Working Group Minutes/MWG 2016-12-07

Participants

  • Paul Norman (pnorman)
  • Steve Friedl (SJFriedl)
  • Ilya Zverev (Zverik)
  • Michael Spreng (datendelphin)
  • Jonathan Witcoski (Mutter, jonwit)
  • Guillaume Rischard (Stereo)

Open issues

  • bank transfer form
  • E-Mail rejected as spam on membership@osmfoundation.org
  • Member self service area

Introductions

Three members are missing.

Minutes from 2016-09-04 and 2016-10-31 accepted.

recipients of mwg@ and membership@

Michael asks who receives e-mails from those two addresses. Also, there was a Mail from Michael Collinson asking to be removed from those mailing lists. Paul explains that membership@ forwards to mwg@, and that he removed Michael Collinson from the list. Now only members of the mwg receive e-mails from those two addresses.

Member self service area

There was a request to provide a member self service area. The idea is that a member can check her or his current status, and could change her or his address directly. Ilya will look into this.

Membership payments by bank transfer

There is one payment which has a name and clearly states that it is a membership payment, but it does not match an actual member or someone who announced paying by bank transfer. As there is nothing we can do, such payment will be recorded as a donation unless we get to know more details of this member (specifically, an e-mail address).

members eligible to vote at AGM 2016

The first list of members was generated with the wrong parameters, leading to too many people being eligible to vote. Michael generated a second list with the following parameters:

  • Membership Start Date before 10th November, 2016 (30 days before AGM)
  • Membership Expiration Date after 10th December, 2016 (date of AGM)
  • Membership Type is either Normal Member or Associate Member

The MWG recommends the board to restart the vote with the new list.

fee waiver program

Jonathan compiled a list of regions which have difficulties with paypal. But it seems this list contains regions where people can't receive money, but could send. The list needs to be refined. There is no guidance on suitable tasks yet.

Transcript

21:02  * pnorman waves
21:05 < Steve_> hiho.  I'm being xchat challenged today, and my internet is coming and going - feeling awesome.
21:05  * Steve_ is Steve Friedl
21:07 < Stereo> We'll catch you by the leg if you slip
21:08 < Stereo> Ping datendelphin and Zverik ?
21:10 < datendelphin> hi
21:10 -!- Steve_ is now known as SJFriedl
21:10 < Zverik> hi
21:10 < datendelphin> sorry for being late, a bit of social drama with our neighbours. 
21:10 < datendelphin> he needed a few words
21:11 -!- Jonwit [~oftc-webi@148.129.129.144] has joined #osmf-membership
21:11 < Stereo> You have your akademisches viertel :)
21:12 < datendelphin> indeed :)
21:12 < Stereo> So let's wait another three minutes?
21:12 -!- Jonwit [~oftc-webi@148.129.129.144] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:12 < Stereo> Great, the membership wg is already losing members
21:12 < datendelphin> let's start with introductions. I'm michael spreng
21:12 < pnorman> Paul Norman
21:13 -!- Mutter [~Mutter@166.170.35.130] has joined #osmf-membership
21:13 < Stereo> Hi, I'm Guillaume Rischard
21:13 < Stereo> Mutter: welcome, we're just doing intros
21:13 < Mutter> Hello this is Jonathan witcoski, USA sorry I'm late
21:14 < Stereo> Who's chairing? You, pnorman?
21:14 < Stereo> No worries
21:15 < datendelphin> Or I can do it if no one else wants to
21:15 < pnorman> I'd prefer someone else, but I can if needed
21:15 < Zverik> datendelphin: I choose you :)
21:16 < datendelphin> ok, let's start
21:16 < SJFriedl> Hi everybody. I am Steve Friedl in Southern California USA
21:17 < datendelphin> nice, many people showed up
21:17 < datendelphin> my first question was with the mwg@osmfoundation.org mailinglist
21:18 < Zverik> isn't it membership@osmfoundation.org?
21:18 < datendelphin> I think both work the same way?
21:18 < datendelphin> no idea about what is alias of what.
21:18 < pnorman> membership@ directs to mwg@, so that we can tie membership@ to civicrm or something in the future
21:18 -!- Mutter is now known as jonwit
21:18 < datendelphin> It would be nice to get a list of current subscribers. At least Michael Collinson would like to get off the list
21:19 < Zverik> membership@ is an address everyone is writing to regarding membership questions. I assume it is published somewhere on the osmf website
21:19 < pnorman> I can do that (and remove Michael)
21:19 < datendelphin> thank you pnorman 
21:20 < datendelphin> There were requests for a self service member area. For things like changing e-mail address and postal address, checking one's status
21:20 < datendelphin> Might that be possible, desirable with civicrm?
21:21 < Zverik> that's on me. I've got security tokens from Tom and read some api docs
21:21 < Zverik> can't promise any dates though
21:22 < datendelphin> great, you can let us know if we can help any time
21:22 < Zverik> of course, thanks
21:22 < datendelphin> I reviewed the sep/oct payments. Only one was nat already entered, which I did as a first exercise with civicrm
21:23 < datendelphin> I have tow issues from this check. First, one payment where I couldn't match a member to
21:24 < datendelphin> Hm how can I convey which payment I mean without violating confidentiality?
21:24 < Stereo> There's absolutely no contact info on the payment?
21:24 < SJFriedl> some of us have NDA on file, no?
21:25 < datendelphin> there is a name, but it doesn't match any member's name
21:25 < Stereo> Yeah, pnorman has mine
21:25 < jonwit> I have one on file finally 
21:25 < datendelphin> yes but irc is public
21:25 < SJFriedl> duh, of course.
21:25 < Stereo> Do we need to know that person's name?
21:25 < pnorman> If no one has contacted to say they're doing a bank payment and there's no matching information to what the transfer has, I'd take no action at this point.
21:25 < jonwit> So there's only a name and nothing else. No email address or username 
21:26 < datendelphin> no, I manly wanted to ask what to do.
21:26 < Stereo> And we don't know that person, and a quick google/facebook search finds nothing?
21:26 < datendelphin> but I guessed what pnorman says, not much we can do
21:26 < pnorman> Do we know that it's a membership payment and not a donation?
21:26 < datendelphin> it's the second line from the september payments (12.9.16)
21:27 < datendelphin> not for sure. It's just that it is close to 15 pounds
21:27 < Stereo> You can't see if we've received payments from them before?
21:28 < datendelphin> Stereo: we could ask the treasurer about this. But what to do with that information?
21:28 < pnorman> Without them contacting us, I'd just regard it as a donation at this point. The bank transfer information says to include a reference of Membership <your name> and to fill 
                 out https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc0th2KpV2R2mcKZiKPRFH_GVEl12aepf7eYQER9BqFPZtHWA/viewform
21:29 < datendelphin> yes. Let's leave it at that.
21:29 < SJFriedl> pnorman +1
21:30 < SJFriedl> I presume that if they do contact us, we can unwind it an apply it to their account.
21:30 < Stereo> datendelphin: maybe someone had a better idea than us last year. But I'm fine with no action if there's no contact.
21:30 < datendelphin> Ah about these forms. We at sosm do it with a form plugin for wordpress: http://sosm.ch/membership/
21:31 < datendelphin> Would that be acceptable? I could try to do a similar form for the bank payments, retiring the google form.
21:31 < datendelphin> We would get the output as mail.
21:31 < pnorman> I'd be fine with that, and I know some members are unwilling to use Google forms
21:31 < Stereo> Does the osmf have a wordpress?
21:32 < pnorman> join.osmf is on wordpress, as is civicrm
21:32 < Stereo> Could it actually pipe directly into civicrm?
21:32 < Zverik> datendelphin: do you have access to the google forms responses table?
21:32 < datendelphin> Stereo: that would be only little use as we need to match the payments manually anyway
21:32 < Zverik> I'm all for using a wordpress plugin, if anyone wants to set it up
21:33 < datendelphin> Zverik: no, no google account.
21:33 < datendelphin> I will set it up
21:33 < Stereo> https://join.osmfoundation.org/normal-membership/ could let members choose payment method maybe?
21:33 < Zverik> I don't see any payments on 12.9 in the table. There is one on 18th, but the person is quite known and I assume you'd know him
21:34 < pnorman> Stereo: there's a link on the bottom for alternative payment methods. 
21:34 < Stereo> It links to the google form
21:35 < datendelphin> Hm, strange. We are not looking at the same table then
21:35 < pnorman> Stereo: yes, we'd have to change the link
21:36 < datendelphin> the file is named "Membership payments into Barclays Sept 2016.csv"
21:36 < Stereo> I don't know how much the backend lets you personalise that form
21:36 < datendelphin> and it is the third row
21:36 < Zverik> datendelphin: no, I'm looking at the responses table in the google docs
21:37 < pnorman> do we have a link to the google doc?
21:37 < Zverik> Because when one uses a bank transfer, they are supposed to fill a google docs form
21:37 < datendelphin> ah sorry :)
21:37 < Stereo> It would be nice if it let you choose your payment method, and then either redirected you to paypal, or told you to include "OSMF Membership John Smith" on the transfer
21:37 < datendelphin> Of course, I was confused.
21:37 < Zverik> pnorman: we do, but access to it is restricted. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MMEl_uXjmjngOON7NKJcdi22FIfbnpdSeif0_7H2Epk/edit
21:38 < Stereo> Or if it prompted you for the transfer information before letting you submit, if you've chosen that. That way, we only have one form.
21:40 < datendelphin> Stereo: it does already say so that you should include it in the message. Yes one form would be optimal, but I guess that we are not able to do that
21:40 < Stereo> If the backend doesn't offer that possibility, I guess not.
21:41 < datendelphin> So another interesting topic: members eligible to vote for AGM 2016, board elections
21:41 < Stereo> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM16/Election_to_Board says: Only fully paid up members will be able to vote, and only those who have already become members 
                30 days prior to the AGM date.
21:42 < Stereo> Didn't Dermot already take care of it and send the links?
21:42 < datendelphin> I have to admit, I couldn't read the newest messages
21:43 < Stereo> From Dermot?
21:44 < datendelphin> yes, just scanning it
21:45 < datendelphin> Ah I see. Well as I generated the new list, I would suggest that someone crosschecks my attempt
21:45 < pnorman> reviewing some earlier emails too
21:46 < Stereo> Can you tell us about your methodology, and if there were any corner cases?
21:46 < datendelphin> Of course. In civicrm, there are "reports"
21:46 < datendelphin> under reports, I found one titled for the AGM 2015
21:47 < pnorman> dermot generated alist of 653 voters from the search groups Voters normal eligible Voters associate eligible
21:47 < Zverik> Dermot found errors in the voters list and now suggests we declare the voting invalid and restart it from scratch
21:48 < datendelphin> so I opened that report, changed the filter criteria to the 2016 dates, and reran it
21:48 < Zverik> And that he could restart it today if we agreed
21:48 < Stereo> Ah, I wasn't aware of that.
21:48 < Stereo> Was that made public?
21:48 < pnorman> mmm, so it's probably that he ran it for with the 2015 expiry dates?
21:48 < Zverik> Stereo: no, it was a message to the membership@ mailing list
21:48 -!- Irssi: Pasting 5 lines to #osmf-membership. Press Ctrl-K if you wish to do this or Ctrl-C to cancel.
21:48 < datendelphin> Membership Start Date   before 10th November, 2016
21:48 < datendelphin> Membership Expiration Date      after 10th December, 2016
21:48 < datendelphin> Membership Types        Is one of Normal Member, Associate Member
21:50 < Stereo> What were the errors in the voters list?
21:50 < pnorman> I think dermot pulled the wrong lists
21:50 < Stereo> Zverik: I assume it's not https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-membership/
21:51 < pnorman> membership@osmfoundation.org, mail chain starts yesterday
21:51 < Stereo> Ah, I'm not a member.
21:52 < pnorman> I think we have to recommend that it be restarted with what we believe is the correct list.
21:52 < datendelphin> Stereo: would you like to get a member?
21:53 < pnorman> I'll have to fix you not being on the list if you want to be in the WG, but for this particular item it's probably best that way, given that you're a candidate in the 
                 election
21:54 < Stereo> Yes, of course. Actually I should abstain from the discussion completely.
21:54 < Stereo> I'll shut up for a few minutes until there's no conflict of interest anymore :)
21:55 < SJFriedl> the fix is in!
21:55 -!- jonwit [~Mutter@166.170.35.130] has quit [Quit: Mutter: www.mutterirc.com]
21:56 < datendelphin> Ok, so can we leave the decision to  the board? I think it's not the discretion of the mwg to restart the election
21:56 < SJFriedl> +1
21:56 < datendelphin> otherwise, I am ok with what Dermot suggests
21:56 < Stereo> Abstain.
21:57 < pnorman> datendelphin: what about recommending that it be restarted? or should we just inform that it appears the wrong list was used for the initial voting that was sent out?
21:58 < datendelphin> I support the restart.
22:00 < datendelphin> ok, any other opinions?
22:01 < datendelphin> Conclusion: it appears the wrong list was used and we recommend a restart
22:01 < Zverik> I agree
22:02  * SJFriedl concurs
22:02 < datendelphin> So another interesting topic: the waiver program
22:03 < datendelphin> hm jonwit is not here
22:04 < datendelphin> or Mutter
22:04 < pnorman> I had sent around something in early Nov
22:05 < datendelphin> there was also a list sent around with regions not able to use paypal
22:06 < datendelphin> Clifford is also not here, he wanted to find suitable tasks for compensation
22:06 < pnorman> yes, it was in reply to that
22:06 < pnorman> What about the idea of using "active contributor" status?
22:07 < SJFriedl> I thought that the "suitable task" would be part of the submission process for the waiver program - they suggest what they will do for extra credit, and whomever decides 
                  this (MWG?) would accept or reject the application?
22:08 < Stereo> I thought the idea was that the contribution shouldn't be just mapping
22:08 < datendelphin> we could also work with that. 
22:09 < pnorman> the resolution at https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Annual_General_Meetings/14 was "the applicant may be required to contribute something else of value (e.g: time, …) to 
                 the Foundation, for example write a paragraph on mapping in their region"
22:09 < SJFriedl> As far s I remember, the gist was it would have a pretty low bar for suitability.
22:10 < pnorman> Something with the paypal list is that for some of those countries (i.e. Belarus) you can't send money *to* them, but can send money from them
22:10 < datendelphin> yes, so we sould also with that list make a second round
22:11 < Stereo> We don't really lose anything if we waive a membership - there's no unit cost.
22:11 < SJFriedl> agreed.
22:11 < datendelphin> but in the end, we will see who will apply for wit, it should not be too rigid
22:11 < Stereo> Could it be up to the candidate to explain why they can't pay, and suggest a token contribution?
22:11 < SJFriedl> Also, if they reapply a following year, we could ask how they fulfilled their part of the bargain.
22:12 < Stereo> Ah, so we grant on a promise, not on the action?
22:12 < datendelphin> Stereo: I think so. But it is good to have a rough idea how hard it is for whom
22:13 < datendelphin> Yes grant on a promise, but not renew if the last promise was not kept
22:14 < Stereo> And it should be up to the candidate to show, after one year, that they've had some success.
22:14 < pnorman> I view the contributing something else of value as an important anti-carpetbagging (UK usage) measure
22:14 < SJFriedl> only if they reapply. I doubt we'd track them down.
22:17 < datendelphin> So, what to do? I will ask Jonathan and Clifford  about their progress. 
22:17 < datendelphin> And maybe I will start a document outlining the program
22:18 < Stereo> Should we require that the person already maps?
22:19 < Stereo> So two and a half requirements, you're a mapper, and you promise to do something for the osmf, and if you've promised something last year you must have done something
22:19 < datendelphin> Stereo: I think not. Could contribute other things like answer questions, fix tools...
22:20 < Stereo> s/the osmf/openstreetmap/ then
22:20 < Stereo> Or already have some kind of contribution?
22:20 < Stereo> pnorman is right to mention carpetbagging
22:20 < pnorman> I'd prefer is already a mapper, but could see will do something in the future for other criteria
22:21 < datendelphin> ok
22:21 < datendelphin> Now I forgot something important at the start: acceptance of old minutes
22:21 < Stereo> Yeah, you just ploughed into that agenda :)
22:21 < datendelphin> sorry :)
22:22 < datendelphin> http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/MWG_2016-09-04 and http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/MWG_2016-10-31
22:22 < datendelphin> vote: accept
22:23 < Stereo> abstain, I wasn't there.
22:23 < SJFriedl> accept; all seems familiar
22:23 < pnorman> abstain
22:23 < datendelphin> Zverik?
22:24 < Zverik> give me a second plz :)
22:24 < Zverik> 2016-09-04 ok
22:25 < Zverik> 2016-10-31 is really well written :) looks okay to me
22:26 < datendelphin> thanks :)
22:27 < datendelphin> so new volunteers.
22:28 < datendelphin> Stereo joined us today. So would you like to be a member of the mwg?
22:28 < Stereo> Hi, yes!
22:28 < SJFriedl> we need to inform of the rules.
22:28 < SJFriedl> newbie buys the beer
22:28 < SJFriedl> hey, we all had to, right?
22:29 < Stereo> pnorman: you should have told me in Brussels :)
22:29 < datendelphin> Newbie needs to sign the agreement
22:29 < Stereo> I think that's what pnorman has from me
22:29 < pnorman> There was the list of people from SOTM, Rob N sent around an email on the 20th to all WGs
22:29 < datendelphin> great. So we vot on him being a new member? yes from me
22:29 < SJFriedl> +1
22:30 < Stereo> Thank you :)
22:30 < datendelphin> pnorman: I invited all thos people. I will follow up, hoping someone els will join
22:30 < pnorman> There were 6 people on the SOTM list (including Stereo, I believe)
22:30 < Stereo> Oh, and I'm the only one of them here?
22:31 < datendelphin> Yes.
22:32 < Stereo> The membership wg has a membership problem. Great.
22:32 < datendelphin> :)
22:32 < pnorman> There were also 9 other people who weren't sure what WGs they were interested in, who got sent generic info
22:33 < datendelphin> so I would like to wrap up this meeting. Any other business?
22:33 < pnorman> Who's going to send out the email about the election list?
22:34 < datendelphin> who double checks my list?
22:34 < pnorman> I showed 451 people with the civicrm export and looked over the criteria
22:35 < datendelphin> I can send the mail. where to?
22:35 < pnorman> dermot
22:35 < datendelphin> board?
22:35 < pnorman> ya, cc board. include enough background for them
22:36 < datendelphin> board@osmfoundation.org?
22:36 < pnorman> ya
22:37 < Stereo> It's not up to the mwg but to the board to communicate about this, is it?
22:37 < pnorman> to the public? yes, board or dermot
22:38 < datendelphin> ok, that's it?
22:38 < Stereo> Thank you all very much then :)
22:39 < datendelphin> Thank you everyone for joining :)
22:39 < datendelphin> see you next time, in the new year.
22:39 < pnorman> Stereo: send me your email, I can add you. But after my lunch
22:40 < Stereo> I've /msg'd you. Enjoy your lunch :)
22:41 < Zverik> thanks everyone
22:44 < Stereo> Oh, who's in charge of minutes?
22:44 < datendelphin> Me, I guess
22:45 < Stereo> Perfect!
22:46 < Zverik> Thanks datendelphin