From 3trk at progsoc.org Sun Mar 1 21:21:41 2015 From: 3trk at progsoc.org (Leefe) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:21:41 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Fwd: Welcome Back to ProgSoc for 2015 References: <541798b0133f14d1e1c4117868087c12ce3.20150226021710@mail70.atl11.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: Hi PS Exec, Can someone explain why announcements are being sent via MailChimp, and not to the Progsoc mailing list? For those people that didn?t get it, I?ve included a text only version of the post below. (so I don?t accidentally include any unique to me urls) I see that the membership fee has gone up 100% over last year, i.e. it doubled. Can an Exec explain the reason for this price increase? I heard from Jacob that the Union wants Progsoc to move its AGM. Can you please provide more details about this? Regards, Leefe http://www.progsoc.org/~3trk/ Begin forwarded message: > From: Progsoc Team > Subject: Welcome Back to ProgSoc for 2015 > Date: 26 February 2015 1:17:20 pm AEDT > To: > Reply-To: Progsoc Team > > ProgSoc Newsletter - April 2014 > View this email in your browser > > UTS Programmers' Society > Welcome to 2015 > > First Thursday meetup of the year > > On behalf of the new Executive Committee I would like to introduce and welcome you to 2015. > > The executive team has been working hard are planning many events for the year. We will publish a full list of events soon. > > However right now its Thursday and we would like to invite you to the first of out regular meet ups for the year. > > We will be around building 10 level 3 room 380 and/or just down stairs in the Penny Lane cafe from 4pm today and into the evening. > > First couple jugs are on me. > > - Carlin, El President? > > Renew Your Membership For 2015 > > If your need to renew you membership for 2014, fill out this form [here] to update us with your details. > And send a payment of $20 ($10 for current UTS students) to > > PROGRAMMERS SOCIETY > BSB Number: 112-879 > Account Number: 118075761 > > Please add ? MEMBERSHIP? as the payment description. > Sponsor ProgSoc in 2015 > ProgSoc is always on the looking out for sponsors to help us fund events and projects. If you or anyone you know are able to help please contact the Executive team at psexec at progsoc.orgto discuss sponsorship. > Community Classifieds > Selling, buying, hiring, job seeking or looking for love? > Send us an email and we will include it in our next newsletter. > > Free to good home, TFM 13. > Looking for suitable homes for excess copies of the last physical edition of TFM. > > Still looking for Love > Tom D'netto is keen for love, email him at hyperzap at progsoc.org. > > > > > ProgSoc on Facebook > @ProgSoc_UTS > Copyright ? 2015 Progsoc, All rights reserved. > You are receiving this email because you are/were a Progsoc member or have opted into our mailing list. > > Our mailing address is: > Progsoc > Ultimo, New South Wales, Australia > Ultimo, NSW 2007 > Australia > > From carlin at progsoc.org Sun Mar 1 22:24:05 2015 From: carlin at progsoc.org (Carlin Rookes) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 22:24:05 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Welcome Back to ProgSoc for 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <541798b0133f14d1e1c4117868087c12ce3.20150226021710@mail70.atl11.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <0E76ECD3-069D-4270-A521-D78796B834C5@progsoc.org> HI Leefe 1. Mail chimp provides a lot more features then a regular mailing list. Many new members have opted out of the mailing list as they feel that it has simply become a platform for old members to complain and only serves to fill their inbox with unwanted messages. 2. The mailing list was imported into mail chimp so no need relay the messages. 3. Revenue raising. Most of our funding and grants provide matching funding rather than cash outright. For every member dollar we typically get $2 value, and we still need an initial sum each year. It is still a low amout by todays standards and If you feel that you do not gain at least $20 value out of a membership during a year you are free to not renew. Regards Carlin Rookes President > On 1 Mar 2015, at 9:21 pm, Leefe <3trk at progsoc.org> wrote: > > Hi PS Exec, > > Can someone explain why announcements are being sent via MailChimp, and not to the Progsoc mailing list? > > For those people that didn?t get it, I?ve included a text only version of the post below. > (so I don?t accidentally include any unique to me urls) > > I see that the membership fee has gone up 100% over last year, i.e. it doubled. > Can an Exec explain the reason for this price increase? > > I heard from Jacob that the Union wants Progsoc to move its AGM. > Can you please provide more details about this? > > Regards, > > Leefe > http://www.progsoc.org/~3trk/ > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Progsoc Team >> Subject: Welcome Back to ProgSoc for 2015 >> Date: 26 February 2015 1:17:20 pm AEDT >> To: >> Reply-To: Progsoc Team >> >> ProgSoc Newsletter - April 2014 >> View this email in your browser >> >> UTS Programmers' Society >> Welcome to 2015 >> > >> First Thursday meetup of the year >> >> On behalf of the new Executive Committee I would like to introduce and welcome you to 2015. >> >> The executive team has been working hard are planning many events for the year. We will publish a full list of events soon. >> >> However right now its Thursday and we would like to invite you to the first of out regular meet ups for the year. >> >> We will be around building 10 level 3 room 380 and/or just down stairs in the Penny Lane cafe from 4pm today and into the evening. >> >> First couple jugs are on me. >> >> - Carlin, El President? >> > >> Renew Your Membership For 2015 >> >> If your need to renew you membership for 2014, fill out this form [here] to update us with your details. >> And send a payment of $20 ($10 for current UTS students) to >> >> PROGRAMMERS SOCIETY >> BSB Number: 112-879 >> Account Number: 118075761 >> >> Please add ? MEMBERSHIP? as the payment description. > > >> Sponsor ProgSoc in 2015 >> ProgSoc is always on the looking out for sponsors to help us fund events and projects. If you or anyone you know are able to help please contact the Executive team at psexec at progsoc.orgto discuss sponsorship. > > >> Community Classifieds >> Selling, buying, hiring, job seeking or looking for love? >> Send us an email and we will include it in our next newsletter. >> >> Free to good home, TFM 13. >> Looking for suitable homes for excess copies of the last physical edition of TFM. >> >> Still looking for Love >> Tom D'netto is keen for love, email him at hyperzap at progsoc.org. >> >> >> >> >> ProgSoc on Facebook >> @ProgSoc_UTS >> Copyright ? 2015 Progsoc, All rights reserved. >> You are receiving this email because you are/were a Progsoc member or have opted into our mailing list. >> >> Our mailing address is: >> Progsoc >> Ultimo, New South Wales, Australia >> Ultimo, NSW 2007 >> Australia >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > From chris at deigan.id.au Mon Mar 2 16:02:55 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 16:02:55 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Welcome Back to ProgSoc for 2015 In-Reply-To: <0E76ECD3-069D-4270-A521-D78796B834C5@progsoc.org> References: <541798b0133f14d1e1c4117868087c12ce3.20150226021710@mail70.atl11.rsgsv.net> <0E76ECD3-069D-4270-A521-D78796B834C5@progsoc.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Carlin Rookes wrote: > 3. Revenue raising. Most of our funding and grants provide matching funding rather than cash outright. For every member dollar we typically get $2 value, and we still need an initial sum each year. It is still a low amout by todays standards and If you feel that you do not gain at least $20 value out of a membership during a year you are free to not renew. Raising revenue for what? ProgSoc has historically not had a large amount of expenses, is there a plan that the executive can share for what benefits doubling membership fees will earn us? As an aside, I'm not involved in many clubs these days, but I do know at least a few still maintain a $5 membership fee. -Chris. From curious.jp at gmail.com Tue Mar 3 14:12:01 2015 From: curious.jp at gmail.com (Bryn Davies) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 14:12:01 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Welcome Back to ProgSoc for 2015 In-Reply-To: <0E76ECD3-069D-4270-A521-D78796B834C5@progsoc.org> References: <541798b0133f14d1e1c4117868087c12ce3.20150226021710@mail70.atl11.rsgsv.net> <0E76ECD3-069D-4270-A521-D78796B834C5@progsoc.org> Message-ID: Hey everyone, Was putting in my membership today and just in case anyone cares, wanted to note that the newsletter refers to renewing your 2014 membership (under the heading), and the Google form you submit into also talks about 2014 (and tells you to transfer "$10 ($5 for students)" instead of $20/10) - you might want to change that or not, I'm sure people can figure it out themselves. - B. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From slawrence at progsoc.org Tue Mar 3 20:01:21 2015 From: slawrence at progsoc.org (Sarah Lawrence) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 09:01:21 +0000 Subject: [ProgSoc] Notice of Constitutional Changes Message-ID: NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES Changes to our constitution have been proposed to the Executive Committee, and a new constitution has been drafted. These changes will be voted upon by eligible members at our 2015 AGM . *Summary of changes: * *4.2.4* Clarification of eligibility to vote *4.2.5* Added to clarify the annual membership fee payment deadlines *5.1.1 & 5.5.6* Removal of Competitions Officer, First Year Representative, Alumni Representative from the Executive Committee *5.1.6 & 5.7 (and 12 sub-clauses*) Added for the appointments of Liaison Officers (First Year, Alumni, Competitions, Media); added Liaison Officers positions, duties and regulations; added definition of positions. *5.1.7* Added for clarification of Executive Committee voting process *5.1.7.1* Added for clarification of Executive Committee voting process *5.5.1 *Clarification of the role of President *5.5.3 *Clarification of the role of Secretary *7.2.1 & 5.1.3.1 *Changed date of AGM to be inline with other societies within the university; clarification of the 2015 term. *7.2.2* Lower quorum for AGM The new constitution in its entirety can be found here . Kind Regards, Sarah ProgSoc Secretary -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From slawrence at progsoc.org Tue Mar 3 19:45:37 2015 From: slawrence at progsoc.org (Sarah Lawrence) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 08:45:37 +0000 Subject: [ProgSoc] 2015 AGM + Elections Message-ID: It's that time of year again, and UTS ProgSoc will be holding elections and other general business at our Annual General Meeting. Date: 12th March 2015 Time: 6pm Location: UTS Loft For executive nominations, please email name + position to progsoc at progsoc.org . AGENDA: 1. Apologies 2. Reading of the Minutes 3. Executive Reports 4. Constitution Amendments 5. Elections 6. General business / unscheduled business Kind regards, Sarah Lawrence ProgSoc Secretary -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sanguinev at progsoc.org Tue Mar 3 20:48:15 2015 From: sanguinev at progsoc.org (sanguinev at progsoc.org) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 10:48:15 +0100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Notice of Constitutional Changes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54F5835F.2060307@progsoc.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/03/2015 10:01, Sarah Lawrence wrote: > NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES > > Changes to our constitution have been proposed to the Executive > Committee, and a new constitution has been drafted. These changes > will be voted upon by eligible members at our 2015 AGM > . Will further changes be considered, or is it the aim of the Executive to provide a simple choice - take everything or leave everything? Note that in 2013 the amendments to the Constitution were handled with some variants after discussion. You can find the minutes here: https://progsoc.org/wiki/AGM_20130328 Note that there was also discussion on the mailing list and in person prior to the texts being proposed for the actual amendments. > *Summary of changes: * *4.2.4* Clarification of eligibility to > vote The distinction between "members" and "financial members" is not defined, this would require updating section 4 to distinguish these two classes (and perhaps other parts of the constitution). > *4.2.5* Added to clarify the annual membership fee payment > deadlines Seems like a good idea to clarify the dates. Any justification on why this has changed from past dates/usage? Also past dates aligned with Annual General Meetings (closely, not perfectly). Why are the new dates not aligned with something like an AGM, or Semesters, or past dates? > *5.1.1 & 5.5.6* Removal of Competitions Officer, First Year > Representative, Alumni Representative from the Executive Committee > *5.1.6 & 5.7 (and 12 sub-clauses*) Added for the appointments of > Liaison Officers (First Year, Alumni, Competitions, Media); added > Liaison Officers positions, duties and regulations; added > definition of positions. Why are executive positions (as voted upon by members) being turned into "Liaison" positions that are decided at the whim of the executive? Traditionally the "Key-Holder" positions align almost exactly with the proposed "Liaison Officer" positions except that key holder titles are generally not recognised formally in the constitution with explicit names and duties. Also one could revisit the arguments/reasons for making some current Executive positions into Executive and not Key-Holder and explain why these no longer hold. > *5.1.7* Added for clarification of Executive Committee voting > process *5.1.7.1* Added for clarification of Executive Committee > voting process This appears to mean that any meeting of the executive can vote on any "significant decisions" requiring only a majority vote of those attending such a meeting. The details of the meeting are not clear, and as such it is not impossible for such a meeting to consist of a single member of the executive who would have majority vote. Perhaps 5.1.7 should be "to a majority of the Executive Committee". > *5.5.1 *Clarification of the role of President Please clarify what "shall give direction to the Executive Committee for the Society and its interests" is as an actual duty. This should include understanding of how to determine when the president is not conducting these duties since failure to conduct their duties is something that may appear in the future. > *5.5.3 *Clarification of the role of Secretary The change here appears to be to determine some kind of order of selection for who should take over the role of President when the President and Vice-President are both unavailable. Why is this explicitly the Secretary, and why stop there (why not include that the "Treasurer shall act as the Secretary in their absence" and so on)? Perhaps it would be easier to have a general clause somewhere else (similar to that of 5.5.4.4) that "should any member of the executive be absent or ill ... the Executive Committee may appoint any member of the Executive Committee to act in their stead except where otherwise specified by the Constitution" (the last part to prevent conflict with the role of Vice-President). > *7.2.1 & 5.1.3.1 *Changed date of AGM to be inline with other > societies within the university; clarification of the 2015 term. Why? Is there some justification for changing the date other than "to be inline with other societies"? Also there seems no good reason to have 5.1.3.1, why not just change 5.1.3 to read "Be elected to office until the next Annual General Meeting." > *7.2.2* Lower quorum for AGM Again, why? > > > The new constitution in its entirety can be found here > . It > > might be helpful to highlight the actual changes. - - SanguineV -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJU9YNfAAoJEI+NvFGSwhPn+EgP/2mMx+djJBbRKGRnn8zqrrCR M4KfhgrxLdYnikz173YWGCA/g+IosTwz4lR2HWTkkWmb52ARRB30yrL1SqUDbYQ1 5t2KJAHXMKAGiiDOhRMOOquz47ttgsDIiPHwoWKX2ie4vbhtfwB3hMiHCQGo8YTI fvoQzkEDFDw2vNUIoPg+mtDJAN3DSenNzT0jLmU1IL4DxgXixFsLuzokNRHfH/R0 u/F1X/RzAVZ9U5+JH30yM+8OCTwDLeBacTI79qLLmQ9nYEZVPypJyCh9iQbKtTUF 3aX7w7iReXnpp6RCVVBHWX4HWEvcJljpE+i7/TI5P4Kip5gi2vqK8fGiUkVSJioQ a9lEFY9Eu8hm9iVkPB+79NIdsPvq8mqD0D04bZXU9ol+Tig2BmriiPg19Geirwla RmbBCrYnwCYriTbnho+uhvyCpPrBZ92MGRG9ccKrGl0Y/nucSoKE/DhwoHo54DvC EWBg49fyiPPE/5/GqH9oXIq2f00PzSixM5ympK67k9JUmE+rRTqi6TgfAkvFzxSj 74WsVg6QBEJS6rAhoyqs07YXzS07egYypey+oPE7SPF9EVXWUuqEpoPR6RC7LqBZ BCOZnsy9vTIymI+0bR+6k7OZVSd43YC804D27HxEgoUm6nIflekCvHcucGCxbsxL zs8z3xOvIlld9RaEdBbt =VDLl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mmaster at progsoc.org Tue Mar 3 23:20:28 2015 From: mmaster at progsoc.org (Margaret Colville) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 23:20:28 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] 2015 AGM + Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ...Isn't four weeks' notice required for the AGM? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Sarah Lawrence wrote: > It's that time of year again, and UTS ProgSoc will be holding elections > and other general business at our Annual General Meeting. > > Date: 12th March 2015 > Time: 6pm > Location: UTS Loft > > For executive nominations, please email name + position to > progsoc at progsoc.org > . > > AGENDA: > 1. Apologies > 2. Reading of the Minutes > 3. Executive Reports > 4. Constitution Amendments > 5. Elections > 6. General business / unscheduled business > > > Kind regards, > Sarah Lawrence > ProgSoc Secretary > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chris at deigan.id.au Tue Mar 3 23:36:57 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 23:36:57 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Notice of Constitutional Changes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Sarah Lawrence wrote: > NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES > > Changes to our constitution have been proposed to the Executive Committee, > and a new constitution has been drafted. These changes will be voted upon by > eligible members at our 2015 AGM. I'd like to request, for the benefit of everyone who will consider and vote on the proposed amendments that an explanation is given from the proposer for why each change is proposed. That will avoid having people guess the circumstances that have lead to, and the intended outcome of the changes. Furthermore, that a version be made available that can be easily compared to the current constitution (I tried diffing PDFs and whatnot, it just doesn't work), or clearly highlights the changes to be made to the current constitution. -Chris. From chris at deigan.id.au Tue Mar 3 23:44:02 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 23:44:02 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] 2015 AGM + Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Margaret Colville wrote: > ...Isn't four weeks' notice required for the AGM? 7.5.1 Notice of the Annual and Ordinary General Meetings including time, place and business to be transacted shall be displayed prominently on the union notice board at Broadway at least seven (7) days before the date of any such meeting. - Chris. From sanguinev at progsoc.org Tue Mar 3 23:49:08 2015 From: sanguinev at progsoc.org (sanguinev at progsoc.org) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 13:49:08 +0100 Subject: [ProgSoc] 2015 AGM + Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54F5ADC4.40702@progsoc.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/03/2015 13:44, Chris Deigan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Margaret Colville > wrote: >> ...Isn't four weeks' notice required for the AGM? > > 7.5.1 Notice of the Annual and Ordinary General Meetings including > time, place and business to be transacted shall be displayed > prominently on the union notice board at Broadway at least seven > (7) days before the date of any such meeting. > > - Chris. Indeed. Historically plenty of time was allowed for nominations and discussion. The Executive seems to be in a hurry to hold the AGM and change the constitution. - - SanguineV -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJU9a3EAAoJEI+NvFGSwhPnLIUP/3WfilJHLseHE9G3dK7A8IUG VKtMdOoO4HOCym9tX1GyOIwuvWP5yAbsFNTX5ALqwxvFWtCXqmN6ta/TArNtoXnO HlpYWcpULiwmLFf7xWtoqnkHtGq/hNekyegGQhLOpQR/iUFI0D2xaBlXvtMjthwG opaqFXEzRDCtxzpbnguxcxXBMPucLcYKvV/JisjWAesSMg+5lrVzuC8jyC3+qGlU jPmuWTQbmcbvFkrmcs7+/W1P0n3QID+vnbB5ombForLt2yTKJKL4pQNwq1+M6jBd XrqhRVevNRumkWRuSXcTPDOHwGUsSyGv5BlxKpz6TwTR3CbOdoj6+z9AR5Svnu5q y5W6Su5JV8lOd+ZhPzW75rUy5Pa6/a+SpEzAwvEjEFLGQiL21On2tY8W5RIK4BNq LqB+wE8Lg8IJOxipJiK1Pr938V99b9B/Q66q51zNrU3/sryxce2tpoc3N4+0TNW/ H1wq9SOd6dxfzmSo0g9DFuXqU8Exrk45JJvGn8VzIEa4rS/vdheQQ+uw1NxHqofW GP6ms45i9r2jZpWZvDUy8AAEMcL2X5zXg4TTmy8Wg6b0GLNofvWVnxL97d13HvvX vdt0N9fROVHn4JGUQqDKvSVSpci65z9Et70BmIfjMFa+mDeTCkLK/ymi7lWy6E47 12bsaGf+OTE3iegaDYa/ =t3or -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From progsocsecretary at gmail.com Thu Mar 5 20:33:53 2015 From: progsocsecretary at gmail.com (Secretary ProgSoc) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 20:33:53 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Constitution Changes Message-ID: *This message has been sent to ProgSoc members on the ProgSoc mailing list.* Hi All, As requested, below is further information from the Executive Committee regarding the constitutional changes. These changes will be voted on per clause (as grouped in the list) at the March 12th AGM. For a highlighted version of the new constitution: http://goo.gl/ywGC3N *Reminder: for AGM nominations and proxy votes, please email progsocsecretary at gmail.com . Nominations will be forwarded to the ProgSoc mailing list. Proxy votes close at 11.59pm March 11th 2015. * 4.2.4 Clarification of eligibility to vote Added definition for voting rights to only be held by financial members. There is no distinction between a 'member' and a 'financial member'. You are a member if you are up to date with your membership payments. 4.2.5 Added to clarify the annual membership fee payment deadlines Clarification of ambiguity for membership, so that there is a definite expiry date. This is aligned with the start of the academic year, so memberships with the new semester. 5.1.1 & 5.5.6 Removal of Competitions Officer, First Year Representative, Alumni Representative from the Executive Committee Replaced by liaison, see below. Liaison will be synonymous with 'Keyholder'. 5.1.6 & 5.7 (and 12 sub-clauses) Added for the appointments of Liaison Officers (First Year, Alumni, Competitions, Media); added Liaison Officers positions, duties and regulations; added definition of positions. *Competitions Officer: *Having this position as a liaison officer allows us to scale up and down the number of members in this position per our requirements (eg: if an event is upcoming, we can have more than one competitions officer supporting the exec) *First Year:* Removed from exec so that a SGM or AGM is not necessary to appoint this position (see AGM date change) *Alumni:* Similarly, we can scale this position up and down as needed. *Media: *Added so we can have a dedicated person to create and manage printed media for the society (eg: posters, banners, etc) 5.1.7 Added for clarification of Executive Committee voting process >From 5.1, this sub-clause states "The Executive Committee shall vote on significant decisions regarding the Society and its interests, to a majority". This is to ensure majority of the exec members have oversight and agreement to all significant decisions. 5.1.7.1 Added for clarification of Executive Committee voting process See above 5.1.7. 5.5.1 Clarification of the role of President This establishes that the President is responsible for the direction of the society. This was always implied, but the change to the constitution makes it explicit to the constitution. 5.5.3 Clarification of the role of Secretary This is to clarify the role of secretary, and provide a fallback for VP should they be unable to attend a meeting. There are already fallbacks in clause 7.1 for other positions. 5.5.4 (and 4 sub-clauses) Clarification of the role of Treasurer This is to clarify and spread the role over subclauses, as well as include the requirement from the Union for a budget to be produced. 7.2.1 & 5.1.3.1 Changed date of AGM to be inline with other societies within the university; clarification of the 2015 term. The Union holds training, etc for incoming exec in late October. Date is so the incoming executive for the following term can participate and receive benefit of this training. 7.2.2 Lower quorum for AGM In recent AGMs we have had delays due to quorum and this has slowed the AGM purpose. Kind Regards, ProgSoc Executive -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From progsocsecretary at gmail.com Fri Mar 6 19:43:36 2015 From: progsocsecretary at gmail.com (Secretary ProgSoc) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 19:43:36 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Constitution Changes Message-ID: *This message has been sent to ProgSoc members on the ProgSoc mailing list.* Hi All, As requested, below is further information from the Executive Committee regarding the constitutional changes. These changes will be voted on per clause (as grouped in the list) at the March 12th AGM. For a highlighted version of the new constitution: http://goo.gl/ywGC3N *Reminder: for AGM nominations and proxy votes, please email **progsocsecretary at gmail.com ** . Nominations will be forwarded to the ProgSoc mailing list. Proxy votes close at 11.59pm March 11th 2015. * 4.2.4 Clarification of eligibility to vote Added definition for voting rights to only be held by financial members. There is no distinction between a 'member' and a 'financial member'. You are a member if you are up to date with your membership payments. 4.2.5 Added to clarify the annual membership fee payment deadlines Clarification of ambiguity for membership, so that there is a definite expiry date. This is aligned with the start of the academic year, so memberships with the new semester. 5.1.1 & 5.5.6 Removal of Competitions Officer, First Year Representative, Alumni Representative from the Executive Committee Replaced by liaison, see below. Liaison will be synonymous with 'Keyholder'. 5.1.6 & 5.7 (and 12 sub-clauses) Added for the appointments of Liaison Officers (First Year, Alumni, Competitions, Media); added Liaison Officers positions, duties and regulations; added definition of positions. *Competitions Officer: *Having this position as a liaison officer allows us to scale up and down the number of members in this position per our requirements (eg: if an event is upcoming, we can have more than one competitions officer supporting the exec) *First Year:* Removed from exec so that a SGM or AGM is not necessary to appoint this position (see AGM date change) *Alumni:* Similarly, we can scale this position up and down as needed. *Media: *Added so we can have a dedicated person to create and manage printed media for the society (eg: posters, banners, etc) 5.1.7 Added for clarification of Executive Committee voting process >From 5.1, this sub-clause states "The Executive Committee shall vote on significant decisions regarding the Society and its interests, to a majority". This is to ensure majority of the exec members have oversight and agreement to all significant decisions. 5.1.7.1 Added for clarification of Executive Committee voting process See above 5.1.7. 5.5.1 Clarification of the role of President This establishes that the President is responsible for the direction of the society. This was always implied, but the change to the constitution makes it explicit to the constitution. 5.5.3 Clarification of the role of Secretary This is to clarify the role of secretary, and provide a fallback for VP should they be unable to attend a meeting. There are already fallbacks in clause 7.1 for other positions. 5.5.4 (and 4 sub-clauses) Clarification of the role of Treasurer This is to clarify and spread the role over subclauses, as well as include the requirement from the Union for a budget to be produced. 7.2.1 & 5.1.3.1 Changed date of AGM to be inline with other societies within the university; clarification of the 2015 term. The Union holds training, etc for incoming exec in late October. Date is so the incoming executive for the following term can participate and receive benefit of this training. 7.2.2 Lower quorum for AGM In recent AGMs we have had delays due to quorum and this has slowed the AGM purpose. Kind Regards, ProgSoc Executive -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tomchristmas at progsoc.org Sat Mar 7 18:25:57 2015 From: tomchristmas at progsoc.org (Tomislav Bozic) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 18:25:57 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Jacob Dunk for President Message-ID: <593e2f2914e260514f15c19fcca30c21.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Jacob Dunk to the Executive role of President. What can I say? He's got the talent and passion and true leadership skills...and I think he would take the club in a direction that is true to the ProgSoc Spirit(TM) which I think is something this club really needs right now. Tom P.S. please CC your nominations, seconds and acceptances to progsocsecretary at gmail.com :) From tomchristmas at progsoc.org Sat Mar 7 18:26:04 2015 From: tomchristmas at progsoc.org (Tomislav Bozic) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 18:26:04 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Cody Love for President Message-ID: <9b1d60c0c1b0ea2387283cd6e380b6f2.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Cody Love to the Executive role of President. I'm also nominating Cody, because like Jacob, I believe he also has talent and passion and true leadership skills...and I think he would take the club in an interesting direction, which may differ from Jacob's vision, but would also be true to the ProgSoc Spirit(TM). Tom P.S. please CC your nominations, seconds and acceptances to progsocsecretary at gmail.com :) From tomchristmas at progsoc.org Sun Mar 8 10:38:24 2015 From: tomchristmas at progsoc.org (Tomislav Bozic) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 10:38:24 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO Message-ID: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented (the closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job on an annual basis. However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will need more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said changes), plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. Tom From slawrence at progsoc.org Sun Mar 8 13:30:57 2015 From: slawrence at progsoc.org (Sarah Lawrence) Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2015 02:30:57 +0000 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO References: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: I second this nomination - Sarah On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 at 10:41 am Tomislav Bozic wrote: > I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin > Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. > > Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented (the > closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't > consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job on an > annual basis. > > However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure > this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will need > more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said changes), > plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. > > Tom > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hyperzap at progsoc.org Sun Mar 8 13:41:53 2015 From: hyperzap at progsoc.org (Tom D) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 13:41:53 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO In-Reply-To: References: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: I third the nomination in the strongest possible terms. Robin has done an insane amount for the society. He saved everyones files from certain death (one RAID disk had failed, other was having IO errors) and virtualised all of the servers into one new machine. He procured the new server and set it up appropriately. He has plans for bringing progsocs infrastructure into 2015. I believe he is not done with the role yet, and has been great at the job. I strongly support the notion that he should reign as CSO once more. On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Sarah Lawrence wrote: > I second this nomination > - Sarah > On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 at 10:41 am Tomislav Bozic > wrote: > >> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin >> Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. >> >> Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented (the >> closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't >> consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job on an >> annual basis. >> >> However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure >> this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will need >> more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said changes), >> plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. >> >> Tom >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Progsoc mailing list >> Progsoc at progsoc.org >> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >> > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From livia at progsoc.org Sun Mar 8 20:28:23 2015 From: livia at progsoc.org (Livia Lam) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 20:28:23 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Jacob Dunk for President In-Reply-To: <593e2f2914e260514f15c19fcca30c21.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> References: <593e2f2914e260514f15c19fcca30c21.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: <783138970be6c089bb124b550c5b8530.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> I second this nomination. I believe Jacob has the right mix of technical skills, passion, and people skills needed for the job. He was amazing back when he helped out with the American Express Hackathon in 2014. I 100% back Jacob for President. Livia > I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Jacob Dunk to the > Executive role of President. > > What can I say? He's got the talent and passion and true leadership > skills...and I think he would take the club in a direction that is true to > the ProgSoc Spirit(TM) which I think is something this club really needs > right now. > > Tom > > P.S. please CC your nominations, seconds and acceptances to > progsocsecretary at gmail.com :) > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > > From livia at progsoc.org Sun Mar 8 21:57:39 2015 From: livia at progsoc.org (Livia Lam) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 21:57:39 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Sarah Lawrence for Vice President In-Reply-To: <783138970be6c089bb124b550c5b8530.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> References: <593e2f2914e260514f15c19fcca30c21.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> <783138970be6c089bb124b550c5b8530.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: Hi all, I nominate Sarah Lawrence to the position of Vice President. I believe she has done a great job, is passionate about ProgSoc, and will grow and thrive with a larger leadership role. Livia From slawrence at progsoc.org Sun Mar 8 22:09:06 2015 From: slawrence at progsoc.org (Sarah Lawrence) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 22:09:06 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Sarah Lawrence for Vice President In-Reply-To: References: <593e2f2914e260514f15c19fcca30c21.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> <783138970be6c089bb124b550c5b8530.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: Thanks Livia. I accept this nomination. I've enjoyed being Secretary and am excited for the challenge of Vice President. See you all at the AGM. On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Livia Lam wrote: > Hi all, > > I nominate Sarah Lawrence to the position of Vice President. > > I believe she has done a great job, is passionate about ProgSoc, and will > grow and thrive with a larger leadership role. > > Livia > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tomchristmas at progsoc.org Sun Mar 8 23:46:19 2015 From: tomchristmas at progsoc.org (Tomislav Bozic) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 23:46:19 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Sarah Lawrence for Vice President In-Reply-To: References: <593e2f2914e260514f15c19fcca30c21.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> <783138970be6c089bb124b550c5b8530.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: <323d4b1aba0e45e865ee65e1bfc9940b.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> And I second the original nomination to make it official. And I second Livia's sentiments RE Sarah :) Tom > Thanks Livia. > > I accept this nomination. > > I've enjoyed being Secretary and am excited for the challenge of Vice > President. > > See you all at the AGM. > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Livia Lam wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I nominate Sarah Lawrence to the position of Vice President. >> >> I believe she has done a great job, is passionate about ProgSoc, and >> will >> grow and thrive with a larger leadership role. >> >> Livia >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Progsoc mailing list >> Progsoc at progsoc.org >> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >> > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc -- To judiciously use split infinitives is fine by me... From cody.love002 at gmail.com Sat Mar 7 18:33:05 2015 From: cody.love002 at gmail.com (Cody Love) Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 07:33:05 +0000 Subject: [ProgSoc] Exec nominations Message-ID: I nominate: Jacob Dunk for President Robin for CSO -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robin.wohlersreichel at gmail.com Sun Mar 8 16:31:12 2015 From: robin.wohlersreichel at gmail.com (Robin Wohlers-Reichel) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 16:31:12 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO In-Reply-To: References: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: Cheers Guys, I accept this nomination. I'm not sure about the specifics of accepting a nomination, so I hope I've done it right. :D Like Tom said, I have done a little bit of work regarding the ProgSoc infrastructure over the past year, but since I haven't finished everything yet it would be fantastic if I could continue in this role. Cheers, Robin On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Tom D wrote: > I third the nomination in the strongest possible terms. > > Robin has done an insane amount for the society. He saved everyones files > from certain death (one RAID disk had failed, other was having IO errors) > and virtualised all of the servers into one new machine. He procured the > new server and set it up appropriately. He has plans for bringing progsocs > infrastructure into 2015. > > I believe he is not done with the role yet, and has been great at the job. > I strongly support the notion that he should reign as CSO once more. > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Sarah Lawrence > wrote: > >> I second this nomination >> - Sarah >> On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 at 10:41 am Tomislav Bozic >> wrote: >> >>> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin >>> Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. >>> >>> Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented >>> (the >>> closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't >>> consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job on an >>> annual basis. >>> >>> However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure >>> this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will >>> need >>> more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said changes), >>> plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Progsoc mailing list >>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Progsoc mailing list >> Progsoc at progsoc.org >> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Lucy.Humphreys at student.uts.edu.au Sun Mar 8 22:04:01 2015 From: Lucy.Humphreys at student.uts.edu.au (Lucy Humphreys) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 11:04:01 +0000 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Sarah Lawrence for Vice President Message-ID: <1425812639627.67339@student.uts.edu.au> Hi all, I second the nomination for Sarah Lawrence for Vice President. I believe she will contribute to the growth of ProgSoc and be a valuable member and leader within the group. Lucy Humphreys -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akumria at gmail.com Mon Mar 9 01:14:41 2015 From: akumria at gmail.com (Anand Kumria) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 14:14:41 +0000 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO In-Reply-To: References: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: I strongly disagree with this nomination. The role of the CSO is the co-ordinate and communicate what needs to be done. If a second term is required it indicates that no communication nor co-ordination was done. The fact is that I, as one of the admins of many Progsoc infrastructure services (LDAP, DNS, email, webserver, home directories, etc.) am completely unaware of anything that has been done or achieved by Robin. With Robin involved there has been no additional work and little to any progress in making things better. We have had significant outages, and I have had a spend considerable time finding someone to get Robin's attention. Getting the attention of the CSO when outages occur shouldn't be necessary. Outages have been related to: LDAP (~3 months), Email (~4 months), DNS (~1 month - but issues are currently on-going). Robin, as CSO, has taken up the style of the existing Progsoc executive which has been to not to do or say anything to anyone. Their style is to switch-away from existing tools (e.g. progsocsecretary at gmail.com rather than secretary at progsoc.org; not using progsoc-announce but using mailchimp; etc.) as a means to dis-enfranchise existing members. To what end, is unclear. But given their (lack of) communication style, I would urge anyone considering nominating any existing Progsoc Executive to not. I would also urge everyone to vote against all the proposed constitutional changes (let's leave aside the fact that the AGM announcement is currently unconstituional). Anand On 8 March 2015 at 02:41, Tom D wrote: > I third the nomination in the strongest possible terms. > > Robin has done an insane amount for the society. He saved everyones files > from certain death (one RAID disk had failed, other was having IO errors) > and virtualised all of the servers into one new machine. He procured the > new server and set it up appropriately. He has plans for bringing progsocs > infrastructure into 2015. > > I believe he is not done with the role yet, and has been great at the job. > I strongly support the notion that he should reign as CSO once more. > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Sarah Lawrence > wrote: > >> I second this nomination >> - Sarah >> On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 at 10:41 am Tomislav Bozic >> wrote: >> >>> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin >>> Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. >>> >>> Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented >>> (the >>> closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't >>> consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job on an >>> annual basis. >>> >>> However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure >>> this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will >>> need >>> more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said changes), >>> plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Progsoc mailing list >>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Progsoc mailing list >> Progsoc at progsoc.org >> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -- ?Don?t be sad because it?s over. Smile because it happened.? ? Dr. Seuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hyperzap at progsoc.org Mon Mar 9 07:28:15 2015 From: hyperzap at progsoc.org (Tom D) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 07:28:15 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nominations Message-ID: I nominate: Carlin Rookes for president Sarah Lawrence for vice Jacob Dunk for treasurer Kyryl P for secretary Robin for CSO I preemptively decline all potential nominations. Future calls, the ship is sounding its horn, and nothing changes by standing on the pier. Thanks, Tom (ProgSoc treasurer) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hyperzap at progsoc.org Mon Mar 9 09:06:14 2015 From: hyperzap at progsoc.org (Tom D) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:06:14 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Fwd: Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO In-Reply-To: References: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: Sending from progsoc account ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO To: Anand Kumria Cc: Tomislav Bozic , Sarah Lawrence < slawrence at progsoc.org>, progsocsecretary at gmail.com, "progsoc at progsoc.org" < progsoc at progsoc.org> I strongly disagree with these assertions. My following response is written as me and I do not represent the executive. > If a second term is required it indicates that no communication nor co-ordination was done. Or that there is unfinished business. Robin has been building the new servers over the last few months to replace the incredibly unreliable (as you have pointed out) current arrangement. This is being done as VMs in the primary hypervisor, so you probably aren't terribly aware that it is going on. He would like some more time to move all the data across and get it running properly, which sounds reasonable to me. > With Robin involved there has been no additional work and little to any progress in making things better. Explain the server move, core network upgrade, 4x increase in capacity, server replacement etc? I agree this probably wasn't communicated well to someone who lives on the other side of the world. When I was CSO last year, I did literally nothing. The only slight achievement was building a crappy backup system that worked for like a month. > ... no communication nor co-ordination was done. That's incredibly rich coming from someone who logs into the servers at 2am in the morning and changes things without warning or explanation. I don't think its coincidental that the 4 months of email downtime was immediately preceded by your login and changes. >Their style is to switch-away from existing tools (e.g. progsocsecretary at gmail.com rather than secretary at progsoc.org; not using progsoc-announce but using mailchimp; etc.) as a means to dis-enfranchise existing members. The mailing lists have all been imported into mailchimp, so no one is left out. The GNU mailing list system is a decade old, and lacks a significant number of features such as engagement tracking, proper styling, and the like. I do not understand your frustration with the exec choosing to supersede the mailing list with something that does the job far, far better. progsocsecretary at gmail.com is (I believe) a temporary measure till the new network comes into play, which will be far more reliable than the patchwork we have at the moment. Progsoc is far more active than it has been in previous years, and need a reliable email account for correspondence, an email account that doesnt go down when distant admins from the late 90's log in and break things for months on end. > as a means to dis-enfranchise existing members. What? how did you reach this conclusion? > let's leave aside the fact that the AGM announcement is currently unconstituional Elaborate? As far as I can see, its perfectly within the bounds of the constitution. Best Regards, Tom On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Anand Kumria wrote: > I strongly disagree with this nomination. > > The role of the CSO is the co-ordinate and communicate what needs to be > done. > > If a second term is required it indicates that no communication nor > co-ordination was done. > > The fact is that I, as one of the admins of many Progsoc infrastructure > services (LDAP, DNS, email, webserver, home directories, etc.) am > completely unaware of anything that has been done or achieved by Robin. > > With Robin involved there has been no additional work and little to any > progress in making things better. > > We have had significant outages, and I have had a spend considerable time > finding someone to get Robin's attention. > > Getting the attention of the CSO when outages occur shouldn't be necessary. > > Outages have been related to: LDAP (~3 months), Email (~4 months), DNS (~1 > month - but issues are currently on-going). > > Robin, as CSO, has taken up the style of the existing Progsoc executive > which has been to not to do or say anything to anyone. > > Their style is to switch-away from existing tools (e.g. > progsocsecretary at gmail.com rather than secretary at progsoc.org; not using > progsoc-announce but using mailchimp; etc.) as a means to dis-enfranchise > existing members. > > To what end, is unclear. But given their (lack of) communication style, I > would urge anyone considering nominating any existing Progsoc Executive to > not. I would also urge everyone to vote against all the proposed > constitutional changes (let's leave aside the fact that the AGM > announcement is currently unconstituional). > > Anand > > > On 8 March 2015 at 02:41, Tom D wrote: > >> I third the nomination in the strongest possible terms. >> >> Robin has done an insane amount for the society. He saved everyones files >> from certain death (one RAID disk had failed, other was having IO errors) >> and virtualised all of the servers into one new machine. He procured the >> new server and set it up appropriately. He has plans for bringing progsocs >> infrastructure into 2015. >> >> I believe he is not done with the role yet, and has been great at the >> job. I strongly support the notion that he should reign as CSO once more. >> >> On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Sarah Lawrence >> wrote: >> >>> I second this nomination >>> - Sarah >>> On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 at 10:41 am Tomislav Bozic >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin >>>> Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. >>>> >>>> Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented >>>> (the >>>> closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't >>>> consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job on >>>> an >>>> annual basis. >>>> >>>> However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure >>>> this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will >>>> need >>>> more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said >>>> changes), >>>> plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. >>>> >>>> Tom >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Progsoc mailing list >>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Progsoc mailing list >>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Progsoc mailing list >> Progsoc at progsoc.org >> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >> > > > > -- > ?Don?t be sad because it?s over. Smile because it happened.? ? Dr. Seuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carlin at carlinrookes.com Mon Mar 9 09:08:51 2015 From: carlin at carlinrookes.com (Carlin Rookes) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:08:51 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nominations Message-ID: <5FBC0F96-AE69-402F-B9EF-225460058E8E@carlinrookes.com> Hello I nominate and/or second the nominations, for the following people and roles. Carlin Rookes - President Sarah Lawrence - Vice President Robin Wohlers-Reichel - CSO Nick Kobal - Secretary Robin Dalipe - Treasure Cheers Carlin Rookes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robin.wohlersreichel at gmail.com Mon Mar 9 09:21:46 2015 From: robin.wohlersreichel at gmail.com (Robin Wohlers-Reichel) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:21:46 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Exec nominations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I second this nomination for Jacob Dunk as President Cheers, Robin On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Cody Love wrote: > I nominate: > > Jacob Dunk for President > Robin for CSO > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robin.wohlersreichel at gmail.com Mon Mar 9 09:21:00 2015 From: robin.wohlersreichel at gmail.com (Robin Wohlers-Reichel) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:21:00 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nominations In-Reply-To: <5FBC0F96-AE69-402F-B9EF-225460058E8E@carlinrookes.com> References: <5FBC0F96-AE69-402F-B9EF-225460058E8E@carlinrookes.com> Message-ID: I second these nominations, which are: Carlin Rookes - President Sarah Lawrence - Vice President Nick Kobal - Secretary Robin Dalipe - Treasure Cheers, Robin On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Carlin Rookes wrote: > Hello > > I nominate and/or second the nominations, for the following people and > roles. > > Carlin Rookes - President > Sarah Lawrence - Vice President > Robin Wohlers-Reichel - CSO > Nick Kobal - Secretary Robin Dalipe - Treasure > > Cheers > Carlin Rookes > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jacobdunk at gmail.com Mon Mar 9 10:06:56 2015 From: jacobdunk at gmail.com (Jacob D) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 10:06:56 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Fwd: Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO In-Reply-To: References: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: Lets not forget, Pushed us up to gigabit internal network speeds, managed to get us our own decent wifi at no cost, catching a train out to the blue mountains and back with a huge, heavy server so we can upgrade our tech and... wait for it... a working RAID 6 Setup. If anyone from the current exec deserves to go forward into the new executive, it's Robin. On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Tom D wrote: > Sending from progsoc account > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:04 AM > Subject: Re: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO > To: Anand Kumria > Cc: Tomislav Bozic , Sarah Lawrence < > slawrence at progsoc.org>, progsocsecretary at gmail.com, "progsoc at progsoc.org" > > > > I strongly disagree with these assertions. > > My following response is written as me and I do not represent the > executive. > > > > If a second term is required it indicates that no communication nor > co-ordination was done. > > Or that there is unfinished business. > > Robin has been building the new servers over the last few months to > replace the incredibly unreliable (as you have pointed out) current > arrangement. This is being done as VMs in the primary hypervisor, so you > probably aren't terribly aware that it is going on. He would like some more > time to move all the data across and get it running properly, which sounds > reasonable to me. > > > With Robin involved there has been no additional work and little to any > progress in making things better. > > Explain the server move, core network upgrade, 4x increase in capacity, > server replacement etc? I agree this probably wasn't communicated well to > someone who lives on the other side of the world. > > When I was CSO last year, I did literally nothing. The only slight > achievement was building a crappy backup system that worked for like a > month. > > > > ... no communication nor co-ordination was done. > > That's incredibly rich coming from someone who logs into the servers at > 2am in the morning and changes things without warning or explanation. I > don't think its coincidental that the 4 months of email downtime was > immediately preceded by your login and changes. > > > >Their style is to switch-away from existing tools (e.g. > progsocsecretary at gmail.com rather than secretary at progsoc.org; not using > progsoc-announce but using mailchimp; etc.) as a means to dis-enfranchise > existing members. > > The mailing lists have all been imported into mailchimp, so no one is left > out. The GNU mailing list system is a decade old, and lacks a significant > number of features such as engagement tracking, proper styling, and the > like. I do not understand your frustration with the exec choosing to > supersede the mailing list with something that does the job far, far better. > > progsocsecretary at gmail.com is (I believe) a temporary measure till the > new network comes into play, which will be far more reliable than the > patchwork we have at the moment. Progsoc is far more active than it has > been in previous years, and need a reliable email account for > correspondence, an email account that doesnt go down when distant admins > from the late 90's log in and break things for months on end. > > > > as a means to dis-enfranchise existing members. > > What? how did you reach this conclusion? > > > > let's leave aside the fact that the AGM announcement is currently > unconstituional > > Elaborate? As far as I can see, its perfectly within the bounds of the > constitution. > > > Best Regards, > > Tom > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Anand Kumria wrote: > >> I strongly disagree with this nomination. >> >> The role of the CSO is the co-ordinate and communicate what needs to be >> done. >> >> If a second term is required it indicates that no communication nor >> co-ordination was done. >> >> The fact is that I, as one of the admins of many Progsoc infrastructure >> services (LDAP, DNS, email, webserver, home directories, etc.) am >> completely unaware of anything that has been done or achieved by Robin. >> >> With Robin involved there has been no additional work and little to any >> progress in making things better. >> >> We have had significant outages, and I have had a spend considerable time >> finding someone to get Robin's attention. >> >> Getting the attention of the CSO when outages occur shouldn't be >> necessary. >> >> Outages have been related to: LDAP (~3 months), Email (~4 months), DNS >> (~1 month - but issues are currently on-going). >> >> Robin, as CSO, has taken up the style of the existing Progsoc executive >> which has been to not to do or say anything to anyone. >> >> Their style is to switch-away from existing tools (e.g. >> progsocsecretary at gmail.com rather than secretary at progsoc.org; not using >> progsoc-announce but using mailchimp; etc.) as a means to dis-enfranchise >> existing members. >> >> To what end, is unclear. But given their (lack of) communication style, I >> would urge anyone considering nominating any existing Progsoc Executive to >> not. I would also urge everyone to vote against all the proposed >> constitutional changes (let's leave aside the fact that the AGM >> announcement is currently unconstituional). >> >> Anand >> >> >> On 8 March 2015 at 02:41, Tom D wrote: >> >>> I third the nomination in the strongest possible terms. >>> >>> Robin has done an insane amount for the society. He saved everyones >>> files from certain death (one RAID disk had failed, other was having IO >>> errors) and virtualised all of the servers into one new machine. He >>> procured the new server and set it up appropriately. He has plans for >>> bringing progsocs infrastructure into 2015. >>> >>> I believe he is not done with the role yet, and has been great at the >>> job. I strongly support the notion that he should reign as CSO once more. >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Sarah Lawrence >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I second this nomination >>>> - Sarah >>>> On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 at 10:41 am Tomislav Bozic >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin >>>>> Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. >>>>> >>>>> Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented >>>>> (the >>>>> closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't >>>>> consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job on >>>>> an >>>>> annual basis. >>>>> >>>>> However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure >>>>> this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will >>>>> need >>>>> more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said >>>>> changes), >>>>> plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. >>>>> >>>>> Tom >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Progsoc mailing list >>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Progsoc mailing list >>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Progsoc mailing list >>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> ?Don?t be sad because it?s over. Smile because it happened.? ? Dr. Seuss >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jacobdunk at gmail.com Mon Mar 9 09:44:09 2015 From: jacobdunk at gmail.com (jacob no) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 15:44:09 -0700 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Jacob Dunk for President Message-ID: <-2017541008626651994@unknownmsgid> I hereby accept the nomination for president. Serving as Secretary for previous exec and as VP for the current exec I have had the opportunity to see executive styles and approaches that do and do not work. I hope to grab the many positive, socially orientated changes of this year's executive and sustain them, while pushing the society back to its programming roots through more competitions, talks and events. -JacobFrom: Livia Lam Sent: ?8/?03/?2015 8:30 PM To: Tomislav Bozic Cc: progsocsecretary at gmail.com; progsoc at progsoc.org Subject: Re: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Jacob Dunk for President I second this nomination. I believe Jacob has the right mix of technical skills, passion, and people skills needed for the job. He was amazing back when he helped out with the American Express Hackathon in 2014. I 100% back Jacob for President. Livia > I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Jacob Dunk to the > Executive role of President. > > What can I say? He's got the talent and passion and true leadership > skills...and I think he would take the club in a direction that is true to > the ProgSoc Spirit(TM) which I think is something this club really needs > right now. > > Tom > > P.S. please CC your nominations, seconds and acceptances to > progsocsecretary at gmail.com :) > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > > _______________________________________________ Progsoc mailing list Progsoc at progsoc.org http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc From tomchristmas at progsoc.org Thu Mar 12 08:59:55 2015 From: tomchristmas at progsoc.org (Tomislav Bozic) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 08:59:55 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Nominations: Cody Love for Secretary and Treasurer Message-ID: <796b12d39eff8afe897652318e5506a7.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Cody Love for the Executive roles of Secretary and Treasurer. If he has already been nominated for either or both roles, I second those nomination(s). I think he'd be pretty swell at those roles as well, if he doesn't get Pres. Tom From chris at deigan.id.au Thu Mar 12 10:43:08 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 10:43:08 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] ProgSoc Network Status Message-ID: All, Just a heads up - as you may have noticed, ProgSoc has been down for the past few days. Due to building works in Building 10, our network connectivity was removed. Given these circumstances, and the imminent vacation of the ProgSoc room, we have temporarily moved the ProgSoc servers to an off-site facility generously provided by Anchor (http://www.anchor.com.au/). One of the limitations of this temporary arrangement is that ProgSoc is unreachable on its usual IP addresses - as such, you may notice different IP addresses for some hosts. Right now, *.progsoc.uts.edu.au names will not be updated for the different addresses, but using the 'progsoc.org' equivalent hosts will work. Currently, only muspell is available; but niflheim will be made available online as soon as time permits for the necessary configuration changes to be made. If you do find that something isn't working, that you believe should, let me know and I'll look into it. It is intended that the servers will move back to UTS, on their usual IP addresses, as soon as reliable accommodation for the server hardware is secured. -Chris. From progsocsecretary at gmail.com Thu Mar 12 14:21:27 2015 From: progsocsecretary at gmail.com (Secretary ProgSoc) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:21:27 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] ProgSoc AGM Tonight Message-ID: Hi All, Tonight's the night! Our AGM is being held 6pm at the Loft. The agenda is as follows: 1. Apologies 2. Reading of the Minutes 3. Executive Reports 4. Constitution Amendments 5. Elections 6. General business / unscheduled business Here is the nominations (so far). Nominations will close at the start of the election process during the AGM. Proxy votes are now closed. ROLEPERSONACCEPTED NOMINATIONNOMINATED BYSECONDED BY President Carlin RookesxTom DnettoRobin WC President Cody LoveTom Bozic Secretary Cody LoveTom Bozic Treasurer Cody LoveTom Bozic President Jacob DunkxTom BozicCody Love Treasurer Jacob DunkTom Dnetto Secretary Kyryl PxTom Dnetto Secretary Nick KobalxCarlin RookesRobin WC Treasurer Robin DalipexCarlin RookesRobin WC CSO Robin WCxCody LoveSarah Lawrence Vice Pres Sarah LawrencexLivia LamTom Bozic Kind Regards, Sarah On behalf of ProgSoc Exec 2014 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From althalus87 at gmail.com Mon Mar 9 10:16:29 2015 From: althalus87 at gmail.com (Justin Steward) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 10:16:29 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] Fwd: Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO In-Reply-To: References: <7e995bd14bb32e86866c3f1bc6f86b11.squirrel@webmail.progsoc.org> Message-ID: I'm on the ps-admin list, and most of this is new to me. If Robin is re-elected, I strongly hope there is a much bigger focus on communication with the other admins and the club in general, and not just from our new CSO, but the entire exec. Seriously guys, communication this past year has been a joke. Clear communication from the CSO to the admin team might have resulted in some of last year's outages being avoided altogether, or having issues fixed in a more timely manner. I don't much care who gets re-elected, as long as they commit to communicating better with the entire club. Regards, Justin On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Jacob D wrote: > Lets not forget, > Pushed us up to gigabit internal network speeds, managed to get us our own > decent wifi at no cost, catching a train out to the blue mountains and back > with a huge, heavy server so we can upgrade our tech and... wait for it... > a working RAID 6 Setup. > > If anyone from the current exec deserves to go forward into the new > executive, it's Robin. > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Tom D wrote: > >> Sending from progsoc account >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> Date: Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:04 AM >> Subject: Re: [ProgSoc] Nomination: Robin Wohlers-Reichel for CSO >> To: Anand Kumria >> Cc: Tomislav Bozic , Sarah Lawrence < >> slawrence at progsoc.org>, progsocsecretary at gmail.com, "progsoc at progsoc.org" >> >> >> >> I strongly disagree with these assertions. >> >> My following response is written as me and I do not represent the >> executive. >> >> >> > If a second term is required it indicates that no communication nor >> co-ordination was done. >> >> Or that there is unfinished business. >> >> Robin has been building the new servers over the last few months to >> replace the incredibly unreliable (as you have pointed out) current >> arrangement. This is being done as VMs in the primary hypervisor, so you >> probably aren't terribly aware that it is going on. He would like some more >> time to move all the data across and get it running properly, which sounds >> reasonable to me. >> >> > With Robin involved there has been no additional work and little to any >> progress in making things better. >> >> Explain the server move, core network upgrade, 4x increase in capacity, >> server replacement etc? I agree this probably wasn't communicated well to >> someone who lives on the other side of the world. >> >> When I was CSO last year, I did literally nothing. The only slight >> achievement was building a crappy backup system that worked for like a >> month. >> >> >> > ... no communication nor co-ordination was done. >> >> That's incredibly rich coming from someone who logs into the servers at >> 2am in the morning and changes things without warning or explanation. I >> don't think its coincidental that the 4 months of email downtime was >> immediately preceded by your login and changes. >> >> >> >Their style is to switch-away from existing tools (e.g. >> progsocsecretary at gmail.com rather than secretary at progsoc.org; not using >> progsoc-announce but using mailchimp; etc.) as a means to dis-enfranchise >> existing members. >> >> The mailing lists have all been imported into mailchimp, so no one is >> left out. The GNU mailing list system is a decade old, and lacks a >> significant number of features such as engagement tracking, proper styling, >> and the like. I do not understand your frustration with the exec choosing >> to supersede the mailing list with something that does the job far, far >> better. >> >> progsocsecretary at gmail.com is (I believe) a temporary measure till the >> new network comes into play, which will be far more reliable than the >> patchwork we have at the moment. Progsoc is far more active than it has >> been in previous years, and need a reliable email account for >> correspondence, an email account that doesnt go down when distant admins >> from the late 90's log in and break things for months on end. >> >> >> > as a means to dis-enfranchise existing members. >> >> What? how did you reach this conclusion? >> >> >> > let's leave aside the fact that the AGM announcement is currently >> unconstituional >> >> Elaborate? As far as I can see, its perfectly within the bounds of the >> constitution. >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Tom >> >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Anand Kumria wrote: >> >>> I strongly disagree with this nomination. >>> >>> The role of the CSO is the co-ordinate and communicate what needs to be >>> done. >>> >>> If a second term is required it indicates that no communication nor >>> co-ordination was done. >>> >>> The fact is that I, as one of the admins of many Progsoc infrastructure >>> services (LDAP, DNS, email, webserver, home directories, etc.) am >>> completely unaware of anything that has been done or achieved by Robin. >>> >>> With Robin involved there has been no additional work and little to any >>> progress in making things better. >>> >>> We have had significant outages, and I have had a spend considerable >>> time finding someone to get Robin's attention. >>> >>> Getting the attention of the CSO when outages occur shouldn't be >>> necessary. >>> >>> Outages have been related to: LDAP (~3 months), Email (~4 months), DNS >>> (~1 month - but issues are currently on-going). >>> >>> Robin, as CSO, has taken up the style of the existing Progsoc executive >>> which has been to not to do or say anything to anyone. >>> >>> Their style is to switch-away from existing tools (e.g. >>> progsocsecretary at gmail.com rather than secretary at progsoc.org; not using >>> progsoc-announce but using mailchimp; etc.) as a means to dis-enfranchise >>> existing members. >>> >>> To what end, is unclear. But given their (lack of) communication style, >>> I would urge anyone considering nominating any existing Progsoc Executive >>> to not. I would also urge everyone to vote against all the proposed >>> constitutional changes (let's leave aside the fact that the AGM >>> announcement is currently unconstituional). >>> >>> Anand >>> >>> >>> On 8 March 2015 at 02:41, Tom D wrote: >>> >>>> I third the nomination in the strongest possible terms. >>>> >>>> Robin has done an insane amount for the society. He saved everyones >>>> files from certain death (one RAID disk had failed, other was having IO >>>> errors) and virtualised all of the servers into one new machine. He >>>> procured the new server and set it up appropriately. He has plans for >>>> bringing progsocs infrastructure into 2015. >>>> >>>> I believe he is not done with the role yet, and has been great at the >>>> job. I strongly support the notion that he should reign as CSO once more. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Sarah Lawrence >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I second this nomination >>>>> - Sarah >>>>> On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 at 10:41 am Tomislav Bozic < >>>>> tomchristmas at progsoc.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I, Tom Bozic, of sound body and mind, do hereby nominate Robin >>>>>> Wohlers-Reichel to the Executive position of Computer Systems Officer. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now, I know that a CSO serving two consecutive terms is unprecedented >>>>>> (the >>>>>> closest we have ever had is Anand in 1997 and 2002, but that wasn't >>>>>> consecutive) and that it's a good idea to rotate this demanding job >>>>>> on an >>>>>> annual basis. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, Robin has made some significant changes to our infrastructure >>>>>> this past year (not that you would have noticed, but he has) and will >>>>>> need >>>>>> more time to share knowledge of said changes (and finalise said >>>>>> changes), >>>>>> plus he's done a good job overall, so I'm nominating him again. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tom >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Progsoc mailing list >>>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Progsoc mailing list >>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Progsoc mailing list >>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org >>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ?Don?t be sad because it?s over. Smile because it happened.? ? Dr. Seuss >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Progsoc mailing list >> Progsoc at progsoc.org >> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Progsoc mailing list > Progsoc at progsoc.org > http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chris at deigan.id.au Fri Mar 13 00:17:40 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:17:40 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] AGM Results Message-ID: For anyone who is interested in decisions of the night, and don't want to wait for the official minutes to be posted: * All proposed amendments to the constitution were passed * New executive was elected, consisting of: President: Carlin Rookes Vice Pres: Sarah Lawrence Secretary: Nick Kobal Treasurer: Robin Dalipe CSO: Robin Wohlers-Reichel -Chris. From chris at deigan.id.au Fri Mar 13 14:48:44 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 14:48:44 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] ProgSoc Network Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: niflheim is now also up (and by extension, ssh.progsoc.org and user websites). - Chris. From curious.jp at gmail.com Fri Mar 13 15:02:38 2015 From: curious.jp at gmail.com (Bryn Davies) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:02:38 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] ProgSoc Network Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for the update, Chris - and manyy thanks to those involved with finding temporary accommodation for our hosts, and Anchor for providing it. -- ?????????????? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sanguinev at niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au Thu Mar 26 20:46:19 2015 From: sanguinev at niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au (Thomas Given-Wilson) Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 20:46:19 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] [ADMIN] Mail not working? In-Reply-To: References: <20150325221616.GA32441@niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au> Message-ID: <20150326094619.GA14697@niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:02:37AM +1100, Chris Deigan wrote: > Hey Thomas, > > Which hostname are you trying to connect on? > > There's currently a bit going on right now - currently the ProgSoc > servers are sitting at an off-UTS location while the ProgSoc > room/network situation is sorted. Subsequently, they're accessible on > different IP addresses. We've been able to update the DNS for > progsoc.org, but we're blocked on UTS right now for us to update the > progsoc.uts.edu.au domains (we have an open request for this). > > tldr: anything on progsoc.uts.edu.au currently won't work, but its > progsoc.org equivalent should. > > -Chris. > Hi, I was using the .uts.edu.au ones since the .org ones went down and the uts.edu.au ones were still working. Things are slightly better now I have gone back the other way around. Which brings me to the larger questions: Why is the network so broken? The move has been known about for many years, and a room planned/negotiated in the new building since at least 2012. How did the admin/exec fail to move or know when the network was going down? Why is there so little/no communication of what is going on? Is the (now previous) admin/exec trying to hide things, or are their just unable to inform members of important things like infrastructure movements/upgrades/changes? This is particularly concerning since there was a rushed AGM with a changed constitution where members where unable to communicate about what was happening due to lines of communication being cut. As far as I could tell the recent actions were (effectively if not outright intended to) done to prevent input from members who were not there, and to stifle discussion. Regards, - SanguineV From chris at deigan.id.au Fri Mar 27 16:57:24 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:57:24 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] ProgSoc Network Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Everyone, *.progsoc.uts.edu.au names should now be working again. As before, please let me know if anything does not work that you're expecting should work. As previously mentioned, ProgSoc's servers are being temporarily hosted with space, power and network bandwidth donated by Anchor (http://www.anchor.com.au/) whilst the executive makes efforts to secure new accommodation within UTS. -Chris. From chris at deigan.id.au Fri Mar 27 17:25:38 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 17:25:38 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] [ADMIN] Mail not working? In-Reply-To: <20150326094619.GA14697@niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au> References: <20150325221616.GA32441@niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au> <20150326094619.GA14697@niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Thomas Given-Wilson wrote: > Why is the network so broken? The move has been known about for many years, and a room planned/negotiated in the new building since at least 2012. How did the admin/exec fail to move or know when the network was going down? With my not-exec-but-occasionally-involved-in-admin hat on, I only became aware of the room situation once the network connectivity to the room had already been cut. Since then, I've come to understand that: * Previously a representative of UTS had said to the club that it could remain in its current room * The executive became aware that this was not the case some time in early February * The executive decided to "keep it a secret" * A deadline existed, but was extended due to other offices nearby not being ready to move * The room situation was communicated to members on March 12th, indicating a deadline of the 16th I don't believe the network communication was ever communicated to ProgSoc, though I think that's a minor point given the room had to be vacated 7 days later. > Why is there so little/no communication of what is going on? Is the (now previous) admin/exec trying to hide things, or are their just unable to inform members of important things like infrastructure movements/upgrades/changes? This is particularly concerning since there was a rushed AGM with a changed constitution where members where unable to communicate about what was happening due to lines of communication being cut. I questioned the executive during the AGM on their policy on the mailing list; they have stated that they will not kill it, but they do not feel it is an effective means to communicate with members, and as such are using other means (Facebook, Twitter and mailing lists managed by third-parties [Mailchimp]) as their medium for communicating with members. > As far as I could tell the recent actions were (effectively if not outright intended to) done to prevent input from members who were not there, and to stifle discussion. It probably would not have made a difference, given one of my experiences during the AGM: During the review/voting of constitutional amendments, some people entered the room of the AGM, adamant to vote to pass the amendment motion currently being proposed. Note that the amendments were only vocally read, not visually displayed. When I asked them if they knew which amendment they were voting for, they did know, but they *did* want to vote to pass it. That's the kind of AGM we enjoyed. The network outage immediately prior to the AGM was very unfortunately timed, but having been involved in fixing it, I can't see any evidence that it was deliberate. As an aside, as I don't believe it's been mentioned on the list (it was on Facebook), but CK has uploaded his video of the AGM to YouTube[1]. The audio is quite difficult to hear though, given the background noise. -Chris. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qqNz7kM4Mc From chris at deigan.id.au Fri Mar 27 17:28:26 2015 From: chris at deigan.id.au (Chris Deigan) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 17:28:26 +1100 Subject: [ProgSoc] [ADMIN] Mail not working? In-Reply-To: References: <20150325221616.GA32441@niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au> <20150326094619.GA14697@niflheim.progsoc.uts.edu.au> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:25 PM, Chris Deigan wrote: > It probably would not have made a difference, given one of my > experiences during the AGM: During the review/voting of constitutional > amendments, some people entered the room of the AGM, adamant to vote > to pass the amendment motion currently being proposed. Note that the > amendments were only vocally read, not visually displayed. When I > asked them if they knew which amendment they were voting for, they did > know, but they *did* want to vote to pass it. That's the kind of AGM > we enjoyed. I made a typo in that paragraph - they did *not* know what they were voting for, but did want to vote to pass the motion. A corrected version follows: It probably would not have made a difference, given one of my experiences during the AGM: During the review/voting of constitutional amendments, some people entered the room of the AGM, adamant to vote to pass the amendment motion currently being proposed. Note that the amendments were only vocally read, not visually displayed. When I asked them if they knew which amendment they were voting for, they did not know, or even seem to care for that matter, but they *did* want to vote to pass it. That's the kind of AGM we enjoyed. -Chris.