link to Home Page

Board Meeting

October 22, 2000

(Shaul) Great! We have a quorum of six Directors now, as per the Bylaws.
(Shaul) This is a legal quorum to start the meeting, so I hereby declare this
meeting of the Troubled Times Inc Board of Directors open.
(Shaul) Present are the Directors Brent, Gerard, Jurian, Roger, Shirley (with
Brent on the telephone) and Shaul as President at Large and Chairman of the
(Shaul) Present as observers and to give reports: Wendy and Michael
(Shaul) Item 1 on the Agenda:
(Shaul) Approval of the minutes of the last meeting.
(Shaul) Are there any objections to the minutes of the last meeting?
(Gerard) No objection from me
(Roger) None here.
(Jurian) None here
(Brent) none, Brent & Shirley
(Shaul) None from me. The Minutes of the last meeting stand approved.
(Shaul) Item 2: Review Committee for Server Software.
(Shaul) Do you have anything to report, Jurian?
(Jurian) Not really, there isn't much we can do until the servers are
connected to the internet
(Jurian) as for software, I pretty much know which packages I'd prefer
(Jurian) so far, all but realserver are free
(Jurian) and I think realserver only costs money for a license if we want
to actually provide streaming video
(Shaul) (we may need that in the future)
(Jurian) pre-recorded videos should be free to serve
(Jurian) agreed, but not yet, so I guess that'll be a future item?
(Shaul) I think so, as there's really little to say now, it seems.
(Jurian) most important is to get the servers hooked up to the internet, so
we can start working on it
(Shaul) what does this take now?
(Wendy) May I speak?
(Shaul) yes, Wendy, please.
(Wendy) I intended to do instructional videos.
(Wendy) My website can't do streaming video, no cgi bin access.
(Shaul) will we have that access on our servers, Jurian?
(Jurian) the new servers will be able to do that
(Wendy) Can I still do these videos and provide them to TT-Inc to put
on the web somewhere?
(Jurian) we'll have full cgi-bin access
(Roger) I move that we install Jurian as chairman of the software committee
in Ron's absence.
(Shaul) Does that answer the question, Wendy?
(Jurian) Wendy: don't you record the videos once, then convert them to
(Shaul) Thank you, Roger.
(Wendy) So I should plan on doing these videos?
(Shaul) I would definitely say, Yes, Wendy.
(Jurian) for showing pre-recorded video, no special software is required as
far as I know
(Jurian) they aren't "live video's", I mean, are they?
(Wendy) Jurian: .mpg, .avi, or what? Digital camcorder.
(Shaul) Friends, I suggest we move on, this is not a direct part of our
(Shaul) We have a motion from Roger to make Jurian the Chairman of the Server
(Jurian) Wendy: that's fine
(Shaul) Is there a second?
(Brent) I second
(Shaul) Let's vote on it.
(Shaul) my vote: Yes
(Gerard) yes
(Roger) yes
(Brent) Brent yes, Shirley Yes
(Shaul) Motion carried as made - Jurian is the Chairman of the Server
Committee. Good luck, man!
(Jurian) Thanks, I'll do the best I can :-)
(Shaul) We move on.
(Shaul) Item 3 on the Agenda: Approving Router and Tl line
(Shaul) I don't think we can do anything with that in Nancy's absence.
(Shaul) Thoughts, anyone?
(Michael) can I ask a question?
(Shaul) just a second, Michael. Lets see if any of the Directors has anything
to say first.
(Gerard) might be better to make it an item for the next board meeting
(Jurian) I think we should just approve it, we need them anyway
(Brent) Shirley and I agree, Item for next meeting
(Shaul) Although Nancy did write about it in her message, and even voted
"Yes" to approve the installation - do you recall?
(Roger) I think the text of Nancy's message covers the particulars and her
intent is that we consider approval in advance of her husband's visit.
(Shaul) I still think we have to hear her in person about this.
(Roger) What might she add?
(Jurian) can't we preliminary approve it?
(Shaul) Anyone else?
(Jurian) I dont see why we should wait a month with this item
(Shaul) I think we may be able to give the approval.
(Roger) Her intent was that this be consider provisionally, contigent on
funding coming through in November.
(Brent) Shirley agrees with Shaul, in case Nancy has anything to add...
(Shaul) What did you want to say, Michael?
(Jurian) we'd need to hire someone to set up the routers otherwise, cause
the way I read it, her husband could do it otherwise
(Michael) OK... Why the need for an EXPENSIVE T1? Isn't business class
DSL available for a lot less?
(Roger) Yes, but not with the anticipated bandwidth needs.
(Jurian) I'm not sure if DSL has a fast enough uplink speed
(Jurian) downlink is no problem, but for a server, the uplink speed is most
(Michael) Sprint ION offers 8mbps in and 1mbps out for 149 a month (I'll
shutup now)
(Jurian) 1 Mbps is only 128 kilobit, T1 is 1.45 MegaBit
(Brent) Shirley suggests that this is Committee business...
(Roger) Michael, is Sprint Ion available in the Wisconsin area?
(Michael) I don't know Roger.
(Jurian) 1 Mbps is too slow for a server, specially if it'll provide video..
(Jurian) even T1 might get "overloaded" quite soon
(Shaul) what's the concensus?
(Jurian) I agree with Shirley that this is committee business tho, we should
talk about this on the list, not here and now
(Brent) Shirley feels that the discussion is for the committee, not the meeting
(Shaul) I agree
(Brent) Thanks Jurian! (fron Shirley)
(Roger) We could give provisional approval on a dollar amount and let the
committee hash out the details.
(Roger) The provision would, of course, be the receipt of the necessary and
anticipated funds.
(Jurian) Roger: agreed
(Roger) Michael's suggestion of considering Sprint Ion should be noted by
the committee and a cost comparison completed. Final approval could be by
email later, in November when the funds come in.
(Jurian) Ok, lets wait for Shaul to come back
(Jurian) The question is, how long should we wait?
(Roger) Exactly, how long? We don't have a quorom without him. Was Barry
going to be able to join us at all?
(Brent) I read Nancy's post "in my absence -meeting info" to Shirley. Given
the contentof the email, Shirley now thinks we should vote for
approval providing the funding becomes available. Brent agrees.
(Roger) I move that provisional approval of the T1 line be offered with the
provision being twofold. The first provision being the receipt of the
necessary grant funds as anticipated. The second provision being
additional comparison of cost and access limitations of other providers,
namely Sprint Ion.
(Roger) Of course, without a PAL, the motion sits there...
(Roger) Heh Shaul! You missed a few lines of text...
(Brent) Shirley thinks we should vote for the motion with the funding
provision, and let the committe hash out the rest of the details (Sprint Ion)
(Jurian) looks like it
(Jurian) I agree with Shirley
(Brent) I agree with Shirley
(Roger) The board acts as the president and with Shirley's second to my
motion, we can vote on it.
(Roger) I vote yes.
(Jurian) Do I remember correctly if say that in Shaul's absense, Brent was
allowed to "take over" the meeting till Shaul gets back? if so, it might be
wise to do so now?
(Jurian) I vote yes as well
(Shaul) I'm back now!
(Brent) We didn't have a second to Rogers motion....Shirley wanted a revision
(Roger) What was the revision?
(Brent) Roger, Shirley likes first part (funding), but thinks committe
should handle secnod provision
(Roger) If we approve a dollar amount, even provisionally, based only on
this one source, where's the incentive to save the Inc. some money by
considering another provider?
(Shaul) Sorry, friends. What's the status, we're still on item 3, right?
(Shaul) OK, I read what went on. We need a second to Jurian's motion.
(Shaul) That's a valid point, Roger.
(Roger) We are talking about an amount in the neighborhood of $4000 for
startup and then $750 each month thereafter.
(Shaul) That's not a small amount
(Shaul) Alternatives surely have to be looked into, but it seems that Nancy's
already done that, am I right?
(Jurian) I think we should also consider the fact that once the video
content on the servers get more and more popular, we'll need to get more
bandwith.. a T1 isn't that much..
(Brent) Nancy did do a comparison listed in her email "in my absence" she
found the cheaper one
(Shaul) right, for the $2,500
(Shaul) (actually that figure is from the Agenda, not from Nancy's message.)
(Jurian) erm, that $4000 was what the servers were supposed to cost, but
the were only $2500
(Shaul) Here's Jurian's motion: "I move that provisional approval of the T1
line be offered with the provision being twofold. The first provision
being the receipt of the necessary grant funds as anticipated. The second
provision being additional comparison of cost and access limitations of
other providers"
(Roger) I honestly agree that this is very likely the cheapest route. The
only objection was raised by Michael and his suggestion of Sprint Ion is
valid and should be considered. Nancy's message outlines from app. $3000
to $3600 depending on the purchase of firewall, etc.
(Brent) Shaul, the 2500 is for the hardware, roger is talking about the t-1
(Roger) Right, and that motion was mine.
(Shaul) So, is there a second, because if not - we really WILL move this item
to the next meeting.
(Jurian) I second the motion
(Shaul) I agree that Michael has a right to offer an informed opinion,
especially as he's already here and has been asked to offer one.
(Shaul) All right!
(Roger) Go 2 America will save us $350 compared to the local phone company.
(Shaul) We will vote on the following:
(Roger) But the committee should consider any other options available. (per
my second provision).
(Roger) So, what is the vote call Shaul?
(Shaul) We are approving the installation of the T1 line, with two
provisions: a) We get the funding b) the Server Committee will do a further
cost comparison until then.
(Shaul) Was this your intent in the motion, Roger?
(Roger) Yep!
(Brent) Brent Yes Shirley Yes
(Jurian) Yes
(Gerard) yes
(Roger) I vote yes
(Jurian) Brent, Shirley, Jurian, Gerard, Roger: yes
(Shaul) I vote 'Yes'
(Shaul) Roger's motion is carried as stated
(Shaul) We move on to item 4!
(Shaul) Compensation for Shirley for the Brochure efforts.
(Shaul) We'll just have the vote.
(Shaul) All in favor 'yes', all opposed 'no'.
(Jurian) Yes
(Shaul) I vote - Yes
(Shaul) We need a motion and a second, just for the record, so please!
(Shaul) (and THEN we'll vote.)
(Brent) brent Yes Shirley abstains
(Jurian) Ok, I move we compensate Shirley for her Brochure efforts
(Roger) I second.
(Shaul) It's OK that some of us have already voted, we still have to record
the motion and the second on the log.
(Roger) My vote is yes.
(Jurian) Ok, then that's settled :-)
(Shaul) Good. We have Nancy's motion, seconded by Roger, that we compensate
Shirley to the sum of $1,000 for her herculean efforts on the Brochure.
(Shaul) The motion was carried as stated.
(Shaul) We move to Item 5 - Approving the Watching Room idea.
(Shaul) Well - it seems to be working, right?
(Gerard) Yes... it works fine I think
(Shaul) Any comments, Jurian or Gerard?
(Shaul) Is there anyone in the Watching Room now, Jurian?
(Jurian) works fine, I've been watching the watching room, we have one
"watcher" at the moment, none of use here has noticed it, so its working
fine :-)
(Shaul) Excellent.
(Jurian) just one small thing
(Roger) I move that we draft a policy stating that a watch room be used by
visiters of our board meetings/
(Shaul) yes?
(Jurian) do we want to change the password every meeting, or just when
needed (as in, someone figured it out and is being a pain in the a$$) ?
(Shaul) I think we can leave it for now, to save you guys hassle and time.
(Jurian) it takes less then a minute to change it, its more to save the
rest of us time to figure out the new password
(Roger) I disagree. I think it should change prior to all meetings so
guests to the board room are invited and authorized at each meeting.
(Shaul) Well, if we have a problem with disruptions - we can go back to the
'once a week' model
(Jurian) Roger: good point
(Shaul) Ah, there is that, of course. The visitors, the quitting Directors,
stuff like that.
(Roger) Exactly.
(Shaul) There is a possibility that a disgruntled visitor or Director may
come back to 'haunt' us if he knows the way in.
(Jurian) Ok, I'll just change it every meeting then, no hassle :)
(Roger) Since it is so little hassle to change it, let's change it.
(Shaul) So ok, let's leave it for once a week then?
(Shaul) Do we have a second to Roger's motion
(Jurian) once a month (one meeting a month) :)
(Gerard) Yes, Jurian :)
(Shaul) right, right, once a month of course
(Roger) Well, once a month is fine, just right before the meeting like today :)
(Brent) I second the motion
(Shaul) We have a motion that we adopt a policy stating that a watch room be
used by visitors of our board meetings
(Shaul) (The second part of that motion that we'll agree is in there as well
is that
(Shaul) the Board Meetings themselves shall be closed to all save those
people who have been specifically invited by the Board.
(Shaul) Any visitors not invited to attend can watch the meeting from the
Watching Room.
(Shaul) If there's no objection to the above - we'll have the vote now.
(Roger) yes
(Jurian) Yes
(Shaul) All in favor 'yes', opposed 'no'.
(Shaul) I vote 'yes'.
(Brent) yes Shirley yes
(Gerard) yes
(Shaul) The motion to have closed Board Meetings and Watching Room for
visitors is carried
(Shaul) Item 6 on the Agenda: Short discussion about what to do when members
are absent.
(Shaul) Was there a big mess here just now when you noticed that I was gone?
(I don't have the log for those times)
(Jurian) Not really, we were just wondering how long we should wait for you
to get back
(Shaul) The discussion is actually not absent members but absent 'position
holders', such as Chairman of the Meeting, and such.
(Shaul) Ah, ok. So maybe we should set some sort of time limit?
(Shaul) it seems that it would be fair to everyone...
(Jurian) yeah, something between 5 - 10 minutes I think
(Shaul) we can set it so that if during a real time meeting, such as right
now, a person who's report is being expected, or a person who's running the
(Roger) 5 minutes is about right. More than enough time to reboot and log on.
(Shaul) or anyone else who's expected to speak - is gone for five minutes or
(Shaul) then: if it's the Chairman - the remaining members elect another
(Jurian) wasn't that supposed to be last meetings chairman, if available?
(Roger) And in the absence of a quorom?
(Shaul) If it's another member or visitor who's expected to speak - then we
move on to another item on the Agenda, until the person comes back.
(Shaul) That's a very valid question, Roger!
(Shaul) What happens if a meeting suddenly goes below a quorum?
(Shaul) It's usually adjudged in such cases that the meeting has to be
adjourned, unfortunately.
(Shaul) Because you can't carry a motion if you don't have a quorum.
(Jurian) I dont know much about the official rules, but I don't think we can
go on without a quorum
(Shaul) That's why the tail end of the vote of number 3 was correct,
(Roger) In the past, if we suddenly lost a quorom and it wasn't restored in
a reasonable amount of time, we sent any current votecall to email and
adjourned the meeting.
(Shaul) I saw Brent saying that we need to wait for my vote, which is correct.
(Brent) Question:
(Shaul) That would be the thing to do then, Roger.
(Gerard) Right Roger ...
(Brent) are absentee votes legal for a quarium?
(Brent) (Nancy's email) she voted on items is this legal?
(Shaul) I think that it can be, it's true! We have her 'absentee' votes.
(Roger) Since this is an Internet corporation, we do have the luxury of
email votecall, but I think this has to be after a motion and second.
(Shaul) It could be said that Nancy's delegated 'proxy' to each one of us.
(Shaul) What do you mean, Roger, what motion?
(Roger) Right, if needed to make a quorum or to swing a vote, her absentee
is counted.
(Brent) Seems true, Shirley agrees, Shirley says if there is a question, we
could vote a new bylaw.
(Shaul) I'm sorry I don't understand, what question?
(Roger) The email votecalls of the past were only following a motion and
second in the usual way. Nancy's votes prior to this meeting don't
constitute motion or second.
(Brent) Absentee voting
(Shaul) well, not the votes themselves, no.
(Jurian) stupid question, but how can we make a motion and a second without
a quorum?
(Shaul) But if you note - I counted Nancy's suggestion that we compensate
Shirley as a motion.
(Brent) we can't
(Roger) A motion and second only requires two people.
(Shaul) Well Jurian, the point is that when we have a note like Nancy's, then
technically she can be counted as present at the meeting!
(Jurian) yeah, I fully agree with that part :)
(Gerard) Brent left
(Shaul) yes, we're 'below quorum' again...
*** Brent has joined #TT-Inc
(Jurian) I do suggest we try to speed things up a little, meeting is taking
quite long (not that its a problem to me, but some might have high phone
bills cause of it)
(Roger) Shaul, Item 6 is concerning "the issue of what to do in the event of
a continuous absence of an important position holder who is not an Officer,
such as General Project Manager "
(Roger) Did we loose Shaul again?
(Jurian) looks that way
(Jurian) or his connection is being very slow
(Roger) We should try to wind this up.
(Brent) Did we miss a vote on Item 6 when we got bumped?
(Jurian) no
(Gerard) okay let's wait for Shaul
(Roger) Wendy, you were invited to talk about your clothing project
primarily, but Nancy also mentioned something related to the Seed team on
the agenda. Were you going to wait and check into gardening plots, etc.
before requesting funding?
(Wendy) Yes, I intend to do research on plots before presenting that....
(Wendy) And there is a possibility something may 'turn up' for free
before next spring.
(Roger) Right. So the funding Nancy mentions in her email is just in
reference to the clothing project.
(Wendy) As for the Clothing Project, most was itemized and should be
clear from the plan I submitted...
(Wendy) but I can answer questions, and need a little clarification on
(Brent) True, Wendy, a nice plan layout :)
(Roger) What clarification do you need?
(Wendy) I have a digital camcorder... Does the Inc WANT instructional
video footage for Clothing Project??
(Roger) Of course!
(Wendy) Note: would need to be disseminated as streaming, because
regular insertion on web...
(Wendy) is too large a download for most users.
(Jurian) yeah, as far as I know, all sorts of videos will be available for
viewing on the servers
(Wendy) OK, I will plan on video as well as still photos/text.
(Jurian) heh, why does everyone seem to think streaming video is any
smaller than just downloading it first? :)
(Wendy) Any questions for me on Clothing Project?
(Wendy) Jurian: I was under the impression streaming ran on the web.
(Brent) None here, none from Shirley
(Wendy) User doesn't have to download streaming???
(Jurian) it does, but you still get the entire video :)
(Jurian) just that you watch while downloading it
(Roger) None from here, looks exciting and informative. Can't wait for
your first procedure writeup and video :)
*** Shaul has joined #TT-Inc
(Wendy) My hubby estimates videos very large, in the gigs, very long to
download on 56K.
(Wendy) I will try to edit for smallest size possible, of course.
(Jurian) heh, that's if they stay in AVI / MPEG format, they'll have to be
converted to realvideo, which is MUCH smaller
(Wendy) Jurian: OK, I haven't learned about Realvideo yet.
(Brent) Realvideo is the way to go, I agree
(Jurian) we'll have to play around with it before we make the actual
videos, see what screen size works best
(Jurian) but we can only do that once we have the servers up and running
(Wendy) So can I go ahead and shoot footage, or is there something I
should know first?
(Shaul) Are we hearing Wendy's report now?
(Wendy) Yes, Shaul.
(Roger) Well, not really. Just discussing video and such.
(Jurian) you shoot it on tape / disk first right? only later will it be
converted to realvideo format, so yeah, go ahead and make them :)
(Wendy) OK, Jurian.
(Roger) Something to do while we waited for your return.
(Shaul) ah, so can we go on with item 6?
(Gerard) can we go back to business yet or
(Roger) yep.
(Jurian) yup
(Brent) yes, Item 6
(Shaul) right. Here's what I just copied from our Bylaws: The directors
present at a duly called and held meeting at which a quorum is initially
present may continue to do business notwithstanding the loss of a quorum at
the meeting due to a withdrawal of directors from the meeting, provided
that any action thereafter taken must be approved by the required quorum as
may be required by law, or the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws of this
(Shaul) I think this answers our question about the quorum!
(Roger) Item 6 was for discussion only and we didn't address the concern
"of what to do in the event of a continuous absence of an important
position holder who is not an Officer, such as General Project Manager"
(Brent) yes, indeed
(Shaul) do you have any suggestions, Roger?
(Roger) I think a replacement should be appointed until the return of the
(Shaul) right, that's what is usually done. but, for example right now: we
need Nancy's quarterly Treasurer's report, but can we elect a replacement
for her on that one?
(Shaul) appears that it's not always feasible...
(Brent) True, and in Rons absence, no one else has the needed info about
the PI projects
(Roger) The key word here is "continuous" or long-term. Nancy will be
present again shortly, while Ron will not be.
(Shaul) exactly. But we're talking only about our conduct at the meeting, I
think, not about what to do on the Inc in general.
(Shaul) (that was in answer to what Brent wrote)
(Shaul) (but it applies to what Roger said as well)
(Shaul) We can vote on the following policy, which is the only thing that's
really pressuring in real time:
(Shaul) to wait 5 minutes if the Chairman is gone, and if he's not back in 5
- elect another one.
(Shaul) b) if another person suddenly goes 'absent' - to move on to another
item on the Agenda until he 'reappears'.
(Shaul) Thoughts?
(Roger) Well item 6's heading is "Absent Staff-Discussion"
(Roger) But this appears to be a concern that needs to be dealt with.
(Shaul) It's true, this is supposed to be a discussion, but if a motion
arises as a result of any discussion - then it can be voted on if we want
(Roger) okay
(Brent) If it's the PaL, the VP or previous PaL can resume the meeting, if
there is a quorum
(Shaul) So, what I offered was a 'suggestion'. Question is - do we have
a motion, because if not we'll move on.
(Shaul) Ah, ok, Brent. But what if none of those are present?
(Roger) Let's move on because Brent statement is the current policy as I
understand it.
(Shaul) Better to decide that we'll have a vote, and naturally the VP or the
previous PAL will get to do it...
(Brent) Ok
(Shaul) This may require a change in the Bylaws, so maybe I'll just formulate
it for the next meeting, and meanwhile we can move on, what do you think?
(Brent) I agree, Shirley Too!!!!!
(Jurian) agreed
(Shaul) Right.
(Roger) thank you.
(Shaul) So, Item 7 on the Agenda - the 800 Nubmer.
(Shaul) I think that Nancy's 'I'll be absent' message is the first time I
heard that she's taken on a seasonal full time job.
(Roger) I think Nancy's request for a machine is reasonable and for more
efficient use of her time, but does this replace the 800 #?
(Shaul) I think that the issue of the 800 number warrants more discussion
before it's voted on, in that case.
(Shaul) that's exactly my sentiments as well,
(Shaul) Roger.
(Shaul) I thought that the 800 number was such an excellent idea, and to
suddenly change it at the very next meeting - that's just moving too
quickly for me.
(Roger) We could approve her purchase of a machine rather than the
answering service and table the 800 # issue until next time.
(Shaul) I think that's very reasonable, but in Nancy's message there's not
really anything about the cost of the machine...
(Shaul) does anybody know costs of these machines?
(Jurian) nope
(Shaul) so, how can we approve the cost?
(Roger) This is true. Last time I bought one, it cost $15 and was capable
of recording up to 10 minutes of messages digitally. She should obviously
get one that has a tape so more time is avaible.
(Jurian) heh, needs MUCH more time
(Brent) From Shirley: the answering machine is suppose to be a replacement
for the 800#, (not BOTH)
(Shaul) oh sure! she'd need at least 1.5 hour's worth, it's available
(Roger) But the cost is still going to be minimal in comparison to an
answering service.
(Shaul) That's right, Brent, that's what Nancy suggested.
(Shaul) But are we ready right now to completely 'do away' with the 800 # idea?
(Brent) not both, sorry
(Shaul) I don't think so.
(Roger) Shirley, I disagree. The 800 number should be available for access
to the answering machine.
(Roger) Otherwise, not many will call...
(Shaul) how's that, Roger? you're connecting them together?
(Shaul) I thought there's like a human answering service at the 800 number...
(Brent) Shirley quoting the Agenda,"then we can vote on purchaseing the
machine, instead of the 800# we voted on at the last meeting"
(Roger) Well I'm sure that can be set up, but you don't always get an
answering service when you call an 800 #. We could have an 800 # for the
Inc. and then just plug the answering machine into it.
(Shaul) Ah, you mean that it would save money for the 'human' answerer?
(Roger) Yea, I see the text too. I think the intent is confused here.
(Shaul) Well no, I can understand Nancy's intent. However, the problem is
that she's not here to defend it.
(Brent) No confusion, machine replaces 800#
(Shaul) right!
(Jurian) surely the answering machine needs to have an 800 number ?
(Shaul) but I disagree, and it seems that Roger does too.
(Roger) What I suggest and thought was the intent at the last meeting was
that we have an 800 # for the Inc. and use a service to answer the
calls. Now we could just use a machine at the Wisconsin site to answer
those calls.
(Shaul) Right, and this would save money.
(Roger) Exactly.
(Jurian) yeah
(Shaul) sure, an 800 number is an excellent idea for a corporation that wants
to help the public.
(Shaul) if someone can call toll-free, then he knows that there's some kind
of help.
(Shaul) If that's what we want to do, and I think that it is - then we DO
need the 800 number IN ADDITION to the answering machine.
(Shaul) Anyone else?
(Roger) Nancy's email is more to this point as she has verified that the
800 number is a logical number and is not 'tied to a physical address' in
that no one can obtain the address of the 800 number from
information. This will not violate MJ-12's provision.
(Shaul) that's right.
(Brent) Shirley: there was supposed to be a human answering service at other
end of the 800#, I think Nancy's intent when she wrote that text could have
been that the machine should replace the human answering answering service,
with the 800# attached
(Roger) So the 800 number can be listed for all to call Troubled Times and
they will get a machine to take their message when they call. Someone else
will then return their call later.
(Shaul) Now that I reread Nancy's message, I think that this is actually what
she meant!
(Jurian) Roger: agreed, that's exactly how I see it
(Shaul) I think that she's not talking about doing away with the 800 number,
but with the answering service.
(Shaul) She's saying - let's get the machine instead of the service.
(Jurian) the item is labeled "800 Number Change", not 800 removal
(Jurian) so, "change service to machine" is most likely what she meant
(Brent) True, Shaul and Shirley agrees
(Shaul) This seems very reasonable to me right now, so perhaps we can
entertain a motion and a vote to temporarily replace the 'answering
service' with an answering machine
(Brent) yes
(Shaul) with the cost to be determined later.
(Roger) I move that we approve the purchase of an answering machine for the
headquarters that will be capable of recording at least 90 minutes of
messages. The amount is unspecified as there has been no research into
cost, but this is a necessary purchase so should be approved.
(Brent) I second
(Roger) I further move that this purchase is NOT in lieu of an 800 phone
number, but in addition to it.
(Shaul) We have a motion and a second (which I will not repeat, it's just above)
(Shaul) Brent, does your second include that?
(Roger) Whoops. Did you all get part two of my motion?
(Shaul) yes
(Brent) yes Shaul
(Shaul) Fine, then. We're voting on both parts of Roger's motion, with
Brent's second.
(Shaul) all in favor 'yes', opposed 'no.
(Jurian) Yes
(Roger) Cool. Yes
(Brent) Brent yes Shirley Yes
(Shaul) I vote 'Yes'
(Gerard) yes
(Shaul) The motion to approve the purchase of an answering machine in lieu of
the answering service, with the cost to be determined later and the 800
number stays as voted on previously - that motion carries.
(Shaul) We move on to item 8 on the Agenda.
(Shaul) I think that it's agreed that in the Treasurer's absence we can't
hear the report, and so we'll have to postpone this item until the next
(Shaul) Agreed?
(Roger) Agree
(Brent) agreed, Shirley agrees
(Shaul) right.
(Jurian) agreed
(Shaul) We move to Item 9 on the Agenda, Budget Review. This we CAN talk about.
(Gerard) agreed
(Shaul) Please anyone, thoughts on this?
(Brent) Shaul, Shirley sugests tabeling for email discussion, and Nancy's input
(Roger) I second Shirley's suggestion!
(Jurian) as do I :)
(Brent) I do too, this far into the meeting....
(Shaul) uh... ok. I agree then. We'll move this item to the next meeting as
well, preceded by a lengthy discussion in the coming month!
(Shaul) RIGHT! Item 10, by God's grace!
(Brent) Excellent idea!
(Shaul) Project Status.
(Brent) Who do you want to go first, Shaul?
(Shaul) We have Nancy's e-mail with her reports on the projects. I don't
think this needs going over, unless someone has something to say (about
what Nancy wrote on her projects, I mean)
(Shaul) so, do you have anything on the Brochure, Shirley?
(Roger) Well there is the issue of Nancy needing help with the Seed Team
activities at the Wisconsin site.
(Shaul) What do you mean, Roger?
(Shaul) you mean like discuss the cost of this 'hired man' for the farming?
(Brent) From Shirley: the health topic has pretty well been covered. the
food topic, which is huge, has mostly been done. (more)
(Shaul) (man, Shirley's doing such an excellent job!)
(Roger) Well, it is mostly a report, but the agenda covers funding
proposals so we could give Nancy our encouragement to look into these costs.
(Brent) I just have to look at "animals that can be raised after the PS for
meat and clothing",I need to review the sections on outdoor gardening. (more)
(Shaul) Ah, ok, let's finish with the brochure, then.
(Roger) Sure
(Brent) after that, the food topic will be complete, and I will move on to
the shelter section. Thats a far as I've got.
(Shaul) I don't think that I have the time-table for it here, but does this
fit the expected times for this?
(Brent) Shirley says thank you all! :) Shirley: according to Nancy, we are
ahead of schedule.
(Shaul) Now, to go back to what Roger's started saying about encouraging
Nancy with the costs.
(Shaul) I have this to say about it: my idea was that tt workers or
volunteers are the ones that should be doing that.
(Shaul) but it seems that Nancy's had it with people living on her property.
(Shaul) so it seems that right now there's no choice but to hire an outside man.
(Roger) Yeah, but the tilling is a time-sensitive issue.
(Roger) It has to be done when the climate is right, not when there is a
volunteer handy.
(Shaul) still there may be someone from the tt who'd be willing to do it
seasonally for money!
(Shaul) We never asked, have we?
(Shaul) we just go and hire an outsider right away.
(Shaul) why not help our own people first?
(Shaul) or maybe there's no time for that anymore, because this is seasonal...
(Roger) This is true. I have been there and would be willing to go again,
but the concern for timing is high and my availability is limited.
(Wendy) The problem is location, Shaul. Being done at Nancy's location.
(Wendy) Makes more sense to 'farm it out' to other's locations.
(Shaul) Oh, sure I agree. But there's people who'd be willing to relocate for
a season, young people with no families
(Roger) What Wendy? What do you mean?
(Wendy) I mean you, me, others, Roger. Us doing it, not Nancy.
(Roger) Nancy has 1 acre of beautiful soil there, ready for growing save
for the fact that it needs tilling next spring, prior to planting.
(Shaul) so, what's the farmer for right now?
(Roger) She also needs a helping hand to plant it and then to harvest it
come fall.
(Wendy) I can go on the record as saying harvest is A LOT of work...
(Shaul) Ah, Roger, so we're talking about the farmer for the spring, right?
(Wendy) More than Nancy alone can do.
(Brent) Nancy got volunteers to help harvest, I would think that she could
get the same for tilling and planting.
(Shaul) is there anything that needs to be done before winter
(Wendy) No, not now, not this winter.
(Shaul) Does she really have them?
(Shaul) the volunteers, I mean
(Wendy) Volunteers are iffy.
(Roger) Well, tilling now could be an advantage, but she will need to till
again come spring.
(Shaul) The point is, do we need to decide anything right now, other then
giving Nancy the encouragement?
(Brent) Do we need to worry about this NOW, or could we discuss closer to
(Wendy) Right now, no, but I suggest you start moving towards others,
away from Nancy.
(Wendy) Too much work to expect out of her.
(Roger) No, just encourage her to check into it. She is more than
overwhelmed there in Wisconsin and needs our backup...
(Wendy) I also suggest you consider a goal amount of seed you want.
(Shaul) Right, so let's just agree now that Nancy should look into the issue
of hired help, the costs, availability etc.
(Wendy) Something definite to work towards.
(Shaul) the rest of this can be dealt with on the Seed Team.
(Roger) Yep!
(Brent) Agreed, both brent and Shirley
(Shaul) Well, since we're already talking about it - is there a report from
the Seed Team? Wendy or Roger (Toni and Nancy are not here)
(Wendy) Report? I have bags of seeds. Quantities? Varies...
(Wendy) Couple quarts of corn and beans, a lot of tomato..
(Wendy) Less other stuff, but still some variety.
(Shaul) I assume you know all about their long term storage, right?
(Roger) Yea, I need to leave here in about 10 minutes. I am unsure of my
quantities yet on seed. I can say that Nancy has outdone the entire rest
of the team!
(Wendy) Still have to finish squash and pumpkin before mailing to Roger.
(Wendy) I ship to Roger. Roger does long term storage.
(Roger) Yep
(Shaul) Since Roger has to leave in 10 minutes, I suggest we pause for a
second and deal with item 11
(Shaul) the reason I want to deal with it is because I want to nominate Roger
as the next President at Large.
(Roger) Just bought a 21 cubic foot freezer for that purpose. I will keep
some meat and stuff in there as well, so it's not a complete gift to the
effort, but it will hold the TT seed I have here.
(Shaul) Is Wendy on your Hub and that's why she's sending you the seed?
(Brent) I second Rogers Nomination
(Shaul) a clarification:
(Shaul) Discussion on Item 10 of the Agenda has been paused.
(Roger) Yes, Wendy is one of my growers.
(Shaul) We moved on to Item 11, since Roger's notified us that he has to
leave in 10 minutes.
(Shaul) I have just remembered that I can't make motions. So, we'll assume
that Brent's second was actually the motion to nominate Roger as the next PaL
(Shaul) Is there a second to that now?
(Brent) Agreed, shaul
(Brent) Shirley 2nd s
(Roger) Well, I suppose I can accept my nomination for PAL, but I will need
some assistance with monitoring the Agenda needs, etc. as I have an extreme
schedule as a graduate student, teaching assistant, and father of a 10 year
(Shaul) We have a motion and a second to have Roger serve as this
Corporarion's President at Large.
(Shaul) You can rest assured that you'll get all the assistance you need, Roger!
(Brent) Yes, Roger, I'll help
(Shaul) so, we'll have the vote on this. In favor - 'yes', opposed 'no'.
(Shaul) I vote 'Yes'
(Roger) abstain
(Gerard) yes
(Jurian) Yes
(Brent) Brent Yes, Shirley yes
(Shaul) Motion's been carried as phrased! Congratulations Roger!!!
(Shaul) now, we go back to the Seed Team report, Item 10.
(Shaul) Do you guys have anything to add, Wendy, Roger, or anyone? Please do so.
(Wendy) Just that I think responsibility needs to be shifted off Nancy...
(Wendy) I am willing to take some of it if I know goal quantities...
(Gerard) I don't have anything to add at the moment
(Shaul) That sounds very good, Wendy, and I agree. But what about that acre
of prime land?
(Wendy) More of 'a plan' needed, in short.
(Shaul) As I gather, it was purchased for the specific reason of the Seed
Team, no?
(Wendy) Honestly, Shaul, I think its a wasted acre.
(Roger) The seed team goals are a bit fuzzy, but that's not the extent of
Nancy's responsibilities in Wisconsin.
(Shaul) exactly. but does it need to be wasted?
(Wendy) She can't do it alone, can't count on volunteers, doesn't want
(Wendy) Only other option is hired help... expensive.
(Shaul) yup, that's basically the situation now.
(Roger) She wants someone to relocate to the area and use the land maybe?
(Shaul) but I don't think this is 'closed' by any means. We can discuss it
with her and amongst the membership
(Shaul) see what are our options. We have to be very honest about this.
(Wendy) You have almost 6 months until planting time, when the issue
become critical.
(Shaul) Roger, I think that recently Nancy's expressed the idea that she
doesn't want visitors or live-ins any more.
(Shaul) Ah, Wendy, that's right. So we have all winter to talk about it,
which is good.
(Shaul) Many things may change, money may come in,
(Roger) Right, but if someone moves into the area as an independent citizen...
(Shaul) And we'll have a clearer picture on that 'Montana' land.
(Wendy) An acre is BIG, and needs CONSTANT upkeep, not just spring and
(Wendy) Montana land was not meant to grow seed, IMO.
(Roger) Well, it's not really all that big. My father has managed up to
4000 square feet of planted space just fine with only me to help :0
(Wendy) And an acre is how many sq feet?????
(Michael) 193600 sq ft (I think)
(Jurian) 100 x 100 meters I think, so 300 x 300 sq ft ? dunno
(Brent) So its agreed we can discuss this later.....on the lists
(Michael) 440 x 440 is what my memory held as to the size of an acre
(Shaul) let's have Jurian's report on the Server now. We can discuss the rest
on the list.
(Roger) Notice I said 'planted' space. That acre site in Wisconsin is row
planted and utilizes only about 33% of that space for planting.
(Shaul) we've already agreed that Nancy should look into the costs of the
(Jurian) not much to report on the server, we've gone over it in the
beginning of the meeting haven't we? basically, can't do anything till they
are online
(Shaul) ok. then we move on even further.
(Jurian) servers, that is, there's 2 of them :)
(Shaul) Michael!
(Shaul) At long last, it is you.
(Shaul) thanks for your patience, and now you can say whatever you want about
the project.
(Shaul) whatever you feel we need to know or to discuss, that is.
(Shaul) This is Michael now, on the 'On foot' project.
(Shaul) are you there, my friend?
(Michael) well, nothing has changed since I posted my summary on the
tt-inc list.
(Roger) Well, my ten minutes are up and they are now pressing at the
gate. I must go. C-ya all next time.
(Michael) Does anybody have any questions regarding the project?
(Shaul) Does anybody have anything to say about Michael's summary which was
posted on the list?
(Shaul) Oh, MAN!
(Shaul) now that Roger's gone, and as per our discussion before, we're below
(Brent) Shirley thought the summary looked great, (so did I :-) )
(Gerard) Yes
(Shaul) that means we can't vote on that money for the On Foot and for
(Gerard) we are below quorum now
(Wendy) Perhaps you could do discussion and vote by email?
(Gerard) but we could move that one to the vote by email
(Shaul) Nancy's e-mail vote can be counted as a 'tie-breaker' if we had a
tie, but not a quorum.
(Michael) I would assume we can still discuss but no voting?
(Shaul) That sounds good, guys.
(Brent) I didn't think we intended to vote, just receive the report and discuss
(Shaul) right, right...
(Michael) nothing to vote on now for "On Foot" anyway
(Shaul) so, we go on. I also think it's an excellent report, Michael, some
really good ideas.
(Brent) yes, Michael excellent!
(Shaul) well, do we have a general agreement here that the costs outlined by
Michael would be no probelm for us to apporve when the vote came?
(Brent) Shirley has no problem, neither do I
(Shaul) And is there anything else with the On Foot project?
(Gerard) Not from me
(Michael) Not really at this time. At one point I discussed with Ron
Darby the possibility of attending a survival school but we felt it would
be too large of an expense
(Shaul) ok, thanks Michael, and definitely keep the list posted on any
developments, or when you actually need that money to invest.
(Shaul) Ah, the survival school. Well, can TT set something like that up, maybe?
(Michael) no problem Shaul.
(Shaul) now THAT would be a way to make money, if anyone wants to make money!
(Michael) Who would teach it?
(Michael) Who is qualified?
(Shaul) well, Ron, Clipper, Susan, any ex-military or survival people.
(Shaul) Or people with outdoor experience, like Laura and Maggie or Tim Harmon
(Shaul) Tell you what, I'd just thought about this, so maybe we'll table it
for now.
(Shaul) I'll try to think it out further, talk to Ron, and write something up.
(Michael) well, if there are no other questions regarding "On Foot", then
I've got to split.
(Shaul) Right! So, we have Wendy left!
(Gerard) we should adjourn vote to adjourn
(Gerard) I make the vote to adjourn
(Shaul) OK, I hear you guys. We already have Wendy's report on paper.
(Shaul) Do we have a second to the motion to adjourn?
(Jurian) I second the motion
(Shaul) all in favor - 'yes'
(Gerard) Yes
(Jurian) yes
(Shaul) yes
(Brent) Brent yes, Shirley Yes!
(Shaul) This meeting IS ADJOURNED!