►
From YouTube: Node.js November Public Board Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
C
D
C
C
C
C
C
Today's
agenda
is,
as
stated,
we
will
approve
our
board
meeting
minutes
and
talk
a
little
bit
about
there,
an
interactive
and
our
certification
community
updates.
But
what
we
want
to
make
sure
we
get
through
today
is
our
individual
board
member
discussion
that
has
been
discussed
among
the
community
as
well
as
our
board
members
during
working
sessions.
C
H
C
C
C
These
are
some
general
stats.
We
did
provide
a
activity
report
for
the
sponsors
of
the
event
and
the
board
members
there's
also
other
information
in
there
that
we
could
provide.
Is
it's
quite
a
lengthy
report,
but
we
could
provide
that
as
well
to
any
of
the
community
members
who
are
interested
any
comments
or
questions
on
this
interactive
2017.
C
C
A
C
C
But
we
were
trying
to
find
a
way
to
get
more
of
the
JavaScript
ecosystem
to
participate,
and
so
we
we
just
are
dropping
the
node
from
the
name
so
that
they
don't
feel
like
they're,
not
being
included
and
still
doing
all
the
same
activities
and
more.
We
have
also
partnered
with
the
Jas
foundation
to
bring
in
more
of
the
JavaScript
community
and.
C
Help
us
expand
their
reach
and
there
was
a
good
Twitter
conversation
last
week
about
when
they
announced
the
2018
lineup
of
events
that
are
a
good
source
of
those
that
are
produced
by
the
Linux
Foundation
and
there's
a
lot
of
good
feedback
on
that.
Particularly
I.
Think
we've
mentioned
that
Jesus
would
say
that
about
being
to
work
with
the
frameworks
and
there's
an
interactive
conference
and
having
time
to
collaborate
there.
Our
goal
would
be
to
have
a
much
bigger
show
about
twice
the
size
of
this
year's
and.
C
Hopefully,
a
more
diverse
set
of
topics.
Actually
a
lot
of
our
topics
are
well
beyond
it,
but
I
think
it's
just
a
good
running
change
for
us
to
draw
on
some
of
these
people
that
we
depend
on
to
deliver
applications
that
that
normally
did
consider
coming
to
new
it
interactive
any
questions
or
comments
on
that
I.
D
A
A
Unfortunately,
we've
had
to
push
out
the
the
timeline
for
release
quite
a
bit,
and
this
is
also
in
coordinating
things
such
as
version
updating
for
our
environment.
So
what
we're
looking
at
now
is
items
are
being
worked
on
by
David
mark
comments,
near
forum
and
I'm,
seeing
those
go
through
as
we
as
we
sit
and
he's
also
been
one
of
our
lead
contributors
on
it
from
the
get-go.
A
A
Yeah,
so
in
terms
of
the
the
first
item,
I
believe,
we've
also
got
Rachel
white
and
Tierney
on
the
call
who
are
our
community
creators,
so
they'll
be
able
to
speak
to
this
as
well,
but
it
has
been
proposed
in
the
community
committee
that
individual
membership
could
be
taken
on
as
a
responsibility
and
one
of
the
things
that
was
discussed.
There
was
whether
we
as
a
committee
had
a
had
the
bandwidth
for
it.
A
So
there
have
been
no
objections
to
that
thus
far,
and
that
has
been
even
with
the
context
being
filled
in
for
what
a
large
responsibility
that
is
to
not
only
manage
the
existing
membership
but
to
Aude.
It
what's
happened
with
the
individual
membership
program
up
to
date
and
figure
out
how
to
you
know,
provide
value
for
members
and
the
growing
membership
moving
forward.
A
The
spring
collaborator
summit
planning
is
definitely
underway.
It's
looking
like
first
talks
would
be
potentially
at
Jas
comp
EU
in
Berlin,
but
that
is
not
set
in
stone,
we're
having
to
manage
the
logistics
of
a
venue
alongside
a
place
that
is
advantageous
for
collaborators
outside
of
the
u.s.
to
be
able
to
collect
in
one
place,
but
also
have
a
great
collaborators
summit.
A
So
we're
looking
at
somewhere
that
partners
essentially
partners
with
a
community
conference
so
that
we
can
sort
of
maximize
that
outreach
and
also
be
able
to
bring
some
people
into
the
fold
who
aren't
necessarily
collaborators
yet
but
are
really
interested
in
doing
so.
And
then
the
last
update
there
is
the
individual
membership.
So
as
of
this
month,
we're
at
241
for
individual
membership,
active
members
and
112
of
those
were
from
the
the
individual
membership
program,
signups
that
we
added
on
as
part
of
the
note
interactive
conference
registration.
So
at
this
point
it
is
generated.
C
Next
item,
when
the
agenda
is
the
individual
director
discussion-
and
it
encompasses
more
than
just
the
individual
director-
we-
there
was
the
the
proposals
and
discussion.
Is
there
Hackney
for
last
approximately
if
last
few
months,
and
we
have
two
primary
proposals
but
other
factors
that
we
need
to
consider
in
relation
to
his
proposals?
And
we
summarized
that
in
the
Google
Doc
that
was
that
isn't
linked
here.
C
Had
you
asked
me
being
volunteer
to
to
help
walk
us
through
that?
It
is
I,
think
it's
it's
say
we'll
go
through
each
of
those
proposals,
but
there's
probably
some
sidebars
and
some
other
information
that
that's
relevant.
So
if
you
need
to
bring
something
up,
I
encourage
you
to
do
so.
So
that's
ritual
or
tyranny,
which
of
you
was
going
to
talk
about
the
individual
first
proposal.
I'm.
F
Sorry
not
consistent
can
I
just
add
something
really
quickly.
Sorry
tourney
before
we
get
into
this.
If
you
look
at
the
text
of
the
proposal
on
Google
Docs,
the
proposals
have
actually
been
split
so
that
the
individual
director
membership
and
the
calm,
calm,
directorship
conversation
are
supposed
to
be
completely
separate,
and
so
I
would
just
like
to
ask
everyone
who's.
Looking
at
this
to
please
look
at
that.
Google
Doc,
rather
than
this
slide
for
the
accurate
proposals
that
we're
looking
at
presenting
today,
yeah.
A
C
C
B
Awesome
yeah,
so
I'll
be
taking
this
over.
A
Rachael
has
a
bad
connection
right
now,
so
we'd
like
to
request
that
we
have
a
board
seat.
A
director
seat
rather
similar
to
our
the
TSC,
does
basically
following
the
same
processes
that
the
TSE
has,
and
you
know
this
is
to
ensure
a
few
things
we
would
like
to
have.
You
know
top-level
representation
from
the
committee
to
the
board,
both
for
accountability
and
for
things
that
we
want
to
share
and
request.
B
Some
other
things
are
we'd
like
to
be
able
to
have
accurate
community
representation
to
the
board
from
an
organic
merit
based
group,
which
is
how
at
least
I
personally
see
the
you
know,
JISC
community
committee.
Our
our
work
is
largely
bound,
outward-facing
and
I
see
the
TSC
is
the
inward-facing
group
and
so
we'd
like
to
be
able
to
effectively
be
able
to
have
a
say
and
share
that
surface.
That
can
be
communication
upward
to
you.
The
community
committee
is
very
based,
so
we,
you
know
we
do
have
merit,
but
we
do
it
very
differently.
B
You
know
cabling
the
the
our
reasons
we
don't
want
to
add
someone
to
the
board,
who
would
be
detrimental
or
impact
the
regular
board
activities,
rather
we're
looking
to
help.
You
know
enable
the
board
to
have
an
accurate
and
active
representation
from
the
community,
with
the
goal
of
working
with
you
to
ensure
that
we're
helpful
and
beneficial
as
part
of
the
foundation
and
be
able
to
really
grow
the
community
committee
and
the
note
overall
nodejs
community.
I
I
Definitely
like
to
comment
on
this,
so
it's
been
brought
to
the
board's
attention
several
times
in
previous
conversations
that
this
proposal
is
not
endorsed
by
the
community
committee
to
review
or
remind
a
rough
draft
was
without
proper
context,
was
shared
to
the
community
committee
in
private
many
months
ago.
It
was
never
posted
publicly.
It
was
never
iterated
on
by
the
committee.
It
was
never
made
a
committee
s
agenda
item,
there
was
never
a
vote.
This
is
a
proposal
that
has
brought
to
the
board
by
Tierney
and
Rachel.
I
They
did
not
get
consent
from
consent
from
the
community
community
to
represent
this
on
their
behalf
and
without
ever
posting
it
publicly.
It
certainly
is
an
on
behalf
of
the
community.
We
have
been
told
of
time
and
time
again
that
we
as
directors
must
bring
our
own
voices
to
the
board
and,
to
that
end
not
a
single
board.
Member
was
willing
to
bring
this
proposal
here.
So
in
this
scenario,
when
that
voice
couldn't
be
found,
an
outside
voice
was
brought
in
for
reasons.
I
cannot
understand
and
I
have
not
been
informed
of.
I
I
am
the
representative
to
the
community
committee
on
this
board.
I
find
their
proposal
to
under
I
undermine
the
community,
and
it's
chartered
and
its
community,
and
this
charter
and
I
do
not
endorse
it
and
I
didn't
want
to
represent
it
here.
It
is
also
important
to
note
that
the
previous
chair,
Brian
Hughes,
worked
with
me
often
to
coordinate
board
items
and
I
successfully
followed
through
on
all
of
them.
I
To
date,
neither
of
the
chairs,
Jeremy
and
Rachel
have
reached
out
to
me
to
coordinate,
to
coordinate
on
anything,
and
in
fact
this
is
the
first
item
and
didn't
even
come
from
the
community
committee.
I
suggested
several
times
that
they
created
proposal
that
simply
asked
for
a
director
position
without
sacrificing
an
individual
director
position.
I
I
would
have
sponsored
that
proposal
I
see
now
that
this
was
broken
out,
and
so,
as
these
two
have
been
broken
out,
I
certainly
would
have
sponsored
this
if
the
chairs
had
brought
it
to
me
as
their
Charter
requires
I
mean
the
title
of
this
has
never
been
object
with
the
title
of
this
I
would
like
to
finish.
The
tide
of
this
has
never
been
we'd.
Like
our
own
director,
it's
always
been
the
individual
member
program
changes
proposal.
They
believe
that
a
community
community
director
will
be
superior
to
an
independently
elected
representative
from
the
community.
I
I
do
agree
that
someday
the
community
community
should
probably
have
a
dedicated
director.
I
do
not
believe
the
group
isn't
matured
to
that
point
to
justify
yet
here's
why
they're
not
delivered
on
the
things
the
board
has
set
out
for
them
to
do.
First
of
all,
there's
inclusivity
there's
been
absolutely
no
movement
on
inclusivity.
Let's
not
forget
this
is
where
it
all
started.
It
was
dropped
from
the
TSEs
domain
and
Kham
Kham
was
created
in
part
to
take
on
that
initiative.
Next,
most
of
the
work
being
done
is
self
formation
administration
of
themselves.
I
If
this,
this
work
wouldn't
exist,
if
kaam
kaam
didn't
exist
and
it
doesn't
yet
lend
to
the
project
mission
statement,
and
then
there
are
the
group
that
are
under
come
come.
We
have
an
evangelism,
it's
activity
is
severely
drop-top
and
is
not
discussed
in
calm
calm.
There
are
no
evangelism
meetings.
We
have
a
group
called
community
events.
There
are
two
open
issues:
zero
closed,
there's
been
no
activity
in
five
months.
We
have
no
jazz
collection.
There
is
little
activity
there,
however,
that
activity
would
exist
without
compound.
Then,
finally,
I
have
additional
concerns.
I
There's
been
a
high
amount
of
churn
of
the
members,
and
so
with
members
being
like
not
even
on
the
committee
for
under
a
year,
there's
a
directorship
proposal
here
to
put
someone
on
the
board
for
a
year
term,
so
I
mean
it
seems
a
little
off
so
still,
additionally,
there's
still
no
reps
from
groups.
Like
note
bots
in
note
school.
This
is
this:
is
some
of
the
promise
of
calm
come
from
the
beginning?
I
I'm,
not
sure
that
there
are
even
conversations
happening
about
it.
Note
together
is
via
Rachel.
Last
I
knew
it
was
in
limbo,
still
trying
to
figure
out
what's
happening
with
it.
Looking
around
online,
it
doesn't
appear
to
have
any
activity
now.
I,
just
really
hope
is
revived.
It's
an
awesome
program,
but
kaam
kaam
is
not
actively
discussing
it.
I
B
We've
already
done
a
suite
of
outreach
around
talks
I've,
given
a
talk
focusing
around
the
community
committee,
I
believe
six,
four
or
five
six.
Where
are
there
times
in
the
past
year,
including
at
node,
interactive,
helping
encouraging
people
to
come
participate
in
the
community?
We
have
several
people
who
have
started
from
that.
Those
talks
coming
in
and
participating
now.
B
Something
else
I'd
like
to
mention
is
that
the
you
say
that
the
community
committee
has
a
head
members
active
for
a
year,
any
member,
that's
individually
been
active
for
a
year.
The
community
committee
hasn't
been
around
for
you
we're
coming
up
on
that
mark,
but
we
have
not
actually
hit
that
mark
and,
as
you
know,
William
it's
it's
hard
to
grow
a
community
and
sorry
grow.
B
A
group
who
is
actively
focused
on
community
not
hard
strict
technical
problems,
but
people
problems
and
that's
what
we've
done
and
we
are
continuing
to
grow
that
part
of
the
our
meritocracy.
If
you
want
to
call
it,
that
is
that
we
have
a
long
onboarding
process
if
we
have
a
three-month
onboarding
process
to
become
member,
that
is
part
of
the
Charter
I
believe,
and
it's
something
that
we
actively
encourage
in
people
to
come
participate
in.
But
it's
not
easy.
B
Actually,
a
lot
of
that
work
is
done
over
the
medium
at
nodejs
dot-com,
alias
where
several
of
us,
the
technical
editors
myself,
is
a
B,
Heaton
and
Tracy
from
the
foundation
actively
discuss
articles
that
are
submitted
to
us-
and
this
is
this-
was
done
intentionally
outside
of
github-
to
provide
a
more
welcoming
and
lower
barrier
to
submitting
content.
We
actively
have
content
coming
through
that
medium
and
that
is
not
through
the
github.
B
B
I
B
B
C
F
Like
to
add
to
two
points
that
I,
that
you
know
kind
of
separate
from
from
what's
been
discussed
up
until
now,
strong
my
own
thoughts,
I,
think
that
the
community
committee,
at
the
very
least,
despite
how
we're
all
discussing
it
I
at
least
hope
that
we
can
reach
consensus,
that
we
would
all
like
the
community
committee
to
be
successful
and
I.
Don't
think
that
there's
anyone
here
who
doesn't
want
to
see
the
community
committee
be
successful.
Hi.
B
J
I
B
C
G
C
I
think
that
we've
gotten
opinions
from
a
representative
sample
the
community
committee
here
and
as
well
as
our
individual
director
are
there
anything
other
thoughts
on
the
director
seat
before
we
move
on
and
I
really
stress
that
we
need
to
give
the
other
people
in
the
agenda
some
time
to
speak
in
their
box
as
well.
I.
H
Will
make
one
simple
comment,
which
is
that
the
community
community
and
is
a
peer
committee
to
the
technical
steering
community
and
the
technical
steering
committee
has
a
director
seat
regardless
of
the
scope
of
the
individual
director
seats
and
their?
This
is.
This
is
one
of
the
reasons
that
we
tease
this
apart
in
the
proposal,
regardless
of
the
individual
director
seats
having
parity
between
the
TSC
and
the
calm,
calm
having
representation
on
the
board
seems
very
reasonable
to
me.
A
D
I
would
represent
this.
The
I
think
has
been
ported
out.
You
know
we're
trying
to
build
calm
come
into
something
we're
trying
at
the
same
time,
to
bring
in
additional
members.
We've
had
a
limited
amount
of
success
at
Note,
interactive,
there's
millions
of
users
out
there,
but
we
still
have
barely
scraped
the
surface
of
that
and-
and
we
don't
have
the
voice
of
you-
know
a
big
part
of
our
community.
D
The
end
users
who
feel
uncomfortable
oftentimes
are
unable
to
go
and
open
up
an
issue
on
github
or
engage
through
that
that
mechanism,
especially
enterprise
developers,
we
find,
are
unable
to
go
and
do
that.
So
this
method
that
I'm
proposing
here
is
something
I've
seen
done
in
other
stations
and
it's
a
first
step
towards
potentially
I.
D
Think
having
you
know,
see
as
we
go
through
time
as
we
build
up
to
membership,
but
I
think
what
we
saw
in
the
experiment
to
have
the
individual
director
seats,
as
it
was
maybe
too
early
and
I-
think
it's
still
too
early
in
the
formation
of
of
what
we're
doing
with
Kham
Kham.
So
the
proposal
is
to
provide
help
guidance,
support,
strong
support
with
members
of
the
board
and
participation
to
help
the
calm.
D
Calm
group
have
much
more
of
a
time
slice
of
people
who
are
here
to
help
and
make
sure
we
fund
and
provide
guidance
and-
and
that
comes
through
the
committee
process,
that
the
the
things
that
we
have
to
do,
the
rebuilding
that
we
have
to
do
take
substantial
amounts
of
time
to
go.
Work
through
these
are
lengthy
discussions
and
and
doing
that
within
the
scope
of
the
board
meetings.
D
Bringing
the
issues
in
has
been
ineffective
and
has,
at
some
points
held
the
board
to
not
getting
through
all
the
things
that
it
needs
to
work
through
Foundation,
and
it
leaves
us
you
know,
with
an
inability
to
get
all
the
business
of
the
foundation
done.
So
in
this
case,
what
we
would
do
is,
as
at
least
a
first
step,
is
to
create
a
committee.
The
point
board
members
as
part
of
that
bring
the
calm,
calm
and
other
be
in
it.
D
Whether
it's
toc
members,
calm,
calm
members,
people
from
the
outside,
who
are
users
we
can
can
bring
in
super
users.
People
who
will
help
to
promote
and
build
the
foundation
and
eventually,
hopefully
become
into
either
individual
active
members
or
bring
their
organizations
in
such
that
their
members
to
participate
in
in
these
sessions
and
discussions
and
provide
guidance
and
make
sure
that
any
funding
issues
or
any
you
know,
issues
of
major
consequence
that
we
have
to
create
policy
and
direction
on
get
appropriate
attention
of
senior
level
people.
D
So
that
would
be
my
take
on
on
what
this
committee
would
go
and
do
you
know
they
would
have
to
meet
regularly.
Obviously
we're
looking
at
a
large
scope
of
the
community,
not
a
much
smaller
subset
that
we've
been
been
talking
about.
They
would
certainly
help
to
handle
all
the
resource
requests,
the
budgetary
requests
and
bring
those
either
back
to
the
board,
or
we
can
give
delegate
responsibilities
essentially
to
members
of
a
committee
to
make
decisions
and
choices.
That's
within
our
power.
D
We
can
actually
give
real
action
to
a
committee
that
doesn't
have
to
have
everything
come
back
to
the
board.
We
can
delegate
responsibility
and
therefore
we
would
have
this
this
process
go
on
with
some
oversight
over
a
period
of
time.
That
can
evaluate
how
it
works,
so
I
think
the
pros
are
that
we'll
get
to
a
much
more
in-depth,
detailed
discussion,
the
board
itself
will
be
able
to
function.
Hopefully
a
little
better
will
be
able
to
improve
overall
communications
across
many
of
the
constituents
that
we
have.
D
We
can
do
this
in
a
much
more
regular
fashion
and
essentially
educate
the
entire
foundation
on
what
we're
about
what
we're
trying
to
do
and
to
draw
them
into
the
process.
So
I
think
that's
that's
some
of
the
pros
of
this.
You
know,
yes,
there's
no
formal
vote
on
the
board.
However,
there
could
be
even
more
responsibilities
as
we
delegate
decision-making
to
this
committee,
you
don't
have
to
keep
it
at
the
board
level.
We
could
certainly
share
the
resources.
I.
D
D
The
community
need
to
do
and
it's
it's
challenging
and
so
I
think
what
we'll
end
up
doing
is
is
also
bringing
in
the
resources
of
the
foundation
in
form
of
staff,
as
we
go
through
this
to
make
sure
that
that
the
committee
is
a
approp
we
support
it
and
and
that
you
know
we
move
things
along,
but
that's
something
that
we're
gonna
have
to
tease
out
as
we
go
through
this.
So
I
think
you
know.
In
the
end,
this
is
an
interim
first
step
that
moves
us
along
allows
us
to
explore
this
builded
structure.
D
It
give
guidance
to
it
and
eventually,
possibly
get
to
a
director
seat.
That
is
in
parody,
as
others
have
suggested,
but
I
think
first,
we've
got
a
shape
and
give
guidance
and
build
it
and
do
in
a
way,
that's
very,
very
broadly
community
frettin
way
across
all
the
constituents.
That's
that's
my
yeah.
I
We
eagerly
await
them
to
the
joints.
That'd
be
really
cool,
so
I
I'm
not
sure
why
they
wouldn't
join
the
one,
that's
being
run
by
the
community
already
and
has
traction,
but
I
mean
if
this
proposal
were
to
move
forward.
You
know
I,
guess
I'd
be
concerned
that
this
is
the
first
time
the
Lord
would
take
steps
to
conflict,
its
own
communities,
voluntary
efforts.
D
Committee
William
I
got:
maybe
I
didn't
make
that
clear
that
it
would
be
that
as
their
entree
and
to
helping
participate
that
we
would.
We
would
direct
people
towards
joining
calm
combo,
but
they
would
be
meeting
regularly
with
the
board.
Obviously,
they
would
need
independent
of
the
board
and
at
some
regular
basis
and.
I
All
that
work
I
mean
again
with
this:
the
the
user
feedback.
That's
already
up
and
running
and
started
it's
working
to
be
a
part
of
compound,
so
that
kind
of
all
fits
in.
Well,
there
I
guess:
I
guess:
I'd
rather
favor
the
one
that's
community
grown
rather
than
a
private
group
for
the
board
of
people
that
it's
unclear
how
they
got
there
right
and
then
we
we
get
into
like
transparency
and
how
do?
How
do
we
have
unbiased
admission
and
inclusivity?
B
So
I'd
like
to
add
that
yet
these
feedback
groups
stemmed
from
a
it
is
a
calm,
calm
project
and
it
is
being
developed
into
a
calm,
calm
team,
so
that
project
is
already
a
piece
of
be
calm,
calm
and
looking
at
this
document.
This
is
both
what
the
user
feedback
and
you
should
have
started
by
Tracy
and
with
myself
and
Michael
from
IBM
Michael
Dawson
from
IBM
as
the
first
participants.
B
B
B
D
They
should
be
100%
aligned.
Turning
one
percent
along
and
difference
here
is
is
that
multiple
board
members
become
part
of
the
committee
and
that
once
it's
a
board
committee,
the
board
can
actually
delegate
responsibility
for
activities
so
that
they
have
the
wherewithal
to
make
financial
decisions
or
other
decisions
as
a
proxy
for
the
board.
If
we
so
choose,
that's
the
difference.
Okay,.
F
If
I
can,
if
I
can
add
one
thing
that
I
also
felt
was
a
great
addition
to
this
committee
was
with
the
inclusion
of
the
technical
steering
committee
as
well.
Miss
committee
seemed
to
be
like,
and
this
is
in
my
opinion,
why
it's
a
great
separate
proposal
as
well.
Aside
from
how
anything
else
works
out,
it
becomes
a
central
place
where
all
of
the
stakeholders
and
leadership
of
the
project
can
work
together
to
drive
initiatives
together
and
I,
like
even
the
board,
is
not
necessarily
the
appropriate
place
to
be
driving
initiative.
F
D
B
Would
that
be
it?
It
sounds
like
this.
Both
these
kind
of
scope
changes
would
be
good
fits
for
the
community
committee.
If
this
is
what
the
foundation
is
looking
for,
would
would
it
make
sense
to
put
this
in
the
charter
of
the
community
committee
and
expand
the
scope
with
the
community
committee.
This
well.
D
B
D
F
C
Plus,
there's
there's
the
idea
that
there
are
people
that
are
somewhat
intimidated
and
participating
in
the
calm
or
the
TSC
just
because
they
don't
have
that
culture
and
it
would
give
us
the
ability
to
invite
them
likely
I
actually
commend
the
Don
boarding
process
for
the
the
calm
calm
that
the
tyranny
in
Ridgewood
referred
to
earlier.
It's
just
some
people,
especially
users,
who
are
not
as
steeped
in
the
open-source
development,
might
be
a
little
bit
intimidated
by
to
participate
and
I.
C
F
Mark
I'm
gonna
push
back
on
that
a
tiny
bit
I
think
that
it's
I
think
that
it's
good
that
people
who
are
not
part
of
the
leadership
committees
are
included,
and
if
you
look
in
the
document
we
do
mention,
you
know
people
from
the
greater
community
that
are
part
of
it,
but
I'm
not
convinced
that
a
subcommittee
of
the
board
that
includes
directors
of
all
of
the
major
committees
and
board
members,
is
going
to
be
any
less
intimidating.
I
think
that
the
outreach
that
the
community
committee
is
talking
about
doing
right
now
would
effectively
yeah.
F
C
B
D
I
D
D
E
F
A
E
A
H
And
we
didn't
even
touch
on
the
individual
membership
seat
in
this
conversation.
Yet
I
don't
know
that
we
have
consensus
around
how
the
kumkum
differs
from
the
board
committee
and
comfort
with
that
relating
to
you
and
user
committee
as
well.
So,
while
I
agree
that
we
need
to
move
in
this
direction,
I
think
we
probably
need
to
refine
this
a
little
bit
further
before
we
would
even
go
toward
a
vote
on
it.
It
agrees
completely
that
it
doesn't
need
to
block
on
a
director
seat
for
kaam,
kaam
or
information
around
the
individual
membership
seats.
C
D
So,
let's,
let's
call
a
close
here,
thank
everybody
for
their
participation.
We've
got
some
good
conversation.
We
didn't
get
to
everything,
but
you
know
I
think
it's
important
to
hear
from
both
community
members
as
well
as
the
board
members
in
this,
because
we
are
talking
about
making
some
fundamental
shifts
and
how
we
go
about
execution.
So,
thanks
again
and
we'll
take
this
up
in
the
next
or
discussion.
Oh
that's,
Paula,
meeting
cross.