Sender Policy Framework

On Satarday 2006-02-04 at 22:00 UTC, the council held a meeting on IRC (logs available at [1] and [2]). This was the first meeting of the newly elected 2006 SPF Council with all council members (Julian Mehnle, Mark Kramer, Mark Shewmaker, Stuart Gathman, William Leibzon) present. There was a pre-planned agenda published at [3].

2006 SPF Council meeting procedures

Mark Kramer as acting chair of 2005 SPF Council started the meeting proposing to go to the agenda item #1. A procedural point was raised by Julian regarding convention for making resolutions; he proposed to keep previous system used by 2005 SPF Council which was passed as a motion:

Motion 2006-02-04 22:12U (proposed by Julian).

Vote log  >> 22:11 <Julian> A procedural matter: the old council has used the following convention for making resolutions: 1. someone say "Motion: <text>", 2. someone else say "<utc-motion-time>: seconded" (or something equivalent), 3. votes should be cast as "<utc-motion-time>: (yes|no|abstain|...)". 22:11 <Julian> Should we keep this convention? 22:12 <MarkK> indeed, thank you julian :) 22:12 <Julian> I think it has worked well. 22:12 <shew> Thank you. :-) 22:12 <shew> I motion that the convention Julian suggested be kept. :-) 22:13 <Julian> 22:12u: seconded. # ;-) 22:13 <Julian> Votes? 22:13 <MarkK> 2212u: yes 22:13 <shew> 2213u: Yes. 22:13 <SDGathman> 22:12u: yes 22:13 <Julian> 2212u: yes 22:13 <MarkK> motion carries! 22:13 <Julian> willix? 22:13 <willix> 212u: yes

A procedure for voting on motions during SPF Council meetings is:

1. someone say "Motion: <text>",

2. someone else say "<utc-motion-time>: seconded" (or something equivalent),

3. votes should be cast as "<utc-motion-time>: (yes|no|abstain|...)

A related item was then discussed regarding SPF Council meeting quorum rules. Council agreed to keep previous council's procedure of:

It was also agreed that in general all rules and procedures adopted by previous year SPF Council would apply to newly elected council unless decided otherwise by motions of new council.

Regarding 2005 SPF Council members

Council thereafter went ahead with agenda item #1:

The council discussed "advisory" status and agreed that this means that:

It was also noted that this represents continuation of the procedures initiated by previous council as decided during July 2005 SPF Council meeting but that this needs to be reaffirmed. A brief discussion was then held how "thank you" to previous year SPF Council would be expressed and it was agreed that should be both by email and as mention on the website with official SPF Council motion. Two motions were thereafter passed as follows:

22:22 <Julian> Motion: The new council extends its thanks to Greg
                  Connor for having done a good job as the 2006 council
                  election officer.
22:22 <shew> 22:22 UTC: Seconded.
22:22 <Julian> Votes?
22:22 <SDGathman> 17:22u seconded
22:22 <MarkK> 2222u: yes
22:22 <Julian> 2222u: abstain
22:22 <SDGathman> 17:22u yes
22:22 <willix> 2222: yes
22:22 <shew> 2222u: Yes.
22:22 <SDGathman> 22:22u yes
22:22 <SDGathman> sorry
22:22 <MarkK> motion carries 

                  exiting members from the previous council: Greg
                  Connor, Chuck Mead, Wayne Schlitt, and Meng Weng Wong,
                  and re-affirms the following motion from the previous
                  council: "Council members losing regular member status
                  shall be given Advisory Member status for one election
                  term. Advisory members have no voting rights, but
                  shall be allowed full reading and posting access to
                  the public and p

                  #spf-council IRC channel. The council can decide to
                  deny advisory membership to specific past members."

                  in the minutes.

2006 SPF Council positions

An item 2 on the agenda was thereafter discussed:

This discussion started with questions raised by Stuard Gathman and Mark Shewmaker regarding position of |Executive Director that was previously held by Meng Weng Wong. It was noted that it was primarily project public spokesperson and advocacy position which was specifically good fit for Meng due to him often being present at email-related conferences and doing PR and advocacy for the project from when he first started it. However it was thought by all council members that at the new council these functions would be better of being distributed more evenly among all council members with spf-council list (or its alias) serving as primary contact for press. A motion was thereafter passed as follows:

23:09 <willix_> Motion - "2006 SPF Council will have two official
                  positions - council chair,
23:09 <willix_> who chairs the meeting and is responsible for meeting
                  agenda and
23:09 <willix_> council secretary, who is responsible for meeting
                  minutes and
23:09 <willix_> publication of council resolutions. The 2006 Council
                  will not have
23:09 <willix_> a separate posotion of an E.D., but rather the
                  responsibilities of
23:09 <willix_> that position will be shared among all council
                  members.
23:09 <willix_> "
23:09 <Julian> The thing is, we don't really need to re-approve the
                  definitions of "Chair"
                  <http://new.openspf.org/Council_Resolution/5> and
                  "Secretary"
                  <http://new.openspf.org/Council_Resolution/7>. Those
                  resolutions can stay as they currently are, I think.
23:10 <Julian> But I can agree to the latest text.
23:10 <Julian> 2309u: seconded.
23:10 <Julian> Votes?
23:10 <MarkK> 2309u: yes
23:10 <Julian> 2309u: yes
23:10 <SDGathman> 2309u: yes
23:10 <willix_> 2309: yes
23:11 <shew> 2310u: yes
23:11 <Julian> shew: I think you mean 2309u (AKA William's motion),
                  right?
23:11 <shew> correct.
23:11 <shew> 2309u: Yes.
23:11 <shew> (Sorry, I was using time-voted. My misunderstanding.)
23:11 <Julian> No problem. ;-)
23:11 <Julian> So ordered.