[19:40] == Jon__ [56a2ee66@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.162.238.102] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[19:42] == Theo10011 [~Theo@wikimedia/Theo10011] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
[19:44] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.24.58] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[19:46] == SMP-laptop [~SMP@wikipedia/SMP] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[19:49] == Bence [54033446@gateway/web/freenode/ip.84.3.52.70] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[19:59] == bnewstead [~chatzilla@adsl-71-142-67-126.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:00] <Austin> Hi all
[20:00] <Jon__> Hi everybody
[20:01] == Theo10011_ [~Theo@59.180.29.15] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:01] <Jon__> I think we have everybody who confirmed, except for Arne, who should be along soon
[20:01] == anirudh [~bhati@wikimedia/Sir-Nicholas-de-Mimsy-Porpington] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
[20:02] <bnewstead> Hi everyone.
[20:02] == aklempert [~chatzilla@p5B243344.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:02] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.24.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
[20:02] == Theo10011_ has changed nick to Theo10011
[20:03] == anirudh [~bhati@wikimedia/Sir-Nicholas-de-Mimsy-Porpington] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:03] <aklempert> hello everybody
[20:03] <Jon__> Hi Arne
[20:03] <Theo10011> Hi
[20:03] <anirudh> hi
[20:03] <Jon__> I think we now have everyone who confirmed
[20:04] <Jon__> Has everyone had a chance to see the agenda? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/Working_group_meeting_2011-3-11
[20:04] <effeietsanders> Bence: can I ask you a quicky right now?
[20:04] <Bence> go ahead
[20:04] <effeietsanders> Bence: how much will http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2011/Schedule change?
[20:04] <effeietsanders> did you already process the feedback?
[20:05] <Bence> this should be the final version before some last minute polish
[20:05] <effeietsanders> (since there is only 45 min and not a few hours on MR on the agenda, it is relevant for this meeting I think)
[20:05] <effeietsanders> ok :( too bad
[20:05] <effeietsanders> but good to know
[20:06] <Austin> *nod*
[20:06] <Jon__> yes, it is. we'll have to make the best use of our 45 minute slot
[20:06] <effeietsanders> I am not sure a 25 min presentation would be the best way
[20:06] <effeietsanders> but well
[20:06] <Jon__> what would you suggest?
[20:07] <Theo10011> who will be presenting?
[20:07] <effeietsanders> I have been saying since the beginning that the only way to make people feel owner of this outcome, would be by involving them in discussion
[20:07] <effeietsanders> about the movement roles
[20:07] <Jon__> even better if we present for less than 25 minutes. the more time for discussion the better
[20:07] <aude> hi
[20:07] <effeietsanders> Jon__: exactly
[20:07] <Austin> Hi, kate
[20:07] <Theo10011> Hey aude
[20:07] <Jon__> we probably need to offer them something, though
[20:08] <Jon__> not sure we can just stand up without framing the discussion with something concrete
[20:08] <Austin> I think we can condense what we've done into 15-20 minutes, though
[20:08] <Theo10011> so a Q&A session following a discussion?
[20:08] <effeietsanders> well, it would make sense to have the slot that is called "accountability" now about movement roles
[20:08] <effeietsanders> because that is what it basically is
[20:09] <effeietsanders> Austin: probably in less :)
[20:09] * effeietsanders mumbles something about elevator pitches
[20:09] <effeietsanders> but sorry
[20:09] <Austin> Well, let's be realistic
[20:10] <effeietsanders> I am drifting away from the agenda
[20:10] <Austin> If we only have that much time, there's one obvious focus
[20:10] <Austin> So present the charter, and discuss
[20:10] <effeietsanders> do we want to discuss this now? or first the other points on the agenda (I know, my fault :) )
[20:11] <Austin> (With maybe 5m at the beginning to summarize the rest)
[20:11] <Austin> Yes, good point
[20:11] <Jon__> Austin, have you had any responses to the posting of the new models on meta?
[20:12] <Austin> Nothing apart from "Oh, right, I still need to reply to that"
[20:12] <anirudh> no discussion around new models
[20:12] <Austin> (And yes, I've been poking people all week)
[20:13] <Jon__> disappointing
[20:13] <effeietsanders> as a suggestion for future posts... maybe next time actually include content in the email
[20:13] <effeietsanders> because to be honest, I saw a short email with a link, my experience is that most of the times that disappears without reading in the archive
[20:13] <Austin> I did start writing a summary of the summary
[20:14] <Austin> I'm not sure what the happy medium is between "not enough content to be interesting" and "tl;dr," but I'm trying
[20:14] <effeietsanders> usually it is more effective to include a few paragraphs of actual text with something to respond to
[20:14] <effeietsanders> Austin: yes, it was a good summary of process and who we are :)
[20:14] <effeietsanders> but not of the actual proposal, right?
[20:14] <Austin> No, that's right, but I was trying to include more in my second e-mail (not yet sent)
[20:15] <effeietsanders> I don't mean to critisize you, to be clear - I could have spent more time on it myself - but as a suggestion
[20:15] <Austin> Copying the entire thing into an e-mail won't do anything, of course, because a wall of text is just as bad as no content at all
[20:15] <effeietsanders> yeah
[20:16] <Austin> The hard part is summarizing while maintaining NPOV
[20:16] <effeietsanders> forget NPOV :)
[20:16] <Austin> Anyway, I'll get that sent this weekend
[20:16] <effeietsanders> we're not writing an encyclopedia here
[20:16] <Austin> No, but people would object if I misrepresented their views :)
[20:16] <effeietsanders> then they could reply to your email and say that
[20:16] <effeietsanders> ;-)
[20:17] <aude> what's the status of the questions?
[20:17] <aude> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/New_group_models#Questions
[20:17] <aklempert> Austin: at least some kind of response ;)
[20:17] <Austin> The "questions" section is my summary of the mailing list discussion prior to posting on meta
[20:18] <effeietsanders> aklempert: are you still working on the accountability email with ABBA?
[20:18] <Austin> There were a few other things brought up, but none that raised clear questions, so I asked the list if the people who'd commented could supplement it.
[20:18] <effeietsanders> Austin: this is where liquid threads would be welcome...
[20:18] <effeietsanders> :P
[20:19] <aklempert> effeietsanders: still *hope* to be able to work on it. frankly, i was not able to do anything for it so far. and afaik nobody else either
[20:19] == Theo10011_ [~Theo@59.180.33.83] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:19] <effeietsanders> :(
[20:19] <aklempert> indeed
[20:19] <effeietsanders> I would like to see something
[20:19] <effeietsanders> even if it is consise
[20:20] <effeietsanders> and incomplete
[20:20] <effeietsanders> I'll admit I did not do anything on flow of the money either
[20:20] <effeietsanders> since I was under the impression that nobody felt for pursuing that path any more
[20:20] <aude> how do these groups and existing organizations cover things like the US chapters council?
[20:20] <aude> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_United_States_Chapters_Council#WALRUS_committee
[20:21] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.29.15] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
[20:21] <effeietsanders> aude: I think the first question to be answered would be whether that would be the Wikimedia USA chapter or a non-chapter
[20:21] == Theo10011_ has changed nick to Theo10011
[20:21] <effeietsanders> and we could spend probably a whole afternoon on that alone :)
[20:22] <Austin> IMHO, it doesn't really address it at all
[20:22] <effeietsanders> (even though I find it an interesting topic and would be happy to find such afternoon)
[20:22] <Austin> But I'd like to contribute on the talk page if it's proposed ;)
[20:22] <Austin> s/proposed/brought up/
[20:22] <aude> the closest I see is the "partner organization" which is like chapter-light
[20:22] <aude> non-exclusive
[20:23] <effeietsanders> but I'm sorry - I'm going to pull us back to the agenda
[20:23] <effeietsanders> aude: please start a discussion about it on the mailinglist :)
[20:23] <effeietsanders> as a reply to Austins email
[20:24] == Abbasjnr [3e186ff8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.24.111.248] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:24] <effeietsanders> any other points about the emails that are sent out / are to be sent out?
[20:24] <Jon__> Hi Abbas
[20:24] <aude> alright, your first comment: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_roles_project/New_group_models
[20:24] <Abbasjnr> hi
[20:24] <aude> effeietsanders: which mailing list?
[20:24] <Theo10011> Hey Abbasjnr
[20:25] <effeietsanders> aude: any :) probably internal or foundation-l
[20:25] <effeietsanders> I want discussion
[20:25] <aude> effeietsanders: okay
[20:25] <effeietsanders> I don't care where
[20:25] <effeietsanders> (personally)
[20:25] <Austin> The talk page is good
[20:25] <effeietsanders> ok, next point
[20:25] <effeietsanders> Planning our movement roles meeting on 24th March
[20:25] <Austin> But a follow-up note to one or more lists would help
[20:25] * aude doing
[20:25] <Abbasjnr> hi Theo10011
[20:28] <anirudh> we'll start at 1145 hrs?
[20:28] <Jon__> 1145?
[20:29] <effeietsanders> would it make sense to start a page about that meeting?
[20:29] <effeietsanders> like we did for Frankfurt?
[20:29] <anirudh> yes, it would.
[20:29] <Austin> In fact, I even think I said I would, but it got lost on my agenda
[20:29] <effeietsanders> and now focus on the main topics to discuss and leave the practicalities for there
[20:29] <Jon__> the meeting in Berlin will start at 0900
[20:30] <Jon__> on 24th
[20:30] <anirudh> ah, thanks jon
[20:31] <Jon__> it seems like the key item for us to work on 24th is what we share on 25th
[20:31] <Jon__> if we want to share something on 25th that is short, sharp and to the point, so that we have the most time for discussion ...
[20:31] <effeietsanders> maybe it would make sense to prepare working group proposals?
[20:31] <effeietsanders> spend an hour or two on that?
[20:31] <Jon__> sorry, I've lost you
[20:32] <effeietsanders> there will be working groups during the chapters meeting
[20:32] <Jon__> do you mean working group proposals to the main conference?
[20:32] <effeietsanders> it would make sense for us to propose some
[20:32] <Bence> +1 on that
[20:32] <Jon__> yes, we should propose something on 25th ... which we should finish on 24th
[20:32] <effeietsanders> I know from last year, there ain't comin' a hell lot of creativity on that from participants :)
[20:33] <Austin> brb, doorbell
[20:33] <Jon__> what does that suggest that we should do?
[20:33] <effeietsanders> Jon__: maybe you can elaborate on what you mean with "propose something" ?
[20:34] <Jon__> how about Austin's suggestion ... that we put up a skeleton charter, and take it from there?
[20:34] <Austin> So, we continue working on the charter until then, and spend the bulk of the meeting polishing that up?
[20:34] <Jon__> yup
[20:35] <effeietsanders> right now I think we have had so little public discussions that it would be unnatural to put up a real draft
[20:35] <effeietsanders> if we would stick to a true skeleton with identified open questions, that could make sense
[20:35] <aklempert> it's probably too early to polish it up in the sense that we create some nice text
[20:35] <aklempert> effeietsanders: +1
[20:35] <effeietsanders> and yes, that means we have to re-evaluate our time table
[20:36] <Jon__> nice text will make it look more final, anyway ... the purpose is to stimulate discussion
[20:36] <Jon__> tell us more, Lodewijk
[20:36] <Theo10011> effei I don't see any issues with putting the current version up either.
[20:36] <aklempert> a skeleton, with some bullets, marked as more or less consensus, controversial and unknown
[20:36] <effeietsanders> Theo10011: the current version is too much
[20:36] <effeietsanders> people will just start shouting
[20:36] <Theo10011> maybe it can start a discussion.
[20:36] <effeietsanders> not a real discussion
[20:36] <effeietsanders> at least, not constructive
[20:37] <Theo10011> we need more attention, the posts and the meta pages have been ignored for the most part.
[20:37] <effeietsanders> what I think would be the best approach is to either let loose the idea that we need to finish a proposal by the end of the chapters meeting, or make much more time for it
[20:37] <effeietsanders> since the latter is not happening probably...
[20:38] <effeietsanders> imho we will need to re-evaluate our goals for this specific meeting
[20:38] <effeietsanders> mind you, we have only 45 minutes + a group session
[20:38] <effeietsanders> that is roughly 3 hours worth of presentation *and* discussion
[20:39] * aude assumes there will be good notes of these discussions
[20:39] * aklempert agrees with re-evaluating time-table and goals
[20:39] <effeietsanders> I would rather have us put up a skeleton with topics we think need to be addressed and identify open questions, and then make sure everybody in the meeting agrees on that
[20:39] == Theo10011_ [~Theo@59.180.37.237] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:39] <effeietsanders> and then use the working groups to address some of those questions
[20:39] <Austin> http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/March_meeting is up (and incomplete)
[20:39] <aude> open questions are helpful
[20:40] <effeietsanders> Bence: is there a chance to rename and repurpose the accountability slot a bit"?
[20:40] <Bence> what is your suggested name?
[20:40] <effeietsanders> and make it into a discussion about the accountability side of movement roles?
[20:40] <effeietsanders> well, name it "Movement Roles: Accountability in the movement" for example
[20:40] <Austin> It does seem rather silly to have a discussion about accountability in a vacuum
[20:41] <effeietsanders> then at least people realize it is part of a bigger whole :)
[20:41] <effeietsanders> I know Erik won't like it :P
[20:41] <Austin> Movement roles is very much relevant to the topic, so merging them makes sense
[20:41] <aklempert> or just "Accountability in the movement"
[20:41] <effeietsanders> then at least we have another hour
[20:42] <effeietsanders> aklempert: putting "Movement Roles" in front of it, helps making people aware that this movement roles process is actually happening
[20:42] <effeietsanders> it is more of a PR thing ;-)
[20:42] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.33.83] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
[20:42] == Theo10011_ has changed nick to Theo10011
[20:42] <effeietsanders> (and of course we should make sure enough of us will actually be there)
[20:42] <Austin> I think putting MR at the session's center is more important than what we call it
[20:42] <aklempert> well, we don't want to scare people away either. perhaps in brackets at the end? ;)
[20:42] <Bence> my original plan had movement roles in mind; but I wasn't a fan of the "X: Y" naming structure
[20:43] == Abbasjnr [3e186ff8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.24.111.248] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[20:43] <effeietsanders> aklempert: a matter of making the other session even more scary :P
[20:43] <effeietsanders> ouch, against GLAM :P
[20:43] <effeietsanders> hmmmm
[20:43] <bnewstead> If you are going to change Erik's session then it should be in discussion with him.
[20:44] <effeietsanders> bnewstead: it is not "Erik's session" afaik? :)
[20:44] <bnewstead> Sorry: Meant *the session proposed by Erik*
[20:44] <effeietsanders> and we have such discussion already on the relevant page btw
[20:44] <effeietsanders> so it is not out of thin air
[20:45] <effeietsanders> the brainstorm page that is
[20:45] <bnewstead> Well it reads to me that MR wants to coopt that time slot.
[20:45] <effeietsanders> it is a discussion imho that fits within the MR process
[20:46] <Austin> I think it's a natural focus for that session
[20:46] <bnewstead> which is fine if this is what everyone involved agrees on...but not sure that the MR team is the decision maker on this.
[20:46] <Austin> Well, that's why we're fortunate enough to have the conference organizer in the room ;)
[20:46] <effeietsanders> I am not planning on making this decision, I am just putting a suggestion forth to Bence - then he can follow due process
[20:46] <Jon__> and we are not that well prepared for one session, let alone two ...
[20:46] <effeietsanders> (if necessary)
[20:46] <effeietsanders> Jon__: we should be
[20:47] <effeietsanders> we should be prepared for 10 sessions if need be, imho :)
[20:47] <Jon__> we definitely should ... but we are not yet, eh?
[20:47] <effeietsanders> we have two weeks
[20:47] <effeietsanders> and it wouldn't be "our" session either, btw
[20:47] <Austin> I'm with Lodewijk, on this—the less we discuss at the chapters meeting, the worse off we'll be at the end
[20:47] <effeietsanders> just to be clear
[20:48] <effeietsanders> it is just a matter of placing it in context
[20:48] <anirudh> Indeed.
[20:48] <Jon__> More time at the chapters meeting is good .... and we need to be prepared :-)
[20:48] <effeietsanders> but if we ever want to make this process a success, we need to make people aware of this context
[20:49] <effeietsanders> and for preperation we have this thursday :)
[20:49] <effeietsanders> so going back to that agenda point...
[20:49] <effeietsanders> imho there are a few things we need to do then:
[20:49] <Jon__> thank you
[20:49] <Austin> Again, http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/March_meeting
[20:49] <effeietsanders> 1) prepare a short presentation
[20:50] <Austin> I think a subpage of that page for our final presentation is in order
[20:50] <effeietsanders> 2) prepare discussion questions for the other sessions - even if not directly related
[20:50] <effeietsanders> (if for whatever reason people are getting bored, we should grasp that chance)
[20:50] <Jon__> Lodewijk, are you talking about Thursday 24th or Thursday 17th when you say "this Thursday?"
[20:50] <effeietsanders> 3) prepare at least 3 proposals for working groups
[20:50] <Austin> http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/March_meeting/Presentation, in case anyone wants to help flesh it out
[20:50] <effeietsanders> Jon__: I am talking about this Thursday that we reserved for sitting together :)
[20:51] <effeietsanders> sorry for the Dunglish
[20:51] <Austin> Right, the Thursday before the chapters meeting
[20:51] <effeietsanders> and maybe 4) prepare an elevator pitch and questions for informal discussions
[20:51] <effeietsanders> (outside meeting schedule)
[20:51] <Jon__> how is 1 different from 4?
[20:52] <effeietsanders> 1) is the presentation Austin or you could give at the kickoff of the meeting at the beginning of the 45min slot
[20:52] <effeietsanders> a 5-10 min presentation, right?
[20:52] <effeietsanders> 4) is something to explain the process and questions in 20 seconds
[20:53] <effeietsanders> at least I would find that very helpful
[20:53] <effeietsanders> and I know I am not the only person in this channel being long threaded sometimes ;-)
[20:54] <Austin> Agreed
[20:54] <Austin> (Updating the wiki as we go along, btw)
[20:54] <effeietsanders> and I suggest we take a short while in the beginning to do some updates and input analysis of course
[20:54] <effeietsanders> (on the Thursday)
[20:55] <effeietsanders> (as an in-between: big hugs, thank you aude!)
[20:55] <effeietsanders> anything else on the Thursday meeting agenda?
[20:56] <effeietsanders> ok
[20:56] <effeietsanders> Preparing for ~25 minute plenary presentation on 25th March
[20:56] <effeietsanders> that was on the agenda too
[20:56] <Jon__> we're going to need to plan work beyond Berlin
[20:56] <Austin> I think the stuff you just enumerated falls into the realm of prep work
[20:56] <effeietsanders> should we still discuss that, or did we already cover that
[20:56] <aklempert> Jon__: +1
[20:56] <Austin> As in, stuff we should try to get before Thursday
[20:56] <effeietsanders> Jon__: good point, re-evaluate time table and goals :)
[20:57] <effeietsanders> Austin: we should try, but I dont think it is very realistic unfortunately considering the past weeks and the rest that has to happen
[20:57] <effeietsanders> if anyone has time for it though... please raise your hand :)
[20:58] <effeietsanders> Austin: so lets be honest with ourselves and put it on the agenda :)
[20:58] <Jon__> effe ... I think you just raised your hand
[20:59] <aklempert> :) :(
[21:00] <Jon__> Austin, are you developing the agenda on the wiki?
[21:00] <effeietsanders> Jon__: I have another strategy process going on, a chapter to professionalize, knowledge transfer to another board member to prepare, annual report to write...
[21:00] <Austin> Well, it's on the page regardless
[21:00] <Austin> Yes
[21:00] <Austin> http://movementroles.wikimedia.org/wiki/March_meeting
[21:00] <aklempert> let's put it on the agenda. however, if someone works on it before, he will get some applause, and maybe a barn star
[21:00] <effeietsanders> I am already wondering how to fit that into the 40h per week I dont sleep or do internship
[21:00] * Theo10011 likes barnstars.
[21:01] <Theo10011> precious!!!
[21:01] * aklempert thinks theo just raised his hand, at least a little bit :)
[21:01] <effeietsanders> :)
[21:01] <Theo10011> inadvertently
[21:02] <effeietsanders> I would appreciate it though if Austin could get the time to prepare this agenda thoroughly for us so that we can go through it effectively in Berlin
[21:02] <effeietsanders> as in, collect documents and information and stuff
[21:02] <effeietsanders> :)
[21:02] <Austin> Yes, I'll work on it, but it would help if people could pitch in as well
[21:02] <Austin> #s 1 and 4 are easy enough
[21:03] <Austin> Er, 2 and 4
[21:03] <aklempert> Austin: okay, please keep reminding us
[21:03] == Theo10011_ [~Theo@59.180.43.147] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[21:03] <Austin> Will do
[21:03] <effeietsanders> ok
[21:03] <effeietsanders> next point
[21:04] <effeietsanders> I think we covered getting maximum input
[21:04] <effeietsanders> so going to 5)
[21:04] <effeietsanders> since we're over time already
[21:04] <effeietsanders> In-person meeting between Berlin and Haifa
[21:04] <aklempert> i thought we would need such a meeting
[21:04] <effeietsanders> I think Jon__ added that
[21:04] <effeietsanders> oh, arne did?
[21:04] <Jon__> indeed
[21:05] <aklempert> jon, after the two of us were talking together this morning ;)
[21:05] <effeietsanders> should we discuss and decide that now, or shall we discuss it when we're all together in Berlin?
[21:05] <Jon__> exactly
[21:05] <Austin> It sounds like a good idea to me
[21:05] <effeietsanders> in principle I think it is a good idea
[21:05] <effeietsanders> but right now we have a sub set :)
[21:05] <Austin> Maybe we can hold it somewhere other than Germany, this time? ;)
[21:05] <effeietsanders> Leiden?
[21:05] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.37.237] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
[21:05] <Austin> Ha!
[21:05] <aklempert> if everybody here agrees that it would be a good idea, we could start looking out for possible dates
[21:06] == Theo10011_ has changed nick to Theo10011
[21:06] <Jon__> how about putting possible dates on the wiki
[21:06] <Jon__> ?
[21:06] <effeietsanders> aklempert: I was thinking about wairting with that because of the re-evaluation of the time table
[21:06] <Austin> Yeah
[21:06] <effeietsanders> April would be too soon probably
[21:06] <effeietsanders> May is full with other meetings
[21:06] <effeietsanders> so would probably be June anyway
[21:07] * effeietsanders guessing here
[21:07] <Austin> I think it's hard to say, so early
[21:07] <effeietsanders> (and in June it is actually good weather in Leiden!)
[21:07] <effeietsanders> ;-)
[21:09] <bnewstead> Hey all - I need to run. Catch up with you in Berlin. Cheers.
[21:09] <Austin> Later, Barry
[21:09] <effeietsanders> great to have you here!
[21:09] <effeietsanders> thanks for the input
[21:09] <Jon__> cheers, Barry
[21:09] <anirudh> We can have a discussion around possible dates on the MR wiki, and get input from the participants. Probably best to decide at the Berlin meeting where we'll have a better idea as to where we stand.
[21:09] == bnewstead [~chatzilla@adsl-71-142-67-126.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net] has left #wikimedia-roles []
[21:09] <aklempert> anirudh: sounds good
[21:09] <effeietsanders> anirudh: true, we could prepare this point :)
[21:10] <Austin> That's what I was thinking, yes
[21:11] <effeietsanders> ok
[21:11] <aklempert> okay
[21:11] <effeietsanders> then we're through?
[21:11] <aklempert> it seems so
[21:12] <Jon__> see everyone in Berlin in 13 days time!
[21:12] <aklempert> great!
[21:13] <anirudh> When's the next IRC meeting?
[21:13] <aude> please take good notes
[21:13] <Jon__> :-)
[21:13] <Jon__> there will be an IRC meeting next Friday, scheduled at 1100 UTC
[21:14] <anirudh> thanks.
[21:15] <anirudh> have a good night, everyone.
[21:16] <Austin> Night, all
[21:16] <Bence> good night
[21:16] == Bence [54033446@gateway/web/freenode/ip.84.3.52.70] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[21:17] <Jon__> good night
[21:17] <aklempert> good night, jon
[21:18] <aklempert> good night, everybody
[21:43] == anirudh [~bhati@wikimedia/Sir-Nicholas-de-Mimsy-Porpington] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
[21:49] == aklempert [~chatzilla@p5B243344.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.15/20110303024726]]
[21:49] <effeietsanders> good night all
[21:49] == effeietsanders [~eia@wikimedia/effeietsanders] has left #wikimedia-roles []
[21:54] == Theo10011_ [~Theo@59.180.53.144] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[21:56] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.43.147] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
[21:56] == Theo10011_ has changed nick to Theo10011
[21:57] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.53.144] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
[21:57] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.53.144] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[22:06] == Theo10011_ [~Theo@59.180.55.236] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[22:08] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.53.144] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
[22:08] == Theo10011_ has changed nick to Theo10011
[22:15] == Theo10011 [~Theo@59.180.55.236] has quit [Quit: ~~~~]
[00:05] == SMP-laptop [~SMP@wikipedia/SMP] has quit [Quit: Me'n vaig]
[01:08] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
[07:22] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
[09:04] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[12:02] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
[12:11] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[15:04] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[15:24] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
[16:07] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[16:14] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
[16:14] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[16:23] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
[17:48] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[18:38] == effeietsanders [~eia@wikimedia/effeietsanders] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[19:22] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
[19:30] == kibble [~cbrown@wikimedia/Cbrown1023] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[19:33] == kibble [~cbrown@wikimedia/Cbrown1023] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
[19:36] == kibble [~cbrown@wikimedia/Cbrown1023] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[20:34] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[22:39] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
[22:43] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[23:20] == effeietsanders [~eia@wikimedia/effeietsanders] has left #wikimedia-roles []
[00:01] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
[06:54] == aude [~katie@pool-96-231-117-17.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
[08:13] == effeietsanders [~eia@wikimedia/effeietsanders] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[08:32] == Austin [~austin@82.161.53.38] has joined #wikimedia-roles
[08:39] == effeietsanders [~eia@wikimedia/effeietsanders] has left #wikimedia-roles []
