Subject: Re: When will CPAL actually be _used_?
From: Rick Moen <>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:48:06 -0700

Quoting Ashlee Vance (

> On 8/21/07, Matthew Flaschen <> wrote:
> >
> > While we're on this topic, Michael Tiemann has said the Board
> > intends to publish the minutes for the CPAL approval meeting(s).
> > Where and when will this happen?
> Danese Cooper is knitting the minutes into a quilt. Please be patient.
> The OSI moves at needle not internet speed.

Matt, if I might make a small appeal for a sense of perspective:  The
CPAL text the Board approved differed only to a ludicrously trivial
degree from that of the draft extensively discussed, a short while
earlier, on this mailing list.  Badgering the Board over its approving a
licence "not discussed" on this mailing list wastes everyone's time, as,
realistically speaking, we _did_ discuss it.

Speaking of wastes of time, any additional subscribers inclined to opine
on which licences are "ethically corrupt", or otherwise lacking in merit
for personal reasons of little interest to others, are hereby invited to
save such sentiments for their therapists -- who care deeply on an
hourly basis, as per contract, whereas all of us others, alas, do not.

FYI, as to Board minutes:  When I've been on organisations' boards of
directors, I've always recommended that their secretaries follow
corporate best practices[1] by recording the name of the organisation,
date and time of the meeting, who called it to order, who attended, if
there was a quorum, the exact text of any motions made (or the fact of
reports accepted, etc.), whether they passed or failed, any conflicts of
interest or abstainments from voting, when the meeting ended, who
developed the minutes, and _nothing_ else -- in particular, no attempt
to capture Board discussion.

This has the advantage of highlighting what the Board actually _does_.
(Please note that, as a deliberative body, a Board can act only
collectively, and discussion among or by individual members does not
constitute Board action.)  It also has the advantage of basic legal
caution, as anything recorded in the minutes that doesn't need to be can
be cited in adverse parties' future litigation.

[1] And no, I don't mean the sense of this term detailed at .