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: http://piratepad.net/fiuASvRqss
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 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etherpad#Clones
12:43 Ed: Ah, I guess this explains it http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/12/19/0059221
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: http://code.google.com/p/etherpad/
13:18 Ed: Friedrich, did you want Adhocracy to be listed as an Active project of the Metagovernment?
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: http://metagovernment.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges
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: http://metagovernment.org/pipermail/start_metagovernment.org/2010-January/002541.html
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. http://www.ietf.org/
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 ispone-business.de 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 blog.metagovernment.org 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 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:DumpBackup.php
12:50 Ed: Then others import with http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:ImportDump.php
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: metagov.blogspot.com 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 wordpress.org 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 WordPress.org was the software and Wordpress.com 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. wordpress.org came first
13:00 Pietro: and it can be installed anywhere
13:00 Ed: But can you host on wp.org?
13:00 Ed: Ah... right
13:00 Pietro: wordpress.com 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: http://t.zelea.com/wiki/User:Mike-ZeleaCom/Opening_an_architecture
13:01 Ed: And blog.metagovernment.org and/or metagovernment.org/blog 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 metagovernment.org, it should also have a standalone domain, such as metagovblog... but also blog.metagovernment.org
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 blog.metagoverment.org. 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: hyperreal.org 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 Wordpress.com 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: http://en.wordpress.com/features/
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 WP.com. I would make a mess, writing as the wrong user. :-(
13:10 Philippe: this one comes to my mind http://www.tuxfamily.org/
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 wp.org directly
13:11 Ed: Hey, that's nice. Maybe we could move the wiki there too?
13:12 Ed: http://www.tuxfamily.org/en/about
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 wp.org 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: http://codex.wordpress.org/Post_to_your_blog_using_email
13:16 Ed: The more I see of Tux, the more I like it. http://www.tuxfamily.org/en/subscribe
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: http://www.tuxfamily.org/en/about
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: http://www.feedmyinbox.com/
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: http://www.videochallenge.america.gov/about.html
13:42 Pietro: wow. I would love if we did something like this
13:42 Ed: Well, there's my silly 30-second video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6W5dMAiWug
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 dropbox.com
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