National Meeting Log 20100113

Meeting Log This page contains a transcript or log of a meeting that occurred on the 13th January 2010. It should be used for reference only and does not need to be edited.

[20:05] Roderick_Laptop: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Meeting_Agenda - I guess we'll wait until crafti shows to discuss Brendan's points on the agenda.
[20:05] Roderick_Laptop: We can discuss from point 5 onwards.
[20:05] frew: Hope we dont stress you out Rod. I think of the PPAU as therapy 
[20:06] Brendan: Roderick_Laptop: is it that obvious I wrote it
[20:06] Brendan: rofl
[20:06] Roderick_Laptop: haha - it's a little like that frew. so much to organise - we need a nsw meeting soon.
[20:06] Roderick_Laptop: nog3, i get an rss feed of recent changes 
[20:06] frew: indeed
[20:06] stefan: whoops, didn't see the agenda, guess it's good I'm here for 6.2 & 6.3
[20:06] Roderick_Laptop: nog3, not nog3
[20:06] Roderick_Laptop: nog3, not
[20:06] stefan: and 3.1.3
[20:06] Roderick_Laptop: ah - it keeps autocompleting.
[20:06] Brendan: lol
[20:07] stefan: fail client
[20:07] stefan: x-chat does that? 
[20:07] Brendan: he's on a mac
[20:07] Brendan: macs do what they want
[20:07] Roderick_Laptop: ok - well point 5 - acta, i better update everyone.
[20:07] Roderick_Laptop: i talked to a few people at dfat today.
[20:08] Roderick_Laptop: i narrowed my search, and got a good response.
[20:08] Brendan: oh?
[20:08] Roderick_Laptop: i'll go down to canberra in early feb/late jan for a debriefing.
[20:08] Brendan: explain
[20:08] Roderick_Laptop: and blog the meeting outcome.
[20:08] Brendan: what is this debriefing
[20:08] Roderick_Laptop: well, they've offered me a debriefing with a senior departmental officer.
[20:09] Brendan: cool
[20:09] Roderick_Laptop: which i've taken up.
[20:09] Roderick_Laptop: so if anyone has particular questions they want answered/asked, let me know.
[20:10] Roderick_Laptop: i'll be sure to relay them.
[20:10] DavidGaetjens: Thats brilliant. How do you feel about contacting the ACTA mailing list for suggestions?
[20:11] Roderick_Laptop: the discussion list? I'll ask once I get confirmation of date.
[20:12] Roderick_Laptop: anyway, that's really just FYI.
[20:12] Roderick_Laptop: the internet filtering groups - whats doing there stefan?
[20:12] Roderick_Laptop: I assume you'd know, considering Jasmine has been discussing progress etc with you?
[20:13] stefan: I do, I was in a meeting with the SIC BNE group last night
[20:13] stefan: starting with SA, we're having a meeting on Thurs with guests Mark Newton & Sen Simon Birmingham to discuss our options, and are intending to brand as the SIC group after talking to them (and EFA) about it
[20:14] stefan: Glancey will also be talking about our options for getting the message out there, and having done it before, why protesting is fail
[20:14] stefan: all of which will be on youtube for the benefit of other states
[20:14] Roderick_Laptop: ah great
[20:15] stefan: QLD has a very similar approach to us, and we've shared some good ideas already, basically education not protest, but QLD are doing an Aust Day BBQ which SA is not so keen on, nor do we have time to organise
[20:15] Roderick_Laptop: we were just contacting possible speakers today.
[20:15] stefan: for Sydney?
[20:15] Roderick_Laptop: yeah
[20:15] Roderick_Laptop: what sort of ideas are we talking? just public forums and community meetings etc?
[20:16] stefan: ok, BTF (block-the-filter.org) is attending SA, they said they would send someone to Sydney too, but realise that we don't want to protest, so aren't all that interested
[20:16] stefan: yeah, basically
[20:16] Roderick_Laptop: would you be able to put me in contact with the sydney group
[20:16] Roderick_Laptop: because i wasn't aware of anything being organised here
[20:16] stefan: BTF have also said they would can the protests *if* EFA directly told them to, so some people seemto be putting the pressure on them to do that
[20:16] Brendan: Crafti will be 20 minutes late
[20:16] Carter joined the chat room.
[20:17] Brendan: His wife says he has class.
[20:17] Brendan: lol
[20:17] Brendan: I didn't even know he was married
[20:17] Roderick_Laptop: um ok?
[20:17] Roderick_Laptop: did you call?
[20:17] Brendan: no
[20:17] Brendan: gtalk
[20:17] Brendan: she was on his account or something
[20:17] stefan: Rod, I think frew is organising Sydney as Ben Sand is busy
[20:17] frew: yeah we are both on it
[20:18] frew: got Geordie from the EFA today who said he could speak assuming the time was OK.
[20:18] Roderick_Laptop: I expect similar from ALIA
[20:18] Roderick_Laptop: I can't imagine the NSWCCL will be averse to it.
[20:19] Roderick_Laptop: and I'll probably mc the thing.
[20:19] stefan: what about Kate Lundy? she's ACT but might consider coming down if you approach her the right way
[20:20] Roderick_Laptop: Might be an idea, if she can stop spinning for a couple of hours. Can't hurt to try.
[20:20] stefan: may or may not be a good idea
[20:21] Roderick_Laptop: any idea on numbers for the adelaide meeting?
[20:21] stefan: no idea
[20:21] stefan: I think 25 confirmed on facebook, but we're advertising far beyond that
[20:22] Roderick_Laptop: oh, and who is the 'australian internet lobby' ?
[20:22] stefan: and Mark Newton has since retweeted us
[20:22] stefan: a group that Michael Hill started up by himself, and will be euthenised after the meeting
[20:22] Roderick_Laptop: ah, that's good news.
[20:25] Ash_Wiren_UTC8 left the chat room. (Ping timeout)
[20:26] Ash_Wiren_UTC8 joined the chat room.
[20:27] stefan: btw, do we have any video editing/syncing guys around here? might need to get someone to put the SA meeting video together
[20:27] stefan: video & audio probably from different sources
[20:28] Roderick_Laptop: there was Andrew (from BNE if I recall) who did a bit of that sort of stuff.
[20:28] Roderick_Laptop: I'll find his contact
[20:28] stefan: and if you get Sydney promoted in the right places, you might get people approach you about it too, that's what happened with Sen Birmingham
[20:29] frew: I know David Cheng does video stuff, but he is travelling around Australia ATM
[20:29] stefan: he asked his assistant to ontact us to speak there and rearrange his schedule accordingly
[20:29] Roderick_Laptop: Oh yeah, I forgot about Dave
[20:29] stefan: yeah, there's probably someone from SIC QLD too
[20:30] Paul_Templeton: I have a few strategies that could double our membership over night - can't wait to the meeting
[20:30] stefan: Rod, do you think 250 is a good estimate of our membership right now?
[20:30] Roderick_Laptop: yeah 250, perhaps a few just over.
[20:31] Roderick_Laptop: I went for a walk today, and got a few memberships from a few people.
[20:31] flatwhatson joined the chat room.
[20:31] Roderick_Laptop: We really need public meetings - people are requesting them in Melbourne.
[20:32] sdunster-laptop: Carter wants to join
[20:32] DavidGaetjens: Thanks. That is exactly the kind of thing more people need to be doing (collecting memberships).
[20:32] stefan: yeah, we need branches for that too
[20:32] stefan: well, not need, but it helps
[20:32] Roderick_Laptop: I've been organising one for Sydney, and I said from the first day we need to have autonomous organisations in every city.
[20:32] Roderick_Laptop:  /state/
[20:33] frew: I'll get started on organising a PP meeting in Wollongong, we have a few members and many more on the Facebook group etc
[20:33] stefan: and if you want to get started, I guess SA has done a lot of the leg work for you guys too
[20:34] Roderick_Laptop: good stuff. I mean, I've almost finished drafting that platform, the rest of it is just small changes, from there you can build on each issue.
[20:34] stefan: except we haven't got IT/S to sort out websites for us yet, but that's a whole other issue
[20:35] Brendan: Roderick_Laptop: next meeting we hold should have a very specific feature to gain members
[20:35] Brendan: sending out mail stating that the people sitting on the fence should attend a meeting to see how it is
[20:35] Brendan: where members can answer any questions about joining they may have
[20:36] Roderick_Laptop: Yeah - the first few meetings were very broad, and we did a lot of leg work regarding policy and structure.
[20:36] Roderick_Laptop: I guess that's the boring stuff out of the way now.
[20:36] Brendan: that meeting
[20:36] DavidGaetjens: Good idea, although a live meeting may be more appropriate for that kind of thing.
[20:36] Brendan: was so fuckign boring
[20:36] Brendan: I honestly wanted to punch myself in the face
[20:36] Brendan: lol
[20:36] Roderick_Laptop: haha - unfortunately, it had to be done.
[20:36] frew: ah wasnt so bad, been through much worse than those
[20:37] Brendan: I plan to not sit through that kind of boredom again
[20:37] • Brendan nods
[20:37] stefan: and having people at these meetings that are familiar with policy etc is critical
[20:37] Brendan: DavidGaetjens: that's what I was talking about...
[20:37] Brendan: a live meeting, in NSW
[20:37] stefan: I got stacks of questions thrown at me in SA, all good ones, but the newer members may not have known all the answers
[20:38] DavidGaetjens: <stefan> Agreed, though I'm sure most members will pick up things like that later.
[20:38] Roderick_Laptop: Yeah - if you wanted a boring meeting, you should have been at the constitutional drafting.
[20:38] DavidGaetjens: *Shudders.
[20:38] frew: got a fair bit of interest about the PP at the first meeting in Sydney about the filter
[20:38] Brendan: stefan: people like me
[20:38] Brendan: and Rodney
[20:39] Brendan: plus it's always a boost to say "Hi, I'm the state coordinator, and this is the party secretary and head of IT."
[20:39] Roderick_Laptop: Considering I wrote the majority of it, I'd consider myself fairly knowledgeable about it 
[20:39] stefan: exactly Brendan, but other states need them too
[20:39] DavidGaetjens: Indeed <Brendan>. If you have a title, don't be afraid to announce it.
[20:39] Hellar joined the chat room.
[20:40] Roderick_Laptop: It will come - I'll annotate the policy to give a bit more explanation
[20:40] Brendan: stefan: other states have them
[20:40] Brendan: SA, VIC and QLD have high level reps
[20:40] Brendan: dont be silly now
[20:40] stefan: what about WA?
[20:40] Brendan: what's WA
[20:40] Brendan: oh, that state
[20:40] Brendan: that was rejected by the Dutch
[20:40] Brendan: _that_ state.
[20:41] Roderick_Laptop: I need to call Yagan and see what's happening.
[20:41] Brendan: he's on gtalk
[20:41] Brendan: oh wait
[20:41] Brendan: he left
[20:41] Roderick_Laptop: WA has a highly disproportionate member numbers.
[20:42] Roderick_Laptop: With a good co-ordinator, they could be a really strong regional group.
[20:42] Brendan: I wouldnt cry if someone else wanted the NSW coordinator position btw, I'm not that apt at organising things bigger than small meetings >_>
[20:43] Roderick_Laptop: Like I said, I don't mind fulfilling that role when you can't. I just need a hand every now and then.
[20:43] jsmith left the chat room. (Ping timeout)
[20:43] Roderick_Laptop: And a good crew. What do you think about a NSW discussion list?
[20:44] Roderick_Laptop: That we just add all members to, and they can unsubscribe from if they don't want to participate?
[20:44] Brendan: I dont know how relevant that would be
[20:44] stefan: fyi, the SA lists work that we have announce.sa members get subscribed to, general.sa they join if they want (but announce.sa is reply-to there), and pr.sa that is just media releases should we hav any
[20:44] frew: well we could spam members without spamming all the members
[20:45] frew:
[20:45] Brendan: Roderick_Laptop: lets not considering expanding naything yet please
[20:45] Brendan: I'm a bit weary of expanding _anything_ right now
[20:46] Roderick_Laptop: http://www.gulli.com/news/piratenpartei-nackte-flashmobs-gegen-nacktscanner-2010-01-10 heh
[20:46] Roderick_Laptop: yep
[20:46] Brendan: when does this meeting start
[20:46] Brendan: lol
[20:46] Roderick_Laptop: still waiting for crafti
[20:47] Roderick_Laptop: regarding those other points.
[20:48] Brendan: maybe he is hiding
[20:50] Roderick_Laptop: well, we can just discuss them anyway, there are logs, he can request them if necessary.
[20:50] sdunster-laptop: on that note, are we going to be putting these logs onto the wiki?
[20:51] jsmith joined the chat room.
[20:51] sdunster-laptop: i know a few weeks back i went on there looking and was dissapointed they weren't up there
[20:51] Brendan: I dont log, otherwise I would
[20:51] sdunster-laptop: i ran out've battery and missed a heap of the meeting
[20:51] Roderick_Laptop: ok, who wants to be responsible for that?
[20:51] sdunster-laptop: i'm happy to do it if you like...
[20:51] Roderick_Laptop: when was that sdunster? i'll have a look
[20:51] sdunster-laptop: nah don't worry about it now
[20:52] Roderick_Laptop: I don't know if I logged it.
[20:52] Brendan: his wife types slowly
[20:52] Brendan: lol
[20:52] Brendan: grammatically correct, but slow
[20:52] Roderick_Laptop: that'll be good if you could sdunster.
[20:52] Brendan: I'll skip point 1
[20:52] sdunster-laptop: np
[20:52] Brendan: point 2
[20:52] Brendan: Paul_Templeton: the job at the bottom of the page
[20:52] Brendan: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Group_Policy_and_Guidelines
[20:52] Brendan: do you agree with the implementation of the job requirements
[20:52] Brendan: and would you be willing to take these powers
[20:53] Brendan: and responsibilities
[20:53] Paul_Templeton: looking
[20:53] Brendan: btw, you are the deputy secretary, right?
[20:53] Brendan: I can never remember who is who
[20:53] Roderick_Laptop: Treasurer
[20:53] Brendan: oh
[20:53] Brendan: in that case, I pointed at the wrong person, sorry
[20:53] Brendan: Roderick_Laptop: who is the dep sec
[20:54] Roderick_Laptop: Michael Nadler
[20:54] Brendan: Nadler
[20:54] Brendan: right
[20:54] Brendan: and he isnt here
[20:54] Brendan: ANYWAY
[20:54] Brendan: I would like to see the committees consolidated into the groups on that page there
[20:54] Roderick_Laptop: nah, i should have done that at the beginning, Mick gives his apologies, family engagement
[20:54] Brendan: with someoen they must report to once a week
[20:54] Brendan: so that they can be kept tabs on
[20:55] dcrafti joined the chat room.
[20:55] dcrafti was promoted to operator by ChanServ.
[20:55] Brendan: right now the IT/S group has no-one active
[20:55] Roderick_Laptop: 14 days should sufficient.
[20:55] dcrafti: Hi guys
[20:55] Brendan: and the guys with the passwords
[20:55] Brendan: they are not around
[20:55] dcrafti: Sorry I'm late. Uni on Wednesday
[20:55] Brendan: so what happens in an emergency
[20:55] Brendan: nobody they can go to for assistance
[20:55] Roderick_Laptop: I have passwords to everything. 
[20:55] Paul_Templeton: brendon: sounds fine
[20:56] Brendan: Paul_Templeton: I thought you were the dep secretary, lol, sorry
[20:56] dcrafti: So, run down please
[20:56] Brendan: dcrafti: we waited for you
[20:56] Brendan: discussion just began basically
[20:56] Brendan: the committees require reorganisation
[20:56] Brendan: to maximise our resource usage
[20:56] Brendan: and our efficiency
[20:56] Brendan: and this needs to be done asap
[20:56] Brendan: not "soon"
[20:57] Brendan: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Group_Policy_and_Guidelines should be used as a guide, if not almost verbatim
[20:57] Brendan: with some changes
[20:58] DavidGaetjens was promoted to operator by Brendan.
[20:58] Roderick_Laptop was promoted to operator by Brendan.
[20:58] Roderick_Laptop: Well, I've drafted the by-laws that are necessary for committee construction. I think snappy comebacks can be pissed off. I haven't got the time to manage it, and anyone that wants to write copy or faqs can.
[20:58] Roderick_Laptop: If you can start on the terms of reference for each committee
[20:58] Brendan: with any level of literacy
[20:59] Roderick_Laptop: and documenting the structures, and what they've done/haven't done.
[20:59] Brendan: what do you mean
[20:59] Roderick_Laptop: then we can start to ascertain how we should reorganise
[21:00] Brendan: each group has a leader that should designate jobs as required between the members of the group
[21:00] Brendan: in my plan
[21:00] frew: We should make comittee membership open to all full members who have an interest and are active in paticipating IMO
[21:00] Roderick_Laptop: well, talk to each committee head, and see what the hell they think their committee is actually for, what their responsibilities are.
[21:00] Roderick_Laptop: and document that responsibility, because at the moment it is all very vague.
[21:00] Roderick_Laptop: agree frew
[21:01] Brendan: have you considered that why we need to start anew
[21:01] Brendan: lol
[21:01] Brendan: with these groups
[21:01] Brendan: rather than refactor the old ones
[21:02] Hawk_BNE joined the chat room.
[21:02] DavidGaetjens: While I agree that we have too many groups and that it may be a good idea to re-organise, we do need to consult everyone involved. We cannot make these kind of decisions rashly without annoying a lot of people.
[21:03] Brendan: there's not a lot of people, that's the other issue
[21:03] Brendan: we have ghost committees
[21:03] frew: I agree DavidG
[21:03] Brendan: media relations has two people last I heard
[21:03] Brendan: and I dont know anyone involved with campaigns
[21:03] Roderick_Laptop: the guys in campaigns are all in vic I think?
[21:03] Brendan: IT/S wont even notice the changes, as they arent changes for them
[21:04] dcrafti: Brendan, you raise very good points, and we do need to rework the committees now that we have been around for 3 months.
[21:04] frew: I think one of the problems with  the comittees, is that when they were formed, some of the members stopped being active. Like the internet media comitte only has 3 people active at the moment. There hasnt been any new voice brought in to replace those that havent bothered to get involved.
[21:05] Brendan: internet media should be merged with campaigns
[21:05] Brendan: internet is just another medium
[21:05] Brendan: shouldnt be exclusive
[21:05] dcrafti: If you want to have a role in it, we will likely be happy for you to help the process. There are still issues that need to be discussed offline, however.
[21:05] Roderick_Laptop: yep.
[21:06] dcrafti: Internet media is more like a boundary between media relations and campaigns,
[21:06] Hawk_BNE: Can I chime in with a question here? (don't want to interrupt the flow though)
[21:06] Brendan: Hawk_BNE: shoot
[21:06] Roderick_Laptop: go ahead Hawk_BNE
[21:06] Brendan: dcrafti: sounds a tad redundant to have an entire group as a boundary
[21:06] Hawk_BNE: is there a media archive somewhere? Conroy soundbites etc?
[21:07] Brendan: use the head of groups as a boundary
[21:07] Brendan: Hawk_BNE: no, but that would be useful I think
[21:07] dcrafti: I am trying to say that its function should be taken as cooperation between the other two committees
[21:07] Roderick_Laptop: when we have the numbers, perhaps.
[21:07] Hawk_BNE: I have the skills n time- want to make a "Pauline Pantsdown" mix of Conroy...
[21:08] dcrafti: Hawk_BNE, good. Do it
[21:08] Roderick_Laptop: but at the moment, why enter into new levels of bureaucracy, and committees we have to manage.
[21:08] Hawk_BNE: need more soundbites... have scoured youtube and have a start, but more is always better
[21:08] Brendan: Roderick_Laptop: in reference to what
[21:08] Roderick_Laptop: internet media
[21:09] Brendan: it has no real purpose
[21:09] Roderick_Laptop: i second the im/campaigns should merge.
[21:09] Brendan: as there can be people within those committees
[21:09] Brendan: focused on the itnernet medium itself
[21:09] Brendan: it's certainly less confusing
[21:09] Roderick_Laptop: that was the consensus in sydney with dave, but i haven't heard whether he talked to haidon about it.
[21:09] dcrafti: OK, so media relations still handles the media side of the internet then
[21:09] Brendan: yes
[21:09] Brendan: and campaigns handles the campaigning
[21:09] Brendan: like viral videos, etc
[21:10] dcrafti: ok, agreed
[21:10] frew: Well there wil have to be co-operation, ATM internet media looks after twitter and FB
[21:10] Brendan: that's not campaigning though
[21:10] dcrafti: Cooperation will always be required.
[21:10] Roderick_Laptop: Hawk_BNE, stefan may want to talk to you re: a bit of vid from the SA Anti Filter meeting.
[21:10] Brendan: but yeah
[21:10] dcrafti: Brendan,Twitter can be used for campaigns
[21:11] frew: it is campaigning, its promoting events
[21:11] Brendan: of course, a telephone can be used for teleconferencing
[21:11] Brendan: the scopes overlap a bit
[21:11] Brendan: that's a given
[21:11] Brendan: the point is streamlining it so the gap is smaller
[21:12] Tunic joined the chat room.
[21:13] Roderick_Laptop: ok - what about your other points Brendan ?
[21:14] Brendan: hey?
[21:14] Brendan: point 1?
[21:14] Brendan: okl
[21:14] Brendan: dcrafti: why the sudden obsession with branching out to bikers
[21:14] Roderick_Laptop: 1,3,4
[21:15] DavidGaetjens: The bikies are something that I originally brought up. The idea behind it is that they seemed like a large group of people (in SA at least) that seemed to hold similar beliefs regarding civil rights.
[21:15] frew: I see some value, just in terms of defending civil liberties
[21:16] Hawk_BNE: When's the election?
[21:16] Roderick_Laptop: Hawk_BNE, Federal? I'm going to have a punt and say August.
[21:17] Roderick_Laptop: We may need to really push for membership in the next month and a half.
[21:17] dcrafti: Brendan, there is no obsession with branching out to bikers. I'd also like to remind you that this is a professional organisation, and that hyperbole and sarcasm will not help to make a point.
[21:17] Roderick_Laptop: I'm going to need people to really let me know about events that I can get along to and speak on behalf of the party at.
[21:17] Brendan: dcrafti: I'm not hyperbolising
[21:17] dcrafti: Bikers happen to be having a rally
[21:17] Brendan: a large majority of bikers are gang-related
[21:17] DavidGaetjens: The 'obsession' with bikies has been an ongoing discussion weighing the pro and cons of contacting a bikie organisation such as the motorcycle riders association of South Australia.
[21:17] dcrafti: We need members
[21:17] Brendan: and that's not something we need to associate with
[21:17] dcrafti: We should collect membership. It seems pretty obvious
[21:18] DavidGaetjens: Yes, the pros and cons include the potential for negative media attention and the potential for new members
[21:18] Brendan: you're focusing on the wrong civil liberties right now if you're looking at bikers
[21:18] Roderick_Laptop: It is very easy for us to be maligned at the moment.
[21:18] dcrafti: Brendan, should we kick out any members if we find out that they are bikers?
[21:18] Brendan: and you're doing nothing but harming our platform
[21:18] dcrafti: Brendan, you are out of line.
[21:18] Brendan: dcrafti: should we actively look for criminal members?
[21:18] dcrafti: No
[21:19] Brendan: I am not out of line
[21:19] Hawk_BNE: yeah u are
[21:19] Brendan: how so
[21:19] dcrafti: But the bikers are innocent until proven guilty and they are viable as members
[21:19] Brendan: are you blind to the fact that this can irreparably harm our image
[21:19] Brendan: at such an early point in the party's history?
[21:19] Brendan: that's the point i am trying to make
[21:20] Brendan: too much, too soon
[21:20] stefan: that depends if you want to talk about their legally correct image, or the general image in the community
[21:20] dcrafti: How so, about you being out of line? Well to start with, you forwarded a private email to everybody. You have been aggressive and have come across as very immature.
[21:20] DavidGaetjens: So far, no bikies have been officially contacted by the party due to these concerns.
[21:20] stefan: I'm pretty sure the SA council have unanimously agreed we shouldn't actively pursue bikers or any related association, but we wouldn't object to them taking part should they want to, would have to double check on the unanimous though
[21:20] Brendan: stefan: I was taking about their image, if I was misinterpretted then I wrote it incorrectly
[21:21] Brendan: dcrafti: I wasnt aware it was a 'private email'
[21:21] dcrafti: It was sent to just you. You forwarded it to allmembers and ripped shit into it in a way that didn't allow civilised reply
[21:21] Brendan: well to be fair, the email was basically taking a shot at me entirely
[21:22] DavidGaetjens: FYI: <stefan's comment>:unanimous did not include me - I did not vote on this.
[21:22] stefan: that is correct, you are not an SA council member
[21:22] Brendan: and if you fear people finding out your emails, don't send them in the first place
[21:22] dcrafti: It was also sent privately. If you want to have private discussions, then fine. You air stuff in public and things get nasty. We can't afford nasty
[21:22] Brendan: if you want assured confidentiality, profess your requirements
[21:22] dcrafti: Brendan, you are being immature
[21:22] Roderick_Laptop: Look - just as an aside, I think everyone appreciates things that I raised in the first discussion re: freedom of expression/association - however at this point in time, it's probably an unnecessary to target bikie groups.
[21:23] dcrafti: We are meant to be working towards a shared goal, not just criticising constantly
[21:23] Roderick_Laptop: especially where we haven't targeted our core demographic yet.
[21:23] Brendan: I am not criticising constantly
[21:23] Brendan: it is this _one_ issue that needs to be stamped out
[21:23] Brendan: and calling immaturity against me wont make it go away
[21:23] dcrafti: I know
[21:23] dcrafti: Only time will make it go away
[21:23] Hawk_BNE: Brendan- pull your head in
[21:25] Roderick_Laptop: I tend to agree with Brendan's sentiment though - not something we should be actively pursuing, from a purely cynical political perspective.
[21:25] dcrafti: We need to get involved in LAN parties for sure, but we should have a presence at *any* gathering that supports civil liberties
[21:25] DavidGaetjens: <Roderick_Laptop> I agree (with your 2nd to last comment). The original proposal was to contact an isolated group and we should be careful to do nothing beyond that in relation to bikies (if anything) at this point
[21:26] dcrafti: The media is totally ignoring us at the moment. I really think that having a few biker members, whose membership would be effectively secret, is much of an issue.
[21:26] dcrafti: Does anyone have any metrics or even anecdotes to prove otherwise?
[21:26] frew: got mentioned on RN this morning
[21:27] dcrafti: Yesterday morning there was the interview with Rick Falkvinge, if that's what you mean
[21:27] frew: ah yeah, just listened to the story on the ABC website
[21:29] Roderick_Laptop: anyway, discussion regarding membership fees.
[21:29] dcrafti: So Brendan, what are your intentions every time the NC, after discussion, makes a decision that you vehemently oppose?
[21:30] Brendan: as long as the discussion is with the party itself and not unanimous just within the NC, then I'm fine with it
[21:30] dcrafti: OK, but do you recognise the NC's authority as the executive arm of the party?
[21:30] Brendan: of course
[21:30] dcrafti: OK, then we can work with that.
[21:30] Brendan: if I didn't care, I wouldn't argue in the first place
[21:31] dcrafti: You've got a lot of good to bring to the party. I understand the frustration that can come from passion.
[21:31] Brendan: I just don't think all that much benefit can come from an influx of members pushing for a new platform
[21:31] stefan: I do find it interesting that since this topic was primarily for the benefit of SA, that although SA Council was involved in the original discussion, it wasn't involved in the final decision
[21:32] Faradn: I have to agree with Brendan's sentiment on this (not his words though) i don't think we should officially approach biker groups yet, its not a good look to the mainstream media IMO. focus on the freaks and geeks first
[21:32] DavidGaetjens: The bikie issue seems to have been blown out of proportion. It was my understanding that the current discussions were aimed at addressing this issue. To my understanding, no final decision has been made.
[21:32] stefan: I'm not sure I'd be too keen on seeing photos of us at biker protests, or at legalise mairjuana protests, at least not while we're such a minor and unknown party
[21:32] Brendan: baby steps
[21:32] dcrafti: Well, handling out leaflets and membership forms to whoever happens to be at the rally is not exactly courting the groups directly.
[21:32] frew: I thnk discussions like theare best on the discussion boards, where everyone can put in their considered input.
[21:33] Hawk_BNE: focus on the RSL veterans first... forget the geeks... Anzacs etc died for our freedom- and Conrpy wants to turn us into China?
[21:33] DavidGaetjens: Agreed frew
[21:33] frew: The bikie thing*
[21:33] Roderick_Laptop: nog3, its not out of proportion - you just have to look at similar instances that happened for instance, with the German party. They gave an interview to a right wing magazine about their platform, and we labelled Nazis
[21:33] Roderick_Laptop: not nog3 
[21:33] Roderick_Laptop: damn autocomplete.
[21:34] dcrafti: Do the RSL vets recognise that what we are doing is about freedom?
[21:34] Hawk_BNE: If they don't, we're not knocking on the right doors
[21:34] Faradn: i think we should table this now that Brendan and dcrafti have come to a settlement
[21:34] stefan: dcrafti: well given rally etiquette (and council bylaws?) you should be asking permission from the rally organisers to do that if it's in the area they've got rights to, I'd say that's debatable
[21:34] DavidGaetjens: <Hawk_BNE>: very interesting idea. I will look into this personally.
[21:34] Hawk_BNE: this is a MAINSTREAM argument- there's nothing niche or geek about it
[21:35] dcrafti: We have permission to hand out the forms.
[21:35] Brendan: Hawk_BNE: I hadnt considered we could push towards veterans like that
[21:35] Brendan: nice
[21:35] DavidGaetjens: (as in try to start up a discussion group of what to do, maybe an action group, not approach veterans directly that is).
[21:35] dcrafti: The problem with going for veterans all comes down to the scalability of reaching them. If they aren't online, then the costs are higher
[21:36] Hawk_BNE: Another angle you could take would be to reference the Universal Declaration of Human Rights- there's a great line in there- section 18 I think about freedom of communication and information.... This is essentially a breach of human rights
[21:36] Roderick_Laptop: 12/19
[21:36] Brendan: means nothing legally Hawk_BNE
[21:36] dcrafti: Yep, I've quoted that in something
[21:36] stefan: dcrafti: just wondering, how did you get permission from them if nobody has been contacted about this issue yet?
[21:36] Brendan: the press releae
[21:36] jsmith left the chat room. (Ping timeout)
[21:36] Brendan: it quoted it
[21:36] Hawk_BNE: All u need is a decent media opportunity and get ACA to rock up to a disgruntled old War vet about the evils of the filter...
[21:36] dcrafti: Brendan, we are trying to get laws changed to be in line with the principles, though
[21:37] Faradn: <dcrafti>: have to agree there, we are not yet set up to send out registration confirmations, let alone keep in correspondence by post
[21:38] dcrafti: I contacted the organiser privately via email about permission to hand out leaflets. That is not saying that I am courting the organisation for any platform other than our own
[21:38] stefan: (re registration confirmations, I can do most of that if directed to, but still need some changes made by David Campbell first)
[21:38] DavidGaetjens: FYI: Conroys internet filter also breaches the UN universal declaration of human rights. Maybe this could be a way of branding ourselves?
[21:39] Brendan: of course.
[21:39] dcrafti: Ahh yes, you are right Brendan. My mention of the UDHR was in correspondance with someone who turned out to be a troll.
[21:40] Blank left the chat room. (Quit: night)
[21:40] Faradn: I'm planning on sending a nice censored letter to my MP, with reference to "Conroy's improved RC free Australia Post", I'll post it up on the forum when its done
[21:41] dcrafti: OK Rod, discussion re: membership fees.
[21:41] Brendan: Faradn: huh?
[21:41] dcrafti: As a joke letter
[21:41] Roderick_Laptop: Whats the story with the Melb meeting dcrafti - people on twitter, and the forums asking for a date/time/place?
[21:41] dcrafti: It won't achieve much for the MP, but it will be good fodder on the internet
[21:41] Hawk_BNE: too many acronyms in here....
[21:42] frew: yeah TLA's get confusing
[21:42] dcrafti: OK, I'll have to organise something. Someone... Shane something... Was meant to organise Melbourne meetings. Hasn't worked out too well over this period.
[21:42] Faradn: @Brendan and dcrafti: yeah as a joke, but highlighting the problems with the filter
[21:42] Brendan: Faradn: you'll get boilerplate responses
[21:42] Faradn: and yes I second the motion for melbourne meetings
[21:43] Roderick_Laptop: well membership fees - are they a problem? the SA council seemed to think they were, so fees were waived for their registration push
[21:43] Brendan: Faradn: include in the letter some seriousness in regards to RC material in Australia Post
[21:43] Faradn: I already did
[21:43] Brendan: and how they plan to control it
[21:43] Brendan: lol
[21:43] dcrafti: OK, I'm setting Saturday 30th January as the date of the next Melbourne Meeting. Location and time to be determined.
[21:43] dcrafti: Frew, can you log that?
[21:43] Faradn: i got the boilerplate, so i'm replying with the censored letter
[21:43] frew: sure, doing now
[21:43] Roderick_Laptop: to do that, we need to basically draft a constitutional amendment, because the founding member fee is part of the constitution.
[21:43] jsmith joined the chat room.
[21:43] stefan: just remember with said filtering meetings they should be as apolitical as possible, ie not pushing ppau, or it won't work help either cause
[21:44] dcrafti: DavidG, how did the S.A. recruitment drive go? I saw something in the email about around 10 memberships...
[21:44] Hawk_BNE: Conroy is setting the terms of this discussion, and we're playing right into his hands. Forget the tech-speak, or whether the tests are effective or other fine details- this is a war of principles- the IDEA of filtering is abhorrent- nobody cares about a 2%slowdown or whatever
[21:45] DavidGaetjens: I believe we got around 10 SA members and 1 Victorian.
[21:45] stefan: dcrafti: that was 10 memberships in a few hours in the city, we now total right on 50 I believe
[21:45] DavidGaetjens: Yes, we now total around 50.
[21:45] stefan: the majority of which were sent through due to advertising in other means
[21:45] dcrafti: Hawk_BNE, of course. I've never even mentioned the performance issue. That's the fallback of practical, rather than ideological opposition. We need some of each, but that one is a particularly weak argument.
[21:45] dcrafti: stefan, such as?
[21:46] Hawk_BNE: fair enough- what about merchandise? If people are going to join- they want something for their money besides moral highground... stickers? t-shirts? stubbie cooler? can we score any of this from anywhere or has this been considered already?
[21:47] stefan: dropping forms in to people, twitter, facebook, people talking to friends/family/neighbours/flatmates
[21:47] Roderick_Laptop: yeah, getting quotes Hawk_BNE
[21:47] Faradn: can I come back to recruitment ? what methods have been most effective ?
[21:47] Hawk_BNE: rad.
[21:47] dcrafti: So, what are the chances of S.A. being registered in time?
[21:47] DavidGaetjens: <Hawk_BNE> Yes, it has. If you pay over $50 when you join, you get some merchandise.
[21:47] stefan: in SA really pushing for people to contact friends/family/flatmates/neighbours is best, get people to talk to people they know
[21:48] stefan: dcrafti: nil, we will however run an independent if at all possible
[21:48] Roderick_Laptop: could get messy.
[21:48] stefan: we should have had our forms in by the time it was actually decided to drop the fees, but there was a period where we could gamble with when the writ would be issued, too late now to bother now though
[21:49] Roderick_Laptop: might as well still register the party when you get the numbers.
[21:49] stefan: the indepedent? yeah
[21:50] stefan: and wait another 3 years, not so great
[21:50] Roderick_Laptop: it'll give you a better shot having an organised functioning party for the federal election.
[21:50] stefan: yeah, that's true
[21:50] Hawk_BNE: Quest newspapers? crapy suburban free newspapers could easily run a story (they're desperate for content usually) about the Party and your membership drive etc...?
[21:50] stefan: we were intending to stand for the Legislative Council in SA so the entire state could vote
[21:50] Hawk_BNE: crappy*^
[21:51] DavidGaetjens: Hopefully more votes as well. Remember that we do not necessarily have to get someone elected, we just need to have an impact.
[21:51] Roderick_Laptop: 4% impact.
[21:51] stefan: the problem with SA was really the bad time of year, and unneccessary delays
[21:51] dcrafti: SA doesn't get funding at 4%
[21:51] stefan: had it been during uni semester, we should have had no problem getting the members in time
[21:51] Roderick_Laptop: we are talking federal election aren't we?
[21:51] dcrafti: State
[21:51] Hawk_BNE: Did you guys see the German Airport stunt by the Pirate Party there? can we ride their media halo?
[21:52] Hawk_BNE: in today's news...
[21:52] dcrafti: It doesn't mean much to be semi naked at an airport in Australia when it's 40 degrees
[21:53] Faradn: also they are protesting the "nude scanner" yeah ?
[21:53] Hawk_BNE: no, but a simple mention in their editorial that the party eists here would help
[21:53] Hawk_BNE: exists^*
[21:53] frew: People wouldnt notice, but we can still do stunts of our own
[21:53] dcrafti: Anyway, so S.A. is now well poised to run effective campaigns during the federal election.
[21:53] Brendan left the chat room. (Ping timeout)
[21:53] Faradn: in germany the pirate party campaigns really well on privacy, especially not wanting CCTV cameras
[21:54] Roderick_Laptop: yeah - there's a privacy conference on soon, i want to make a party submission to, and maybe speak at.
[21:54] Roderick_Laptop: argh, so much work.
[21:55] DavidGaetjens: Thats the problem. We really need to be getting paid for this 
[21:56] dcrafti: Yeah, unlikely
[21:56] Roderick_Laptop: all you need is a few hours a day really.
[21:56] Hawk_BNE: Get google to sponsor? they're against the filter!
[21:57] Hawk_BNE: Can't hurt to ask...
[21:57] Faradn: nice idea, but it won't happen
[21:57] Roderick_Laptop: but for the last week or so, i haven't even had that 
[21:57] dcrafti: No big corporation will actively endorse a political party.
[21:57] Hawk_BNE: Um... since when?
[21:57] dcrafti: Or at least a political party like ours
[21:57] Hawk_BNE: Google and Obama were best mates
[21:57] dcrafti: You're right though. We should still be asking.
[21:57] Faradn: they need to be neutral cause whoever is in power can change
[21:57] Hawk_BNE: and google don't like draconian copyright laws either
[21:58] DavidGaetjens: It never hurts.
[21:58] Hawk_BNE: a small donation wouldn't get too much press...
[21:58] Faradn: we could always ask for a small campaign donation
[21:58] dcrafti: Yep
[21:58] mib_zs4uij joined the chat room.
[21:58] dcrafti: I'll get on it.
[21:59] Brendan joined the chat room.
[21:59] PurpleFae joined the chat room.
[21:59] DavidGaetjens: Ask me if you want help with it.
[21:59] Brendan: what did I miss
[21:59] Brendan: in the last 10 minutes
[21:59] Hawk_BNE: give them a link to google.com on our website... rofl 
[21:59] Brendan was promoted to operator by ChanServ.
[21:59] Brendan was promoted to administrator by ChanServ.
[21:59] dcrafti: Yeah, that'll help their SEO
[21:59] dcrafti:
[22:00] stefan: you could mention we use google apps too
[22:01] dcrafti: They'd probably consider that that's already a contribution
[22:01] dcrafti: So, back to the membership fees?
[22:02] Roderick_Laptop: yeah - regarding fees, concession structure, do we waive them - might be ok for the purpose of expediting registration? but other than that, they're a protective breaker.
[22:02] dcrafti: We need to decide whether we should cut membership fees for everyone, and if so, how to conduct it. The details will be decided in the NC, but in general, what do people think?
[22:03] Hawk_BNE: make it ten bucks, with a free bumper sticker... and 50 bucks to include some other merch....
[22:03] Roderick_Laptop: I don't know, but for some people $20 seems to be a real barrier. I don't think it is - some people have really put together spare change to support the party.
[22:03] stefan: that we need to keep the protective breaker by ensuring that free members do not hold a vote
[22:03] frew: Perhaps have a membership option to pay every 3 months?
[22:03] stefan: people that want to join under their own steam vs people we approach are very different
[22:04] Roderick_Laptop: Yeah, that's true.
[22:04] stefan: and the issue with accepting cash from people doesn't help either with that
[22:04] Roderick_Laptop: Oh, regarding O-Week - can people start to collate what is necessary for booking tables, organising groups etc
[22:04] Roderick_Laptop: and put it on the wiki?
[22:04] Roderick_Laptop: and maybe organise a contact point for each uni?
[22:04] Hawk_BNE: gotta split. Power to you guys. will check in soon 
[22:04] Hawk_BNE left the chat room. (Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client)
[22:05] DavidGaetjens: Nice talking with you Hawk.
[22:05] dcrafti: So how the hell do you find contacts at google?
[22:05] jsmith: for -whom- at google?
[22:05] stefan: ugh, yeah, I need to check on adelaide uni again, but it's doable, just not by me this year
[22:06] MichaelW: RAWR
[22:06] dcrafti: ok, found it
[22:06] Roderick_Laptop: fair enough. yeah, i'll have a look too. but that might be our most opportune time to advertise the party, and get memberships.
[22:06] stefan: definitely
[22:06] stefan: and share the cost of the stall with your local net censorship group? 
[22:07] Roderick_Laptop: if they don't mind being on the same stall as the PP, that sounds like a good idea.
[22:08] stefan: well they'll be even more strapped for cash then PPAU
[22:08] stefan: so half price might be a good deal
[22:09] dcrafti: Well, the NC can currently waive membership fees whenever it wants, but I'd like to see the membership fee waived, and that we just reject applications that seem to be for the purpose of flooding the party.
[22:09] dcrafti: I really think that most of our money should come from voluntary donations.
[22:10] Roderick_Laptop: and what stops the NC itself from flooding the party?
[22:10] stefan: I think I prefer the "pay what you think it's worth" option
[22:10] Roderick_Laptop: the constitution protects from a bad NC too.
[22:10] Roderick_Laptop: and to remove that breaker might be considered an administrative abuse of power.
[22:11] dcrafti: The ability to waive membership fees is only until the first national congress
[22:12] Roderick_Laptop: well, after registration, we have our congress, and go to elections again.
[22:12] Roderick_Laptop: and decide our candidates.
[22:12] dcrafti: Right now, we should be more concerned with getting ANY members. We are not being flooded with any kind of membership...
[22:12] stefan: so do we think that free members should still be able to vote and stand as candidates etc?
[22:13] frew: I like the idea of pay what you think its worth
[22:13] dcrafti: I think they should, but maybe only after being a member for a few months
[22:13] Roderick_Laptop: I guess, we should have some threshold.
[22:13] sdunster-laptop: frew: agreed
[22:13] Roderick_Laptop: That's not a bad idea frew.
[22:14] dcrafti: Then what would the restrictions be voting?
[22:14] DavidGaetjens: There are some constitutional issues to overcome related to withholding voting rights from some members, but as long as the process is transparent I'm happy.
[22:15] stefan: DavidGaetjens: are there if you're just creating a new class of membership?
[22:15] Paul_Templeton: if every pirate signed up one other person you would have your 500
[22:15] dcrafti: Founding members are handled separately in the constitution
[22:15] DavidGaetjens: That is one way of overcoming the issues, however this could get complicated really quickly.
[22:15] sdunster-laptop: Free, Standard and Premium! 
[22:16] Mekkis left the chat room. (Ping timeout)
[22:16] Roderick_Laptop: yep, exactly Paul.
[22:16] stefan: yeah, well we wouldn't really want them to be called the same type of member as the paid ones, or that would get messy
[22:16] stefan: so another class of membership does seem somewhat logical
[22:16] DavidGaetjens: In our own way we all are 'founding members' as we joinged as the party is forming. This is a terminology problem.
[22:16] dcrafti: Perhaps...
[22:17] stefan: provisional founding member then?
[22:17] dcrafti: Anyway, we need to go to the NC meeting now.
[22:17] Roderick_Laptop: Yeah - It's getting late.
[22:17] dcrafti: We'll still lurk
[22:17] Roderick_Laptop: and I have to be up at 5 
[22:17] Paul_Templeton: could have a competition - i would put up $200 for prizes for the most referals
[22:17] Mekkis joined the chat room.
[22:18] frew: lol... that sounds like a challenge
[22:19] stefan: 10 sponsored memberships for winner!