From Metagovernment - Government of, by, and for all the people
Jump to: navigation, search

Following is the transcript from Metting 3 of the Metagovernment project (plus comments posted in advance of the meeting).

See also the original pad at:

Transcript follows:

January 20, 2010

14:52 Ed: Hello

23:24 Matías: Hi

January 21, 2010

4:34 Pietro: hi

January 22, 2010

6:21 Giovani: nice clone. is it full open source?

12:43 Ed: I don't see any info about it at all except at

12:43 Ed: Ah, I guess this explains it

13:03 pudo: hi

13:05 Pietro: hello

13:06 Pietro: I second that!

13:06 Ed: Neat venue

13:06 Pietro: wht this tool lacks is a sound bing when someone says something. If not we could just keep it always open in the background

13:06 Pietro: There was a question asked by someone on Vilfredo about CMS

13:07 Ed: We could invite the Pirate Party to attend... then tell them :)

13:07 Pietro: the question ended with the invitation to open a different question... but no one did it.

13:07 pudo: i doubt pp knows how to modify this ;)

13:07 Pietro: I wonder what should I do in those case. SHould I, as maintainer of Vilfredo, personally do it, or just wait

13:08 Ed: well... somebody should be able to improve on the basic EtherPad without charging money for it. It seems fairly simple

13:08 Pietro: do we have the code of this?

13:09 Ed:

13:18 Ed: Friedrich, did you want Adhocracy to be listed as an Active project of the Metagovernment?

13:18 Ed: It is listed in bold on Related but is not listed as Active:

13:20 Pietro: Hi Manuel

13:20 pudo: Ed: I was unsure and felt a bit strange marking the project as active myself

13:20 pudo: but I'd like for it to get involved

13:21 Pietro: if you are working on it, it is ok to be active if you so wish.

13:21 pudo: sure

13:21 Pietro: The only thing, is that the person working on a project should agree to be listed here, and agree on our general direction

13:21 Ed: We ourselves are an adhocracy, so you marking it as Active is totally legit. :)

13:26 Owen: I have another commitment and won't be able to participate in the meeting tomorrow.

13:26 Pietro: Oh Boy, we should pay attention, or we are going to start soon. Thsi thing self ignites!

13:26 Pietro: Sorry Owen, would a different time be better?

13:27 Owen: But if the group decides to pursue the StratML agenda item, I will be happy to assist.

13:27 Pietro: I need to go.

13:27 Pietro: Take care everybody

13:28 Owen: My wife has us booked for lunch and dinner tomorrow, but earlier in the morning (eastern US time) would work for me.

13:29 Pietro: You gys decide. I am ok any time between 9AM GMT and 9PM GMT. But at 9 I will turn off the computer.

13:31 Ed: 1700 is the only way to get people from California to Berlin at a somewhat reasonable time. Even then, we are pretty-much excluding Japan (2am)

13:37 Pietro: Then we shoud just discuss stratml another time

15:21 Ed: OK, pudo, I have added Adhocracy as you can see here:

January 23, 2010

9:28 Giovani: I left my comments on the text,have a nice meeting all !

10:10 Manuel: changing chat windo wize is pretty simple if you have firebug

10:20 Ed: Cool. I just posted instructions:

10:21 Ed: On a 1280x800 screen, changing the value to 600 seems to give me about a 50-50 size ratio

10:23 Pietro: Shouldn't the meeting be at 17.00 time of london? Why are we meeting at 1600 time of london?

10:24 Ed: Oh crap... I sent my message an hour too early, didn't I?

10:24 Pietro: I think so, isn't GMT the time in London?

10:25 Manuel: greenwich mean time

10:25 Ed: usually; except when London is on daylight savings or someting. But yeah, I got it wrong. Drat

10:27 Ed: The first meeting was at 11:00 my time, and I was thinking this one was too... but it's at 12:00 noon my time. Just spaced there.

10:27 Pietro: We could also have sorted that out with Firebug: change the clock to xh+1h ;-)

10:30 Ed: Hm, well... looks like I just found an hour to kill. ;)

10:31 Pietro: I think I will use the time to write a proposal for the question you sent around on twitter

10:47 Ed: Well, to be fair, it was @maymaym who posted it. I just drew his attention to Vilfredo...

11:04 Fabe: Hi

11:15 Pietro: Hi Fabe

11:49 Thomas: test

11:50 Thomas: wrong colour

11:50 Thomas: ah perfect

11:50 Thomas: hello everybody

11:50 Pietro: Hi Thomas

11:51 Thomas: Hi Pietro

11:52 Philippe: Hello everybody

11:52 Thomas: Hello Philippe

11:58 Mike: Greetings all

11:58 Thomas: Hi Mike

11:59 Philippe: Hello Mike

11:59 Pietro: Thomas, you have two windows open?

12:00 Ed: Welcome, all

12:00 Pietro: Hi Ed :-)

12:00 Ed: Looks like the agenda has grown quite a bit in the build-up to the meeting

12:01 Manuel: hmm, priorities?

12:01 Manuel: or do we just see how far we get?

12:01 Pietro: I suggest we write a few empty line at the beginning of the paper, so we can write things. And we keep the agenda at the end

12:02 Ed: like that? :)

12:02 Pietro: Yes, or even more

12:02 Thomas: @Pietro: no

12:02 Pietro: Then we take one point at the time, and we wrestle with it :-)

12:02 Pietro: oops, why?

12:02 Manuel: when space gets too little

12:02 Manuel: no need otherwise

12:03 Craig: Hi folks

12:03 Manuel: hi craig

12:03 Pietro: hmm, I don't know what windows are you guys using, but mine is already full

12:03 Pietro: Hi Craig

12:04 Manuel: can we get this rolling, who's in charge here?

12:04 Craig: Interesting. I've never seen "piratepad" before.

12:04 Ed: Manu... that's first on the agenda :)

12:04 Pietro: :-)

12:04 Manuel: :-)

12:04 Roux: Craig: piratepad is a clone of etherpad, a great collaborative tool for any textwriting

12:06 Ed: We certainly don't need an authority figure; but people have asked if we need someone to take a figurative leadership role

12:06 Philippe: this role could turn

12:07 Ed: If you haven't noticed, I'm not a particularly good figure-head :)

12:07 Ed: I like speaking on behalf of the group, but am not a great motivator or policy initiator

12:08 Tom: How about facilitator? Anyone practised at that?

12:08 Pietro: Which is why we like you

12:08 Manuel: would anybody be willing to take on a more active role?

12:08 Pietro: wait

12:08 Pietro: Manuel

12:08 Pietro: I would prefer NOT to have someone who suggests himself

12:09 Manuel: ahh, yes you have a point

12:09 Pietro: I like the position of the leader chosen by the others

12:10 Ed: <- trying to define what we're talking about re "leader"

12:10 Craig: How many folks here are familiar with the IETF's WG and BOF approach? Anyone?

12:11 Pietro: Not yet Craig

12:11 Manuel: nope

12:11 Ed: got a link?

12:11 Ed: :)

12:11 Philippe: not me

12:11 Pietro: it's the most colorful meeting I have ever participated :-D

12:12 Thomas: lol, me too!

12:12 Ed: (BTW, note the second agenda item is "Organization") which may interact with this discussion)

12:12 Craig: It's rather involved. No time to hash out now.

12:12 Pietro: I think it also links with the point:

12:12 Pietro: Studying a different CMS for Metagovernment

12:14 Ed: The difficulty I have had in acting as an ad-hoc leader is that I don't really know who is listening or if anyone will act on what I suggest; so it makes it somewhat difficult to act in a project-manager style

12:14 Ed: So in a sense, I see the greatest role as "motivate people"

12:15 Manuel: anyone else would have the same problem no?

12:15 Pietro: Maybe we should just cut out a name for each of us. You could be our "Motivator"

12:16 Philippe: in google traduction i have translated "animateur" and I get "Facilitator"

12:16 Pietro: I have a suggestion

12:16 Ed: Well, if you haven't noticed, my time has been much more limited than I anticipated... three different big issues are swallowing tons of my personal time

12:16 Manuel: possibly this also has something to do with clearly defined goals for which people can be motivated for

12:17 Thomas: Yes

12:17 Ed: I think that is right, Manuel

12:17 Thomas: I agree, Manuel

12:17 Pietro: It looks to me that the roles that we need are really defined by the structure we take.

12:17 pudo: Manuel: agreed. having actionable goals is a great motivator

12:17 Craig: I see that my feeling on leadership may go against the consensus here. I tend to think that naming a responsible party to an office is essential for an accountable processes. The point is to ensure leaders can be selected and overturned via a fair process.

12:17 Pietro: So I think we should FIRST discuss the point on the CMS, and then look at the roles on the base of the structure we take

12:17 Ed: So maybe we should skip ahead on the agenda to try to bang out some of those goals

12:18 Ed: Craig - I think the issue we're defining here is that we don't have clear things to make people accountable for

12:19 Craig: Yes, it feels very diffuse.

12:21 Ed: (hm, this format is very cool, but a little distracting)

12:22 Manuel: what is the idea behind the cms as opposed to the current wiki

12:23 Ed: Right... isn't a wiki basically a CMS where everyone is an admin?

12:23 Pietro: yes, but I think we can do better than that

12:23 Pietro: I think we can (and should) link the various project

12:24 Pietro: using each project for what is best

12:24 Manuel: the first ide I have in context of a CMS is a blogroll, where project participants write about current events around e-dem

12:24 Pietro: and use this structure to decide things

12:24 Pietro: Manuel +1 (as an element)

12:25 Philippe: +1 too

12:25 Thomas: +1

12:25 Philippe: but this need to be a common e-dem project

12:25 Philippe: we always come back on the same problem

12:26 Ed: Manuel, are you thinking in terms of bending MediaWiki to the task, or of implementing a blog "next" to it?

12:26 Pietro: I see metagovernment as being embodied in a system of 5 elements

12:27 Pietro: there would be a wiki to store the decision and the common wisdom evolved

12:27 Pietro: there would be a way to discuss open question,

12:27 Pietro: another to vote closed questions

12:27 Pietro: another as a blogroll where we all write

12:27 Pietro: and a set of "rules" we all agree on, that decide how the information flows between those elements

12:27 Pietro: .

12:28 Manuel: ed, well it's the first thing that poped into my mind when i heard cms

12:28 Manuel: a blog is also a cms

12:28 Ed: I like it a lot

12:29 Ed: I could implement something like WordPress on the existing site

12:29 Philippe: from where would come the open questions Pietro ? from the blogroll ?

12:29 Ed: Though I would love to have more than just me be able to admin the overall site

12:29 Pietro: We need to decide. Either each member can open an open question, or it would need 2 or 3 people that conglomerate, to open one

12:29 Ed: My only problem with the existing setup is the admin account is tied to my credit card. If we can get a free/donated host, we could have more admins

12:30 Ed: Pietro, could it be that anyone can open a question, but it is "meaningless" unless at least three people participate in it?

12:31 Pietro: Yes, that's also an option

12:31 Pietro: I think there should be a room that is just for metagovernment, and a minimum time for something to be considered valid

12:31 Pietro: And the open question should be anounced in some ways

12:32 Thomas: Pietro, I like your 5-part-idea

12:32 Ed: Yes, announcement is a critical issue. Right now, I'm trying to follow issues on several of the projects, and it's hard to keep up

12:35 Ed: And if we had an announcement system on the main site, then we wouldn't have to stick to merely one system for either open or closed systems. As long as the question is announced, that sets the venue

12:35 Ed: ^ I meant "open or closed questions"

12:36 Thomas: the connection of many systems is also a good playground for vote-mirroring

12:36 Philippe: Pietro, do you know that this 5 part organisation needs development yes ?

12:36 Ed: Good point, Thomas!

12:37 Pietro: I am not there, sorry. You don't Mirror votes from Vilfredo to Candiwi. You take the result and use that to start a closed question.

12:38 Thomas: yes, Vilfredo is a bit different

12:38 Pietro: Yes, Philippe. This is why I was hoping that we could end with an open question for Vilfredo on how to create an integrated CMS.

12:39 Pietro: But you see, Thomas, the 5 part CMS are 5 different rolse. You don't mirror from one to the other

12:39 Pietro: you mirror from one system to another that can fulfil the same role

12:39 Pietro: you can mirrror between candiwi and rule2gather

12:39 Pietro: because they are essentially both voting tools.

12:39 Thomas: I understand, but we have a few projects, which all do the same part

12:40 Manuel: can we get a decision on the admin question?

12:40 Pietro: please, pose the question, Manuel

12:40 Thomas: @Pietro: yes, I agree

12:41 Manuel: ok I guess ed won't give acess to the dreamhost site(with good reason) our only alternative is another (free/donated) host

12:42 Ed: Or I guess a different option would be to have another nonprofit buy it for us, using our (ad hoc) funds

12:43 Manuel: i have a server, with root access, all that is needed is somebody dedicated to setting things up and a changes dns record

12:43 Ed: I have asked a couple hosts if they would like to donate space, but they weren't very receptive at the time

12:43 Ed: Where is the server located (I mean in terms of who owns it)

12:44 Ed: I'm quite willing to move the DNS record to another host... as long as we're sure it is going to stick around

12:44 Pietro: but if we are having a disstributed system, why not have each role in a different member's place?

12:44 Manuel: it's a virtual server hosted by and for which I pay

12:44 Manuel: candiwi runs on it

12:44 Ed: We could do that, Pietro. For example, I could point to a different server

12:45 Pietro: And no member should have control of more than 1 basic element

12:45 Ed: But if you open up administration, Manuel, doesn't that give us access to your financial relationship with the host?

12:47 Ed: Pietro's model has some elegance to it

12:47 Manuel: I can set up an account which gives access to server, database, etc. which doesn't give any access to the other stuff

12:47 Ed: As an aside, on my to-do list is to provide dumps of the MediaWiki instance, so that others can mirror it as they wish

12:48 Mike: @ED, phillipe may be able to help, he's working on backup procedures for streetwikis

12:49 Ed: There's a MW tool for it... I just haven't gotten around to looking into it yet

12:50 Ed: Then others import with

12:50 Mike: (we need something that doesn;t require admin access to the server, but it would work for any wiki, I suppose)

12:50 Philippe: it's almost done Mike, we should test an import now to see if all is well backuped

12:50 Ed: (brb)

12:51 Mike: @phil, that was fast! @ed brb?

12:51 Thomas: @Philippe: perfect!

12:51 Pietro: brb= be right back

12:52 Ed: (yep; back)

12:52 Philippe: the critical issue is to set standart setup for the wikis to be backuped

12:53 Pietro: I have two questions

12:53 Mike: @phil I saw your post to the Votorola list on that, and will reply soon

12:53 Pietro: 1) is everybody ok with the idea of having a distributed CMS

12:53 Pietro: 2) should I start an open question on Vilfredo with the question:

12:54 Manuel: pietro, what do you mean byis a distributed cms?

12:54 Ed: Manuel, I could shift hosting to you... but I would like better if we could find a sort of "unaffiliated" host that isn't tied to any individual. Yet... also one we can trust and that will be around in the long term. Is that simply asking too much?

12:54 Pietro: "what CMS structure how should Metagovernment use?)

12:54 Pietro: @manuel what I explained above. Different roles, being done by different programs.

12:55 Pietro: @manuel, not necessarily the same 5 points structure, but something similar. Not a single program

12:55 Ed: +1

12:55 Ed: I like Pietro's model. Generally. I think.

12:55 Ed: (Not to sound wishy-washy or anything)

12:56 Thomas: +1

12:57 Ed: So Manu, would you like to host the blog?

12:57 Mike: +1 if it's open, otherwise Metagov will be competing with other e-dem projects

12:57 Manuel: i think for a blog it should be easy enough to find free hosting

12:57 Ed: open how?

12:57 Ed: I guess that's true... like Blogger or something, and have multiple allowed accounts?

12:57 Manuel: etc.

12:58 Mike: @Ed (as defined in the scratchap "open integration")

12:58 Manuel: @Ed i think so

12:58 Mike: (sorry "scratchpad")

12:58 Ed: Ah, line 101 at the moment

12:58 Pietro: please let's use asa blog. It is very good, open source, and you can have multiple administrators

12:59 Mike: (yes)

12:59 Pietro: @mike, can you give us a link

12:59 Ed: I thought was the software and was a for-profit instance; no?

12:59 Philippe: if the blog needs development to integrate other process (5 parts) we can forget the free blog hosting

13:00 Pietro: @mike, are you willing to participate (and stick with it) to the question in vilfredo that defines how the cms will be. In this way we can make sure it will follow also your wishes

13:00 Pietro: @Ed not exactly. came first

13:00 Pietro: and it can be installed anywhere

13:00 Ed: But can you host on

13:00 Ed: Ah... right

13:00 Pietro: is a particular multiuser instance that has been developped

13:00 Ed: So then someone other than me could set up a WP instance

13:01 Pietro: I can, you can, dreamhost can, anyone who have php and mysql can. It's very easy to host

13:01 Mike: @pietro:

13:01 Ed: And and/or can point to it.

13:01 Philippe: +1 for WP installed in server hosted by anon profit organisation

13:01 Ed: @pietro... yeah, but it souldn't be me

13:02 Craig: Gotta go. Bye for now.

13:02 Pietro: By Craig, nice to have you here

13:02 Ed: And in fact, since I control, it should also have a standalone domain, such as metagovblog... but also

13:02 Pietro: @Ed agreed, neither me (I already have Vilfredo) nor Manuel (he has Candiwi)

13:03 Thomas: bye Craig

13:03 Ed: @philippe; are there nonprofits providing WP hosting?

13:03 Pietro: @Ed, let's not rush it. Like with Vilfredo. We start with that at Once we have a cool idea about the domain name we buy it

13:04 Philippe: @Ed I think so

13:05 Philippe: not WP exclusively, but can give webspace to non-profit organization like Metagov

13:05 Ed: Would you care to take the lead on that project?

13:05 Ed: ;)

13:06 Pietro: Wait a sec, Ed. Philip, are you already hosting any active project

13:06 Philippe: perhaps ? I can ask

13:06 Philippe: Yes but on my professionnal servers

13:07 Pietro: So, once we host the blog, it would be better if it was hosted by someone who had no active project. Maybe a non programmer like Jackie could do that

13:08 Ed: A different option would be to host on at the beginning. I think they allow export to a different instance

13:08 Ed: I think

13:08 Pietro: -1

13:08 Ed: Yeah: bottom-right of:

13:08 Pietro: I am not sure if they allow multiple users to be administrators

13:09 Philippe: many many open source projects are freely hosted by non profit organization

13:09 Pietro: plus, I already have multiple accounts on I would make a mess, writing as the wrong user. :-(

13:10 Philippe: this one comes to my mind

13:10 Ed: Well, I don't know if we can nominate Jackie to do it since she's not here :) but Philippe if you'd like to commit to getting something set up within some sort of timeframe, that would work for me...

13:11 Pietro: sorry, I take that back. It is possible to have multiple authors. I just wold rather that we move to directly

13:11 Ed: Hey, that's nice. Maybe we could move the wiki there too?

13:12 Ed:

13:12 Philippe: Pietro if we need to connect the WP to another part of the process we need to access the source code of the blog

13:13 Ed: That's why he's saying we run our own instance of WP (.org) instead of using .com

13:13 Pietro: Do we?

13:13 Pietro: I mean, I am pretty sure you can post on WP from a mail

13:13 Pietro: and I can set up Vilfredo to send emails

13:13 Pietro: as Manuel can set up candiwi

13:14 Pietro: @Ed, yes in we have access to the code. But I tried to hack it, it's not exactly basic . Nut I am a crappy programmer

13:15 Pietro:

13:16 Ed: The more I see of Tux, the more I like it.

13:16 Ed: It seems like it could handle several of our tasks, no?

13:17 Ed: I would be more than happy to get off the wiki's current host (when I have some time to port)

13:17 Pietro: so would they give us ssh access?

13:18 Ed: yup:

13:18 Ed: The question then would become one of how do we, as a group, decide who may have the admin password

13:19 Pietro: yeah, that's not bad

13:19 Philippe: is this the question that prooves that democracy is an impossible thing :(

13:20 Pietro: Let's just use them for one element of the cms

13:20 Ed: It is an issue I have lobored over a lot, without much resolution

13:20 Ed: That makes sense, Pietro. Like open a blog there and see how we like it...

13:20 Pietro: exactly

13:21 Manuel: +1

13:21 Pietro: and if we do it with WP (sorry, I am repetitive) if we don't like it we can always move away

13:21 Pietro: +1

13:21 Ed: OK, adhocracy, who wants to get that ball rolling? By default, that person will have an admin password

13:21 Pietro: I am out, I can't be :-P

13:22 Manuel: please, not all at once ;-)

13:22 Pietro: Who here is not responsible for anything?

13:22 Ed: What was the original topic... leadership. Hmph.

13:22 Pietro: hehe

13:23 Pietro: Jackie, jackie, jackie :-)

13:23 Ed: Well, I'll do it if noone else will, but that just gives me another key. And it may take me a few weeks

13:23 Pietro: look, in vilfredo she opened a question on how can non programmers participate

13:23 Ed: Heck, we could at least ask her, right?

13:23 Pietro: really, let's offer it to her

13:23 Pietro: yes

13:24 Pietro: after all she does not need to do much. Just set it up, (maybe with some help),

13:24 Ed: OK, well I can take responsibility for at least sending that e-mail. :)

13:24 Pietro: and then give to some of us admin or editorial powers

13:24 Ed: If not, then how about we ask Matías next?

13:25 Pietro: btw, Aursays Hi. Only 3.5 years to finish, and be back among us

13:25 Pietro: Aur

13:25 Pietro: says

13:25 Pietro: Yes, also Matias

13:25 Pietro: Or Fabe

13:26 Manuel: ok I think we may find somebody to take it on, should we move to the next point on the agenda

13:26 Manuel: ?

13:26 Ed: 3.5 years? I thought it was a 2-year term in the Army

13:26 Pietro: Next Point, ED

13:27 Ed: Yes, but also I propose we don't try to get through the entire agenda

13:27 Ed: Instead let's meet every 2 weeks

13:27 Pietro: @Ed, I tell you later. In Israell it is 3 years, but he wanted to do the most interesting stuff which requires you to stay an extra year

13:27 Ed: That way we won't be facing huge agendas like this

13:27 Pietro: Agreed Ed

13:27 Manuel: k

13:27 Pietro: In fact we should add a standing place like this one, as part of the CMS

13:28 Thomas: agreed Ed

13:28 Ed: But is there anything that any of you really want to get through today?

13:28 Pietro: I have a question

13:29 Manuel: i think the translation point is mute without translators

13:29 Pietro: I would like people here to answer me

13:29 Pietro: I ask this as the maintainer of Vilfredo:

13:29 Pietro: 1) should I move all the questions about metagovernment in a room called metagovernment?

13:30 Pietro: 2) when a question in vilfredo about metagovernment ends with the request to start a new question, do you want me to take change and open up the new question (if not often it does not get done)

13:30 Pietro: thanks, for your feedback. Vilfredo

13:30 Thomas: I´d say yes to 1.

13:31 Ed: I say yes to both, and also to post to the list server when there is a question for the group. Or (not sure if this is wise) maybe even auto post messages to that room to the list

13:32 Pietro: @Ed we need to find ways in which new questions in a group are expressed outside. I think having an rss feed for each room will be next thing in line

13:33 Pietro: Then there are ways to go from an rss feed to other venues (I think there is an rss--> email service)

13:33 Ed: That sounds good. You can RSS to Twitter too... (I was thinking of doing this for the wiki, just because it seems easy)

13:33 Pietro:

13:34 Pietro: the problem with twitter is that the questions are too long.

13:34 Ed: Alternately (or additionally) we could set up a separate list server to announce questions

13:34 Thomas: The point "Translation to other languages" is about the wiki?

13:35 Ed: Yes, I think so, Thomas

13:35 Thomas: ok, I can do some translation.

13:35 Pietro: @Thomas, I think so. I think Matias is strong on this, as he has spanish friends interested in metagovernment

13:35 Pietro: Thanks Thomas

13:35 Ed: Maybe translation isn't quite the right word, since a wiki is a living document

13:35 Thomas: well, but only to German, right?

13:36 Pietro: Important pioint for the leader: thank the people for the work they are doing!!!

13:36 Ed: good leadership, Pietro

13:36 Thomas: :-)

13:36 Pietro: @Ed I am learning hearing the talks from your president (no, this is not a joke :-) )

13:37 Ed: All, feel free to flush out the Pad at line 42...

13:38 Manuel: fulsh? or flesh

13:38 Ed: heh... well, your choice. :)

13:38 Pietro: I better save it all!

13:38 Pietro: hehe we are all saving :-)

13:39 Manuel: :)

13:39 Ed: There's a Time Slider in the upper-right; lets you see the edit history

13:39 Ed: I think

13:39 Pietro: yes, it does, but it's not confortable

13:40 Pietro: Next point: the video

13:40 Pietro: There is a deadline for the 31st of January

13:40 Pietro: to present a video on what is democracy

13:40 Pietro: shall we participate?

13:40 Pietro: it is a 3 minutes video

13:40 Ed: This is the US Government sponsored competition, right?

13:40 Manuel: the play button is awesome

13:41 Pietro: @ed I think so. U sent the mail

13:41 Ed: Yeah, OK:

13:42 Pietro: wow. I would love if we did something like this

13:42 Ed: Well, there's my silly 30-second video:

13:42 Ed: That's about as sophisticated as I get, video-wise

13:43 Pietro: it would make this group so much near, and give us a such a good presentation

13:44 Pietro: @ed that is very good. We could start from that

13:44 Pietro: and would have to develop the second part

13:44 Pietro: where we actually describe what is going on

13:44 Pietro: And the voice should speak slower ( :-) )

13:44 Ed: I was lead to believe there was a 30-second limit

13:45 Ed: 3 minutes is still pretty short

13:45 Pietro: I think for that video there was

13:45 Pietro: hmm, many advertisments are much less than 3 minutes

13:45 Ed: But the concept of workable governance without an authority is still a very hard sell to most people

13:45 Pietro: yes

13:46 Pietro: also the problem is:

13:46 Pietro: if things go crazy, who is in charge of turning off the system while we fix it?

13:46 Ed: However, what is very easy is selling the idea that authority-based governance is riddles with flaws

13:46 Ed: riddled

13:47 Thomas: I need to go. It was good talking to you. I´m happy about the progress we are making!

13:47 Ed: I'm going to have to go soon as well

13:47 Pietro: Thanks Thomas

13:47 Manuel: ciao Thomas

13:47 Thomas: Thank you!

13:47 Pietro: Shall we close it, then?

13:47 Thomas: Bye!

13:47 Ed: Pietro, how about making a page on the wiki and we can work on flEshing it out

13:47 Manuel: yup, I have to go now too

13:47 Pietro: I would prefer to make a mindmap, if possible

13:47 Ed: Sounds great

13:47 Mike: Bye Thomas. I have to head off myself guys. Bye for now.

13:48 Pietro: can you have dropbox?

13:48 Ed: So what we have learned here is that 90 minutes is a length limit for these meetings. :)

13:48 Pietro: bye Mike

13:48 Manuel: bye

13:48 Pietro: Bye Manuel

13:48 Ed: drop box?

13:48 Pietro: if you can use dropbox, I will send you a folder invitation. And in that folder we put the mindmap we are working on

13:49 Pietro: and whoever wants to participate should just send me a mail, and I add them to the folder

13:49 Ed: I just don't know what it is... software?

13:49 Pietro: It is a really cool thing, @Ed. Essentially it keeps a folder in my computer sincronised with a folder in your computer

13:50 Pietro: so whatever we put inside, will be placed in everybody else computer.

13:50 Pietro: Just, please, don't put anything too heavy

13:50 Pietro: like videos, or anything that is more than 5 MB

13:50 Ed: Sure, but how is it set up?

13:50 Pietro: Since it sincronises in the mackground it is essentially flowless

13:51 Pietro: once I send you the invitation for the folder, they offer you to set it up

13:51 Ed: cool. ok

13:51 Pietro: if not you just go to

13:51 Ed: ah... that was the info I was unclear on

13:51 Pietro: Also I need to use my other email

13:52 Pietro: which is a gmail address

13:52 Pietro: with username pietros

13:52 Ed: then for me use ed at edpastore dot com

13:52 Pietro: ok. Cool. I do it now

13:52 Ed: So, howabout saying "meeting adjourned" and we have a max-90-minute meeting again in two weeks?

13:53 Pietro: I think that is impossible, we need a leader for that

13:53 Ed: :P

13:53 Pietro: In the meantime we are forced to stay here ;-)

13:53 Pietro: ok, thank you very much all...

13:54 Ed: Indeed; thanks.

13:54 Pietro: @ed the line is yours

13:54 Pietro: ...

13:54 Ed: And for the next meeting, we probably should use a fresh pad

13:54 Pietro: @ed oh gosh, what's that another software?

13:54 Ed: just another instance of piratepad.

13:54 Ed: This pad is all messy...

13:54 Pietro: ah, ok

13:55 Pietro: worked

13:55 Pietro: bye bye, it was nice to chat with all of you. I loved this format