[Council Meeting] Meeting minutes from 2019-09-19
patrick at cloke.us
Wed Oct 2 20:47:22 UTC 2019
On 10/2/19 2:33 PM, Eyal Rozenberg wrote:
> On 02/10/2019 1:06, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
>> There is certainly information we could fill in after the meeting, but
>> the amount of detail you're asking for will quickly turn this into a
>> blog post style report. Not saying that is a bad thing, just a different
>> format with its own benefits and weaknesses.
> What I'm asking for is 2x-3x times the current amount of text, with the
> addition being enough context or elaboration to make things relatively
> clear and with the tiniest bit of context; no more than that. Otherwise
> the minutes are not readable and quite possibly not worth posting to the
> I'm very used to doing this as a minute-taker, which is why I brought it
> up. I would usually manage to do this either on-the-fly, or in the few
> minutes following a meeting adjourning while other people are tidying up
> etc - which is why I'm assuming (hopefully justifiably) that it's doable.
Perhaps calling these "minutes" was a misnomer, they're really more of
summaries, they're not meant to be point by point minutes of who said
what. Thanks for the feedback, I'll keep pushing to include more detail
in these. I think a lot of the questions that were brought up are due to
the short period of time we've been releasing this information though.
Frankly, we tend to go back to the same topics frequently, so we'll need
to be a bit more cognizant in the future of what context council members
have vs. people reading the minutes.
I agree that terms like "GData" and "c-c" should not be used (and I try
to make a conscious effort not to use them, but they probably slip in
As was pointed out by Philipp, some of the points are purposefully vague
because more information is either not prudent to be released or cannot
for some legal reason.
Thanks again for the feedback, we'll keep trying to improve these moving
More information about the tb-planning