he suggested that I use little c consensus first. I waited two weeks and nothing had happened at all (keep in mind I started this in July). At the ~~nest~~ meeting, I said that I'd like to start a formal consensus process. Nobody at that meeting was super clear on how consensus works, partly since it's been so long that we're out of practice. We're trying to engage in a complicated process for which the ~~rulebook~~ is missing and we haven't practiced. So, even though I emailed the discuss with a formal proposal, answered many questions over email and in person, and although I did the best I could to make this an open ~~proces~~, since I was not on slack, I was cut out of a separate set of discussion on slack about this process, so aside from a couple people who I worked with in process, there are apparently other discussions on Slack, but none of those people ~~did not reach~~ out to me and those ~~disc~~		Zach - at least for the past couple meetings (when consensus was discussed) meeting notes have definitely been going out.
	~~ussions~~ happened exclusively on ~~slack~~. My understanding is that consensus is coming to a meeting and bringing yourself and following the process. It says here on the wiki page, that a member must be physically present (or find a proxy to come for them) to block a proposal. A member who is physically not present is assenting to a consensus proposal. I have heard about "Quorum" and blocking without being present, but this isn't ~~document~~ anywhere.		I want to talk about my view on how the process worked and my take away on it. Talking to people in person has been super helpful and made things way better. There's a few things I want to address. Firstly, does consensus require slack? Do we want to require the slack application as part of consensus process? We need to change that process then. I have been treated very differently as a noisebridge member for not using a program that is not created by or run by noisebridge. This has influenced my ability to pass a consensus item. There is a huge divide between people who use Slack and those who do not. To try and follow the consensus, I read the consensus process wiki page and talked with many long time members. The consensus process wiki page is marked do not edit and seems like a good reference. I saw that this consensus process on the wiki process -- there was lots of discussions, lots of meetings about how people deliberately tried to manipulate the consensus process for shady ends. I think there is also a misunderstanding that we as a community have about how the consensus process works. I started this as a little c consensus item and I asked J if I could start a consensus item and he suggested that I use little c consensus first. I waited two weeks and nothing had happened at all (keep in mind I started this in July). At the next meeting, I said that I'd like to start a formal consensus process. Nobody at that meeting was super clear on how consensus works, partly since it's been so long that we're out of practice. We're trying to engage in a complicated process for which the rule book is missing and we haven't practiced. So, even though I emailed the discuss with a formal proposal, answered many questions over email and in person, and although I did the best I could to make this an open process, since I was not on slack, I was cut out of a separate set of discussion on slack about this process. so aside from a couple people who I worked with in this process, there are apparently other discussions on Slack, but none of those people reached out to me and those discussions happened exclusively on Slack. My understanding is that consensus is coming to a meeting and bringing yourself and following the process. It says here on the wiki page, that a member must be physically present (or find a proxy to come for them) to block a proposal. A member who is physically not present is assenting to a consensus proposal. I have heard about "Quorum" and blocking without being present, but this isn't documented anywhere.

	Ryan - A big issue is just missed / locked out communication channels. I was wondering if there was a way to get slack shown a bit easier; maybe people people can see it, but not fully access it, or slack tells members who aren't here that they should check this, since we don't livestream this.		Ryan - A big issue is just missed / locked out communication channels. I was wondering if there was a way to get slack shown a bit easier; maybe people people can see it, but not fully access it, or slack tells members who aren't here that they should check this, since we don't livestream this.
Line 245:		Line 244:
	Daryl - if someone cares, they can read the meeting notes		Daryl - if someone cares, they can read the meeting notes

	Zach - When the consensus item is proposed, there is meeting notes for that. A lot of that makes sense, but I think part of the point Daryl was making is that Noisebridge has processes for informing the community of what is happening, but if people choose not to attend the meetings, not to read the meeting notes,		Zach - When the consensus item is proposed, there is meeting notes for that. A lot of that makes sense, but I think part of the point Daryl was making is that Noisebridge has processes for informing the community of what is happening, but if people choose not to attend the meetings, not to read the meeting notes, then they are choosing to not engage with the community and the consensus process.

	Ryan - It would be nice to notify people who are online of there being a new meeting and notes pad. The only reason that the proposal wasn't posted on the current consensus items wiki page was that no-one at the last three meetings mentioned it. I think having a physical copy of the consensus process in the space would be really helpful. I would love to hear from other people.		Ryan - It would be nice to notify people who are online of there being a new meeting and notes pad. The only reason that the proposal wasn't posted on the current consensus items wiki page was that no-one at the last three meetings mentioned it. I think having a physical copy of the consensus process in the space would be really helpful. I would love to hear from other people.
Line 251:		Line 250:
	Trent - in the wiki page, and no-where that I can find, does it say that you must post the exact wording, but my understanding is that you must post the exact wording, so it's not clear if we have to do that.		Trent - in the wiki page, and no-where that I can find, does it say that you must post the exact wording, but my understanding is that you must post the exact wording, so it's not clear if we have to do that.

	Zack - [quotes wiki page on editing consensus items] It isn't clear what qualifies as a "radical" change.		Zack - [quotes wiki page on editing consensus items] It says the text can change from the first meeting to the second, as long as the change isn't "radically different." It isn't clear what qualifies as a "radical" change.

	Trent - I sent out what I thought was the consensus item text, but it apparently it was not.		Trent - I sent out what I thought was the consensus item text, but it apparently it was not.

	Zack - I said that exact text (the current text), give or take a couple clauses, but it didn't get ~~sent~~ correctly. The changes that were made were not large changes, but the larger issue is that people did not attend the ~~meeting~~.		Zack - I said that exact text (the current text), give or take a couple clauses, but it didn't get put in the meeting notes correctly. The changes that were made were not large changes. but the larger issue is that people who might care or object did not reach out to me with questions or attend the meetings.

	Trent - I know what happened. The people who I talked to, since there was not a formal text, thought the proposal was not being formally consensed yet.		Trent - I know what happened. The people who I talked to, since there was not a formal text, thought the proposal was not being formally consensed yet.
Line 263:		Line 262:
	Adrian - I think it's important that the exact text of the consensus item needs to be posted. I shouldn't have to attend every meeting to know what's going on.		Adrian - I think it's important that the exact text of the consensus item needs to be posted. I shouldn't have to attend every meeting to know what's going on.

	Zack - to think a formal consensus is not even happening, is just a matter of not paying attention. If you can alter it in the second meeting, what's the point of having the exact text?		Zack - to think a formal consensus is not even happening, is just a matter of not paying attention. how should people be informed? by the meeting notes and by meetings. Maybe we should change the part in the wiki about altering text at the second meeting. If you can alter it in the second meeting, what's the point of having the exact text proposed in the first place?

	Trent - the only canonical place we have is the meeting notes.		Trent - the only canonical place we have is the meeting notes.
Line 269:		Line 268:
	Roy - What about the consensus item wiki page.		Roy - What about the consensus item wiki page.

	Zack - I think it would help the community to have a big printout of exactly what the consensus process is. Lets cut out the unnecessary confusion, on the mailing list, on the wiki, and in the space, let's have physical signage in the space. For ~~that~~ to be even a little bit vague is really a problem.		Zack - I think it would help the community to have a big printout of exactly what the consensus process is. Lets cut out the unnecessary confusion, on the mailing list, on the wiki, and in the space, let's have physical signage in the space. consensus is how we make our important decisions. For the consensus process to be even a little bit vague is really a problem.

	Trent - can we say that we're agreeing we should do those things, and that, you can talk to Zack about more place through going that direction and talking to each other.		Trent - can we say that we're agreeing we should do those things, and that, you can talk to Zack about more place through going that direction and talking to each other.

	Zack - I volunteer to print signage on my 11 x 17 printer at home. the 11 x 17 printer at NB is SOOO shitty. It's like another elevator [people laugh] That thing blows.		Zack - I volunteer to print signage on my 11 x 17 printer at home. the 11 x 17 printer at NB is SOOO shitty. It's like another elevator [people laugh]. That thing blows.

	Trent - lets schedule an event to do that stuff.		Trent - lets schedule an event to do that stuff.
Line 289:		Line 288:
	Trent - reaching out for me is sending email to people who are interested.		Trent - reaching out for me is sending email to people who are interested.

	Zack - The only people who brought up issues with me were~~, in person, to~~ Trent and John. I wish me and John had coordinated in person first, in hindsight. But I think that it's concerning that not more people were discussing with me.		Zack - The only people who brought up issues with me were Trent and John. I wish me and John had coordinated in person first, in hindsight. But I think that it's concerning that not more people were discussing with me.

	Trent - for example, patrick pmed me saying that he agreed with me. I think people didn't want to pile on to this concern. There was a lot of back and forth and no-one wanted to pile on or interject.		Trent - for example, patrick pmed me saying that he agreed with me. I think people didn't want to pile on to this concern. There was a lot of back and forth and no-one wanted to pile on or interject.

	Zack - I wish we could make the discussion more inclusive somehow.		Zack - That makes sense. but I wish we could make the discussion more inclusive somehow. I hope we can find a way that makes people feel comfortable raising concerns off of slack.

	End of meeting: Zach, Adrian, and Roy agree to work together and with anyone else interested towards clarifying the consensus process at NB in a concise written form. Eventually this is envisioned as a new consensus proposal for clarifying a "new" (~~the~~ really just clarified) consensus process itself.		End of meeting: Zach, Adrian, and Roy agree to work together and with anyone else interested towards clarifying the consensus process at NB in a concise written form. Eventually this is envisioned as a new consensus proposal for clarifying a "new" (really just clarified) consensus process itself.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:08, 25 October 2017
Line 259:		Line 259:
	Trent - I know what happened. The people who I talked to, since there was not a formal text, thought the proposal was not being formally consensed yet.		Trent - I know what happened. The people who I talked to, since there was not a formal text, thought the proposal was not being formally consensed yet.

	Zack - I think people need to come to meetings and read the meeting notes.		Zack - The meetings notes that went out clearly stated that there was a formal consensus item proposed - it made special note of this. I think people need to come to meetings and read the meeting notes if they want to be involved in consensus items.

	Adrian - I think it's important that the exact text of the consensus item needs to be posted. I shouldn't have to attend every meeting to know what's going on.		Adrian - I think it's important that the exact text of the consensus item needs to be posted. I shouldn't have to attend every meeting to know what's going on.

	Zack - to think a formal consensus is not even happening, is just a matter of not paying attention. If you can alter it in the second meeting, what's the point of having the exact text.		Zack - to think a formal consensus is not even happening, is just a matter of not paying attention. If you can alter it in the second meeting, what's the point of having the exact text?

	Trent - the only canonical place we have is the meeting notes.		Trent - the only canonical place we have is the meeting notes.
Line 273:		Line 273:
	Trent - can we say that we're agreeing we should do those things, and that, you can talk to Zack about more place through going that direction and talking to each other.		Trent - can we say that we're agreeing we should do those things, and that, you can talk to Zack about more place through going that direction and talking to each other.

	Zack - ~~The 18~~ x N printer is SOOO shitty. That thing blows.		Zack - I volunteer to print signage on my 11 x 17 printer at home. the 11 x 17 printer at NB is SOOO shitty. It's like another elevator [people laugh] That thing blows.

	Trent - lets schedule an event to do that stuff.		Trent - lets schedule an event to do that stuff.
Line 281:		Line 281:
	Adrian - does it require a consensus process to change / clarify the consensus process.		Adrian - does it require a consensus process to change / clarify the consensus process.

	Zack - how is consensus notified to the community. Whose responsibility is it to notify the community. There should be clear verbiage on what the notification and consensus process is. Do people have objections to the current physically present at meeting part.		Zack - Absolutely. how is consensus notified to the community? Whose responsibility is it to notify the community? There should be clear verbiage on what the notification and consensus process is. Do people have objections to the current physically present at meeting part?

	Trent - you can't just skate around and block it from Berlin. Also, there should be information on the process that tells the person trying to consense an item should make a good faith effort to reach out to members of the community.		Trent - you can't just skate around and block it from Berlin. Also, there should be information on the process that tells the person trying to consense an item should make a good faith effort to reach out to members of the community.
Line 293:		Line 293:
	Trent - for example, patrick pmed me saying that he agreed with me. I think people didn't want to pile on to this concern. There was a lot of back and forth and no-one wanted to pile on or interject.		Trent - for example, patrick pmed me saying that he agreed with me. I think people didn't want to pile on to this concern. There was a lot of back and forth and no-one wanted to pile on or interject.

	Zack - I wish we could make the discussion m		Zack - I wish we could make the discussion more inclusive somehow.

			End of meeting: Zach, Adrian, and Roy agree to work together and with anyone else interested towards clarifying the consensus process at NB in a concise written form. Eventually this is envisioned as a new consensus proposal for clarifying a "new" (the really just clarified) consensus process itself.


	Postponed Items:		Postponed Items: