Movement roles/Working group meeting 2010-11-19
Appearance
--- Log opened Fri Nov 19 07:02:54 2010 10:44 -!- anirudh [SirNichola@wikimedia/Sir-Nicholas-de-Mimsy-Porpington] has joined #wikimedia-roles 13:59 -!- Jon_H [7d3f9949@gateway/web/freenode/ip.125.63.153.73] has joined #wikimedia-roles 14:18 -!- Jon_H [7d3f9949@gateway/web/freenode/ip.125.63.153.73] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 15:30 < anirudh> all set? 15:30 < anirudh> :) 15:54 < anirudh> austin, so are we having the party or what? 15:54 -!- bishakha [~Bishakha@triband-mum-59.183.55.95.mtnl.net.in] has joined #wikimedia-roles 15:55 * anirudh waves bishakha 15:55 < bishakha> hey anirudh! 15:55 < anirudh> good evening. :) 15:55 < bishakha> glad to hear about ahmedabad meeting. :) 15:55 -!- Morgan_ [ca8c6527@gateway/web/freenode/ip.202.140.101.39] has joined #wikimedia-roles 15:56 < anirudh> hiya morgan. 15:56 < Morgan_> hi all :-) 15:56 < bishakha> hi :) 15:56 < anirudh> bishakha, thanks. it's mostly SEOs and marketers turning up. 15:56 < anirudh> ;-) 15:56 -!- Jon_H [7d3f9949@gateway/web/freenode/ip.125.63.153.73] has joined #wikimedia-roles 15:57 < anirudh> hey jon_h 15:57 < Jon_H> hi all 15:57 < Morgan_> hi Jon 15:57 < Jon_H> hey anirudh 15:57 < Jon_H> Hi Morgan 15:57 -!- dami_hun [54033446@gateway/web/freenode/ip.84.3.52.70] has joined #wikimedia-roles 15:58 < Jon_H> hi Bence 15:58 < dami_hun> hi all 15:58 < anirudh> hi dami_hun 15:58 < Morgan_> hi Bence 15:58 < anirudh> just in time. are we expecting arne? 15:58 -!- Ijon_ [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has joined #wikimedia-roles 15:58 < Jon_H> yes, we are 15:58 < Ijon_> Hello, everyone. Asaf Bartov, Wikimedia Israel. 15:58 -!- Ijon_ is now known as Asaf 15:59 < Jon_H> I spoke with Arne just a little earlier, and he said he would be here 15:59 < bishakha> hi asaf 15:59 < Jon_H> Hi Asaf 15:59 < Morgan_> hi Asaf 15:59 < Jon_H> Austin said he would not be here, but would leave his chat client open, which it looks like he has done 15:59 -!- aklempert [~chatzilla@195.33.3.210] has joined #wikimedia-roles 15:59 < Jon_H> hi Arne 16:00 < aklempert> hi everybody 16:00 < bishakha> hey arne 16:00 < anirudh> hi arne 16:00 * anirudh waves asaf 16:01 < Jon_H> Any more introductions? kibble? 16:01 < anirudh> kibble is casey brown. 16:01 < Jon_H> hi Casey! 16:02 -!- bnewstead [~chatzilla@216.38.130.163] has joined #wikimedia-roles 16:02 < Jon_H> hi Barry 16:03 < Jon_H> Shall we start? 16:03 < bishakha> let's 16:03 < Jon_H> Did everyone get the agenda http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Agenda_for_MR_workgroup_IRC_chat_2010-11-19? 16:03 < bnewstead> Hi all - ready to go 16:04 < Jon_H> The first item is to be sure that we have set up the wiki to be ready to hear from everyone 16:04 < Jon_H> since last time we've set up a number of pages 16:04 -!- Morgan_ [ca8c6527@gateway/web/freenode/ip.202.140.101.39] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 16:04 < Jon_H> if we are all OK, we can go to the second item on the agenda 16:04 < Jon_H> but if there are things that we need to do, please say now 16:05 -!- Morgan_ [ca8c6526@gateway/web/freenode/ip.202.140.101.38] has joined #wikimedia-roles 16:05 < aklempert> question: did everybody had a look at the modified meta pages? 16:05 -!- Asaf [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 16:06 < Jon_H> from here for the next couple of months we'd like to try to hear from as many people as possible - so the modified pages on meta should be ready to receive everyone's views 16:06 < bishakha> yes, blog looks good 16:06 < Jon_H> great 16:06 < anirudh> yep. 16:07 < Jon_H> if everyone is OK, we can brainstorm how to encourage participation from as broad a range of Wikimedians as possible 16:07 < bnewstead> Sure 16:08 < dami_hun> maybe we could e-mail out the new entries on the blog to the wikimedia-announce list whenever they are put up? 16:08 < Morgan_> ok 16:08 < anirudh> and internal-l 16:08 < bishakha> yes 16:08 < Jon_H> great. we can do that now. and foundation-l as well? 16:09 < Jon_H> any other lists or places to post? 16:09 < Morgan_> yes, as foundation-l is open to public 16:09 < bishakha> i think foundation-l as well 16:09 < aklempert> announce-l is sent to foundatin-l anyway 16:09 -!- Asaf [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has joined #wikimedia-roles 16:09 < Asaf> Sorry, got disconnected. 16:09 < Jon_H> NP, welcome back 16:09 < aklempert> but we should be careful and not use this channel for any single blogpost 16:10 < anirudh> country specific lists too, many interested community members are probably not subscribed to foundation-l / wikimedia-announce 16:11 < bishakha> we can post to the various india city lists too 16:11 < Morgan_> How about right after the donation page? 16:11 < dami_hun> I think a question a week would not be too much spamy - 16:11 < dami_hun> -y 16:11 < aklempert> anirudh: good point. we should mention that in our mail, encouraging people to spread the link in their local communities 16:11 < Jon_H> is there any list we should not send to? 16:12 < Asaf> Perhaps also in friendly organizations, e.g. Creative Commons, free culture clubs? 16:12 < anirudh> jon_h, encyclopediadramatica-l? 16:12 < bnewstead> I like Asaf's suggestion 16:13 < anirudh> yep 16:13 < Jon_H> thanks. we want to hear from as many wikimedians as possible 16:14 < Jon_H> I like Bence's thought about opening a new topic once a week. does that sound right to everyone? 16:14 < bishakha> yes, once a week will keep the momentum going between now and jan 16:14 < aklempert> +1 16:15 < Jon_H> perfect 16:15 < Asaf> It depends on whether we think a new question may divert focus from a good discussion on a previous question. But it probably matches the timeline we need. 16:15 < Jon_H> let's pick the next couple of topics so that we can get ready up to the next call 16:16 < Jon_H> which should we pick from the options? http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Blog_topics 16:16 < Asaf> Perhaps one-a-week can be adopted as a rule of thumb, but we can play it by ear as we see which questions get more traction. 16:17 < aklempert> Asaf: sure (ignore all rules!) 16:17 < Jon_H> let's get ready for one a week, and see what happens ... 16:19 < bishakha> so one thing: since there are many more qs than weeks between now and Jan, does that mean we will get fewer responses to those we don't pick for the blog? 16:19 < Asaf> I guess the strategic goals question would be a good next step. 16:20 < bishakha> since we've picked a sub-question for the first week? 16:20 < bishakha> or are we looking at whole sections as questions? 16:20 < dami_hun> a lot of questions form a group (follow-up on each other) so we might need to group more questions together, otherwise it will be difficult to come up with a blog-like narrative to elicit answers 16:21 < bishakha> yes, i think so too; 16:21 < dami_hun> and keep the interest up from week to week 16:21 < Morgan_> we have about 7 weeks before Jan 16:21 < Morgan_> and there are 8 sections 16:22 < anirudh> bishakha, no, we weren't originally, but I would support the idea of taking sections rather than individual questions. Connected qs can trigger a lot more discourse and more ideas. 16:22 < bishakha> yes, so 1 section a week? 16:22 < Asaf> If we want build-up, I guess the do-you-share-the-vision question is the logical beginning. 16:22 < bishakha> i think the downside to the section is that there are many more qs to answer 16:22 < bishakha> but can't see how we will circulate all otherwise 16:23 < bishakha> or do we pick one question from each section each week? 16:23 < bishakha> which we feel will enthuse more people to reply to that one? 16:23 < Jon_H> I think we should craft our questions to generate the best discussion 16:23 < Asaf> there are advantages to posing multiple questions in a single blog post: 1. you increase the chances of engaging the reader on at least one of them. 2. you deliver more information (questions are information too) per reader-attention-opportunity. An irrelevant single-question post could make a reader classify the entire series as irrelevant. 16:24 < Jon_H> people can also contribute by answering all of the questions in one g o 16:24 < anirudh> Indeed, also chances are that they will understand the context better with more more questions (that are connected, of course) 16:25 < Morgan_> i doubt that how many people will answer all the questions 16:25 < Jon_H> on the next call, we can pick or design future questions in the light of the discussions we see over the next two weeks 16:25 < bnewstead> We shouldn't over think this. 16:26 < bishakha> all good points, I'm leaning more towards putting out connected qs rather than single 16:26 < bnewstead> We really need a few good questions to spark the dialogue... 16:26 < Asaf> we don't particularly need any one person to answer all the questions. We need aggregates of answers, and we need people to answer questions that engage them, that they find relevant or appealing or inspiring. 16:26 < bnewstead> then we can use the contents of the dialogue to spark further dialogue and bring new people in, 16:27 < bishakha> i guess it depends on how we see the aim of the blog 16:27 < bishakha> is it to get diversity - wider reach? 16:27 < bishakha> or comprehensiveness: all questions answered? 16:27 < Morgan_> honestly, open-end questions is not very interesting for people to answer, if compare to the MC questions, so i prefer less questions 16:27 < bnewstead> We (mainly Jon and Austin) can work with those engaged in the wiki to cover questions we need 16:27 < Jon_H> how about the next question being "How can the Wikimedia movement best meet its strategic goals?" with a list to remind folks of those goals 16:28 < bnewstead> I see the blog as a way to *market* MR to bring in people 16:28 < bishakha> agree, barry 16:28 < Jon_H> once we have brought them in, we can engage them more 16:29 < Jon_H> for the third question, we could ask "What do you think should be the core tasks and roles in the movement of a chapter or sub-national chapter? 16:29 < Asaf> All the more reason to pose multiple questions in a single post -- generate maximum interest in responding to at least one of them, thus drawing people into involvement. 16:30 < aklempert> Jon_H: this is probably not the best question to engage a broad audience (too specific) 16:30 < bnewstead> I think a question focused on problems/challenges would attract a lot of interest. 16:30 < Morgan_> agree 16:30 < Asaf> ...And requires a lot of background. Many, many Wikimedians are not involved with chapter work, and know next to nothing about chapters. 16:30 < Jon_H> how would you word that? 16:30 < bishakha> jon: would you club chapter and sub-national in one question? it's provocative 16:31 < bnewstead> While it may generate complaints about the movement, it would hook people in and give us fodder for discussion 16:31 < anirudh> Jon_H: It is an open-ended question that needs a lot of context. I suggest a major portion of the blog post should contain details that challenge the reader to put their ideas forward. 16:31 < Jon_H> my thought of bringing national and sub-national chapters together was to spark some discussion, although some may not like that 16:31 < bishakha> provocative may be good though; may spark discussion as you said 16:31 < bishakha> people will react 16:32 < bnewstead> my concern with this is that we only really engage the Catalan issue - wouldn't be good 16:32 < Jon_H> anirudh: how best to provide that context? 16:33 < bishakha> barry, there may be comments from other contexts too 16:33 < Asaf> Perhaps the whole chapter area can be represented more generally -- e.g. "What structure should Wikimedia develop to best pursue its goals _globally_? What should be the roles of entities other than the Wikimedia Foundation itself?" 16:33 < aklempert> bishakha: unlikely that we will get somebody to engage when CAT and ES people are already fighting :( 16:33 < bnewstead> Possibly, but I don't see national/sub as a huge animating question. 16:34 < anirudh> Jon_H: perhaps multiple questions that are specific in nature? some thought-provoking examples? to give the readers a jump-start 16:34 < Jon_H> barry: what kind of question about problems or challenges do you think would animate people? 16:34 < bishakha> ok, ok, point taken :) 16:35 < bnewstead> I think it would be more fruitful to engage questions like: what are the community needs that aren't well supported by WMF, chapters, etc. today? 16:35 * aklempert was about to write something similar to what barry just said :) 16:36 < bnewstead> Also, how do we reconcile the fact that we are so centered on the industrialized world (organizationally and financially), but our future is in the developing world? 16:37 < Jon_H> that should spark some discussion 16:37 < dami_hun> I think questioning the Foundation's role would in some way could really animate people (like Barry's question, but could work with a similar dichotomy as the chapter/subchapter question: e.g. where is the border between the foundation's role and the chapters'. who should assume this role if wmf/chapter is not present in an area) 16:37 < bnewstead> I can go on... 16:37 < aklempert> and these questions both make clear what "movement roles" is all about 16:37 < Jon_H> how about if we put these topics onto the page http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Blog_topics 16:38 < Jon_H> invite everyone to edit between now and this time next weeik 16:38 -!- Asaf [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 16:38 < Jon_H> then we can pick the top one a week from now? 16:38 < bishakha> yes, good idea. should not lose them 16:38 < bishakha> also, these qs are diff from the ones in Initial Qs but good discussion ones for the blog 16:38 < bnewstead> There is a whole stream of tough questions about accountability to the community and how that is realized or not in the way we structure entities and make decisions about where resources go? 16:39 < Jon_H> and a some questions about transparency that follow on, too 16:40 < bnewstead> The questions are different, but they follow the theme. 16:40 < bishakha> agree, barry 16:40 < Jon_H> let's put these ideas up on the MR wiki for a week so the team can edit and improve 16:40 < anirudh> bnewstead, most important of the bunch. 16:40 < bnewstead> The challenge with the interview questions is that they are good for an interview, but aren't provocative enough to draw people in. 16:41 < Jon_H> do we want to pick the second question now, or leave these ideas on the MR wiki page for a week for us to edit and ponder? 16:41 < aklempert> Jon_H: let's work on ideas on-wiki and then you or austin just pick one 16:42 < anirudh> +1 16:42 < Jon_H> thx 16:42 < bishakha> these qs will also give us leads on how to frame later qs for the blog to spark talk 16:42 < bnewstead> Is it possible to propose the two questions now and then we can push forward? 16:43 -!- Asaf [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has joined #wikimedia-roles 16:43 < bnewstead> I'm worried we'll lose more time, if we deliberate more on it. 16:44 < Jon_H> this has been a good discussion. it would be good to move on ... should we leave it on MR wiki and decide in a week, or decide now? 16:44 < Jon_H> barry, arne: i think you were making different suggestions ... am I right? 16:45 < bnewstead> Since my thought was received with stoney silence... 16:45 < bnewstead> let's go the wiki, but let's get it done by Monday. 16:45 < bnewstead> ;) 16:45 < Asaf> oh, everyone was silent? I re-connected because I figured my connection must have frozen... :) 16:45 < aklempert> i don't see any need for a time-consuming deliberation. let's just put questions on the mr-wiki. i don't expect any discussion about that 16:45 < Jon_H> great. the next question is about http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/Initial_Questions/Responses 16:45 < bishakha> i will confess my silence was due to other distractions :) 16:45 < aklempert> (since we seem to be all on the same page about this) 16:46 < Jon_H> who beyond those on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/Initial_Questions/Responses should we be inviting to participate? 16:47 < Jon_H> and, while we are on the topic, who else should we reach out to interview directly? http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interviews 16:48 < Jon_H> I think we should encourage as many people to contribute on wiki as possible http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/Initial_Questions/Responses 16:48 < bishakha> jon, remember last irc we said we wanted to limit the number of interviews to the bare minimum? so do we need more names for interviews? 16:49 < bnewstead> I'm adding a couple of names to the interview list...for non-chapter people 16:49 < Jon_H> the list of interviews http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interviews should be short, Bishakha, which it is right now 16:49 < anirudh> I would suggest someone from the Wikimedia India chapter (apart from me). WMIN is unique for now, because we will be working with WMF in India (as they are setting up their office soon). 16:49 < Jon_H> but if there is someone to include, let me know now 16:49 < Jon_H> and if there is someone on the list we should encourage to contribute on wiki, and not interview directly, let's take them off the list of interviews 16:50 < bishakha> anirudh: can the chapter person write in on wiki? since that's the hope for most chapters? 16:51 < Asaf> I think we need to hear some voices by Wikimedians who are not likely to *ever* have a chapter speak for them -- e.g. Wikimedians working on projects in Yiddish, Latin, Esperanto, Simple English, etc. 16:51 < bishakha> +1 16:52 < Asaf> precisely because chapters are _obviously_ not an option for them, it would be interesting to hear what structure they feel would support them. 16:53 < anirudh> That would mean sharing resources and close collaboration. It's best if MR address similar possible future endeavours with the community to define the relationship. 16:53 < Asaf> thoughts? 16:53 < aklempert> asaf: good point. especially yiddish and esperanto seem interesting 16:53 < Jon_H> someone suggested Chuck Smith for the Esperantists ... who should we talk to for Yiddish, Latin, Simple English etc.? 16:54 < anirudh> bishakha, best to have a real-time discussion. I can get all the EC people involved. 16:54 < aklempert> Asaf: latin and simple english are less relevant imho - because these communities don't have a common culture 16:54 < Morgan_> How about the Wikimedians from Japan? They are working on the chapter proposal. 16:55 < Jon_H> thanks. while we are on this topic, I'm planning on doing a chunk of the interviews myself ... does anyone else also want to do any interviews? 16:55 < anirudh> I can talk to Chuck Smith. 16:56 -!- Asaf2 [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has joined #wikimedia-roles 16:56 < Jon_H> thanks, anirudh. can you put your name on http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interviews against Chuck's name? 16:56 < Morgan_> I can talk to WM Macau 16:56 < bnewstead> All, I need to sign-off to prep for a call in 3 minutes. Good discussion today. 16:56 < Asaf2> was anything said after Morgan's question about Wikimedians in Japan? I think my link seized up again. 16:57 < Jon_H> thanks barry. take care 16:57 < anirudh> bye barry 16:57 -!- bnewstead [~chatzilla@216.38.130.163] has left #wikimedia-roles [] 16:57 < Morgan_> bye barry 16:57 < Jon_H> that is a good idea. we can add that to the list on http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interviews 16:57 -!- Asaf [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 16:57 < Jon_H> Morgan, great if you can talk to Macau ... can you sign up on http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interviews?? 16:58 < Morgan_> ok 16:58 < Asaf2> I'm not sure you got a previous line I sent: I wrote that the Latin projects are mainly a hobby for self-exercise in the language. They are to a great extent write-only projects, i.e. their contribution to fulfilling the Wikimedia Vision is the least. 16:58 < Jon_H> thx 16:58 < Jon_H> BTW, as we are approaching the hour ... it is fair to say that we have covered all of the key questions ... if anyone needs to leave, there are no new questions to raise 16:59 < Asaf2> But Simple English, on the other hand, is possibly quite relevant to the Vision. I'm not sure what state the Simple English community is in, though. Is it a healthy project? 16:59 < Jon_H> from my end 16:59 < Jon_H> good questions 16:59 < Jon_H> who would know about simple english? 16:59 < aklempert> Asaf2: the project itself are not our scope 16:59 < Asaf2> I don't know. kibble: do you know anyone there? 16:59 < bishakha> i'm off then, bye all 17:00 < Jon_H> thanks, Bishakha. be well! 17:00 < anirudh> bye bishakha 17:00 < Asaf2> aklempert: sure, but if the Simple English people feel the movement could be more accommodating to their activity, e.g. some outreach, offline efforts, etc. -- we probably want to know. 17:00 -!- bishakha [~Bishakha@triband-mum-59.183.55.95.mtnl.net.in] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 17:01 < aklempert> i don't. because it's not relevant for our work 17:01 < aklempert> simple english is a project with international scope 17:01 < aklempert> if they need something, they will get it from the wmf 17:01 < Asaf2> I see. ok. 17:01 < aklempert> but they're unlikely to form any kind of organizational structure 17:03 < Jon_H> I'm going to start to reach out to the interviewees on http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interviews, so if you would like to interview anyone sign up now 17:03 < aklempert> sorry for being so negative, but is see more coming on our plate every week and we didn't get much stuff done yet 17:03 < aklempert> ... but *I* see ... 17:03 < Asaf2> sure, we need to prioritize. I thought we were still in the gather-everything-possibly-relevant stage. 17:04 < Jon_H> I'd suggest we encourage Simple English to contribute to the blog and give answers to our initial questions on the wiki 17:05 < aklempert> i would say we're now in the "filling the gaps" mode. if we missed something important we should add it 17:05 < Jon_H> there our resources are not limited, but for interviews our resources are finite (our time) 17:05 < Asaf2> sure, okay. 17:05 < Asaf2> okay, goodbye everyone. 17:06 < Jon_H> good bye Asaf2 17:06 < Jon_H> anyone else have anything to add right now before we all sign off? 17:06 -!- Asaf2 [4fb37384@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.179.115.132] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 17:07 < Jon_H> Arne, Bence, Anirudh, Morgan? 17:07 < Morgan_> nope 17:07 < dami_hun> no 17:07 < aklempert> nope 17:07 < aklempert> just a reminder to sign up for the january meeting if you didn't do that yet 17:08 < anirudh> Nope. 17:08 < Jon_H> thanks, gents. that was a very productive call 17:08 < anirudh> aklempert, is there a possibility to include travel funding for a chapter rep from India? 17:08 < aklempert> Jon_H: thanks for facilitating it :) 17:09 < Morgan_> thank you, and happy interviews :p 17:09 < anirudh> given our prospective relationship wtih the WMF office in India? 17:09 < anirudh> thanks guys. 17:09 < Jon_H> Thanks, Morgan 17:10 < aklempert> anirudh: do you think of any specific person? the meeting is less about getting new information, more on putting the stuff together 17:10 < anirudh> aklempert, I will have to discuss that with the EC. It will be a long-term Wikipedian. 17:11 < aklempert> i personally don't think that inviting someone to the meeting in january who's not already activley participating here in this group, doesn't make any sense (just my opinion) 17:12 < anirudh> Since the original MR team will be pivotal in channeling community discourse, I feel that participation from an Indian chapter would be healthy. 17:13 < anirudh> Yes, I agree with that. 17:14 < anirudh> But this is merely the beginning and an EC member can be delegated this responsibility. I will (obviously) express my interest, but there are very capable members in the committee. 17:14 < aklempert> since one or two europeans which recently joined the mr mailing list indicated that they want to participate, it seems just to be fair to think about bringing people from other parts of the world in 17:15 < aklempert> but i have to check - since our originial idea was that just the official members get funding and the others can come on their own expense 17:15 < anirudh> my thoughts exactly. 17:16 < anirudh> yes, please, thanks. :) 17:16 < Jon_H> I think it important that whoever comes has been part of the process ... the meeting will be about pulling together what we have heard, rather than bringing in new ideas 17:18 < aklempert> anirudh: just to be clear: if you get funding. it's you as an active participant from india. not as a delegate of WM-India 17:19 < aklempert> of course you can and probably should discuss this with your board. 17:21 < Jon_H> but just to be sure, the meeting in January is not a meeting of "representatives", but those who have been working together on the MR project 17:21 < aklempert> oaky. i have to go 17:21 < anirudh> hm, I don't wish to complicate the process. I proposed this because I think the Indian community is a significant stakeholder and should be a part of the conversation. I understand that the movement roles will hugely impact Wikimedia's efforts. 17:21 < aklempert> thanks to everybody for this great meeting 17:22 < anirudh> thank you arne. 17:22 < Jon_H> thank you anirudh 17:22 < Morgan_> :-) 17:22 < Jon_H> thanks Arne 17:22 < Jon_H> thanks Morgan 17:22 < anirudh> *waves Jon_H 17:22 < Jon_H> TTFN 17:22 -!- aklempert [~chatzilla@195.33.3.210] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.12/20101026210630]] 17:23 < Morgan_> anirudh: I think the Indian representatives can attend the chapters meeting in March, and discuss the MR stuff in the meeting. 17:25 < Morgan_> For the Jan meeting, it seems it is a working meeting more than a discussion meeting 17:26 < anirudh> I understand, and that makes sense. 17:26 < Morgan_> so i would like to see more indian representatives in chapters meeting :p 17:27 < Morgan_> try to ask for more than 2 representatives if you wish 17:27 < anirudh> but only an MR working committee member will be able to join such a meeting during the chapters meet 17:27 < Morgan_> i dunno whether it works, but i think you could try 17:28 < Morgan_> i am not sure the MR meeting section in Chapter Meeting, i guess it will have section which is open to all the participants 17:29 < Morgan_> you have to ask Jon anyway 17:29 < anirudh> will do, thanks. 17:29 < Morgan_> welcome :-) 17:31 < Morgan_> I gotta sleep 17:31 < Morgan_> 0031 in HK 17:31 < Morgan_> see you guys and good night :p 17:32 -!- Morgan_ [ca8c6526@gateway/web/freenode/ip.202.140.101.38] has left #wikimedia-roles [] 17:35 -!- Jon_H [7d3f9949@gateway/web/freenode/ip.125.63.153.73] has quit [Quit: Page closed]