Board meeting Minutes/19 September 2005

From GovernanceWiki
< Board meeting Minutes
Revision as of 16:12, 17 January 2006 by Tom (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

This website is not affiliated with SAGE or the USENIX Association. The use of the term "SAGE" below is historical, and refers either to the SAGE subgroup of USENIX, or to a precursor of the organization now called LOPSA.

12 September 2005
Board meeting Minutes Next:
26 September 2005

Minutes approved: 26 September 2005

Tom Perrine (chair), Andrew Hume, Trey Harris, Pat Wilson, David Parter, Geoff Halprin, Stephen Potter, Chris Palmer, Doug Hughes, Sam Albrecht (note taker)
8:03 pm Eastern time.
9:35 pm Eastern time.

Consent Agenda

  • Approve minutes of 12 September 2005
  • Acknowledgement of online vote to adopt BitPusher as hosting provider:
MOTION VIA EMAIL: adopt BitPusher as SAGE hardware/service vendor given contract proposal linked below
In return, Bitpusher is to receive Gold Founding Sponsor status and one Guinness payable to CTO at LISA. Moved by Hughes, seconded by Parter. Ayes: Hughes, Parter, Halprin, Harris, Hume, Wilson, Potter. Motion passes on 13 September 2005.

Motion by Hume. Consent agenda passes.

Wilson holds minutes of 12 September 2005 for redaction.

Action Items

  • Board:
    • Review and comment on draft reimbursement policy and discuss on 9/19/2005 board call- See draft at "Travel and reimbursement"
    • Tentatively plan for full day meeting on Sunday before LISA conference, agenda input to be posted on wiki and voted on in the 9/19 or 9/26 board calls. MOTION by Harris to meet all day Sunday, December 4th at the LISA conference. Second by Hume. Motion passes.
  • Harris:
    • Send out email call for volunteers for resume project viability assessment — DONE, mailing list created at <resume dash interest at sage-members>.
  • Hume:
    • Distribute budget with AH expenses in three weeks. Actual expenses update due from AH in a week.
    • Work with Albrecht to create an annual budget. Discussion on authority. Treasurer will continute to develop.
    • Speak to Mike Jones on 09/12/2005 - Points to be made are...
      • Intro- It was not a joint decision by the SAGE exec committee and USENIX board. Done.
      • Make sure that it is clear that USENIX cannot just decide at any time whether SAGE is meeting the criteria, timeframe must be clear. Done.
  • Palmer:
    • Write letter for potential sponsors - Draft on wiki, will revise.
  • Parter:
    • Look into pricing of having mission statement on back of business cards (Deepa is getting pricing). Nothing received from Deepa yet. Suggestion to put Headquarters info on the back of the card.
    • Send business card file to Albrecht after talking to JD. Done.
    • Present (with Hughes) draft plan for website. Deferred to agenda item below.
    • Incorporate comments posted on wiki for the Code of Ethics review for discussion on the 9/19/2005 board call. DONE -- see agenda item below.
  • Albrecht:
    • Work with Harris and Palmer to take brochure to the next stage. Not complete.
    • Send out July and August expenses with the new accounting codes. Not complete - coming the week.
  • Schmidt:
    • Look into any licensing needed to sell items in CA at LISA - deferred to Albrecht. Not complete.
    • Look into merchant account issue, and a possible back up plan- deferred to Albrecht. Not complete.
  • Wilson:
    • Attend Toorcon and talk up SAGE. Wilson provided a report and discussion on meeting segmented members needs. content

discussion of Day 0 web content (parter)

We will be taking over content sooner over rather than later. Ownership - Content committee (Palmer and Potter). Discussion on how to best approach the uSAGE and newSage discussion including benefits. Discussion on outsourcing member services versus website content and control. Palmer to draft material for next weeks review.

Do we want to investigate this service and possibly try and have it ready to announce (live) at LISA? (Parter)

see "Email service" and "Mail forwarding" (which should be combined into one page)

see also " email addresses" (in progress)

Discussion on impacts to Day 0 and providing quality service. Discussion on allocation of project resources. Suggestion to run as "beta". Question on whether we publically seek volunteers. (No decisions at this time).

Code of Ethics review

Parter puts two motions on the agenda:

  • Motion by Harris to approve the Charge to the Code of Ethics review committee. Second by Hume. Motion passes.

Approved text: Code of Ethics review committee policy

The SAGE Code of Ethics was adopted in 2003. it is intended that the Code of Ethics should be broad enough to not need frequent revision, but strong enough to serve the Profession, individual Practitioners and system administration organizations.

To take into account any deficiencies found in the Code after adoption, and to adapt to changing circumstances, a two-year review was mandated at the time of adoption, with the expectation that future reviews every four years would be appropriate. It is not intended that this review entail a major rewriting of the Code of Ethics. If the review comittee feels that a major rewrite is necessary, it should provide an explanation in the submitted recomendations, but not undertake that task.

The Code of Ethics Review Comittee is charged with organizing the review of the SAGE Code of Ethics:

  • Appropriate attention should be paid to publicity, both for the sake of an informed review involving our members, and as an opportunity for publicity and raising awareness in the broader sysadmin community and perhaps even further (managers, etc). Publicity should be coordinated with the SAGE Communications Committee.
  • Discussion with the community should include a public event at LISA 2005 and online discussions, using SAGE online resources and others as deemed appropriate by the committee
  • The Committee is not charged with redrafting the Code in its entirety. If the Committee believes this necessary, it should make a recommendation to the Board, but should not proceed.
  • A report and recommendations (separate from the report) should be submitted to the Board no later than Feb 1, 2006:
    • The report should document review activities, level of participation, and any other information about the review process as determined to be appropriate by the review committee
    • The Recommendations should address:
      • any proposed changes in the text of the Code of Ethics
      • future review schedule (tenatively set for 4-year cycle after the initial 2-year review)
      • any other recommendations from the review committee
  • The budget for this activity is up to $100. If additional funds are needed, the Committee must seek approval from the Board in advance.

  • Discussion about requesting the Leadership Committee to recomend a committee chair and members. The Leadership Committee is asked to submit their recommendation no later than October 15.
    Discussion on approaching the Leadership Committee regarding the best way to get this project done. Potter volunteered to be the Board representative.
    • MOTION by Harris to have Potter work with the Leadership Committee on the Code of Ethics review and to document the procedure for future efforts with the Leadership Committee. Second by Hume. Motion passes.

Potter left the call at 9:04.


Discuss decision points in travel and reimbursement policy; possibly approve policy.

Deferred until next week, first item after action item review.


a quick progress (or lack of it) report.

Hume reported no progress in the last week. Legal review and conversion to a contract is about 2 hours of billable time and can be done in 5 or 6 days. Discussion on the history and decision points that relate to the document transfer to USENIX.


We need a sense of how we are going to pitch/explain stuff next year (during outsourcing). Its a complicated message, with all parties named SAGE. Then someone needs to write a bunch of stuff.

Day n project

we need status on the transition/IT stuff. not sure how this is different from content item above (this is a permanent stub.)

Discussion on effective date of agreement definition and actual date of providing member services.

New Business

Redactions of 29 August

Delegate contract signing authority to SAGE executive director

MOTION by Hughes to allow contract signing authority to the SAGE Executive Director for SAGE Board approved issues/items. Harris second. Motion passes.


Discussion on when AH could start processing memberships. ACTION for Harris to draft a membership policy. Halprin offered to help.


  • Albrecht will be on vacation Wed-Fri.


  • Motion by Hume to adjourn, second by Wilson. Meeting adjourned at 9:35 pm Eastern