From committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 2 17:00:01 2011 From: committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 4 day warning: Notice of Ordinary Committee Meeting Message-ID: <20110502090001.86D2D6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> An Ordinary Committee Meeting will be held as usual at 5pm this Friday in the UCC Clubroom, unless otherwise stated. From pabx-reports at ucs.uwa.edu.au Wed May 4 09:15:07 2011 From: pabx-reports at ucs.uwa.edu.au (pabx-reports at ucs.uwa.edu.au) Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 09:15:07 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] [PABX] Group Summary - PDF Message-ID: <20110504011507.AE3018B33A@new-charon.its.uwa.edu.au> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110504/af65a8b9/attachment.txt -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: phonebill-April2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 3134 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110504/af65a8b9/attachment.pdf From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 5 17:00:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 24 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110505090001.209CB6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: bob : purchase 3 dev boards zanchey : purchase a TP-LINK TL-WR1043ND wireless N AP ($75) From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 6 11:00:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 11:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110506030001.0D8B46006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: bob : purchase 3 dev boards zanchey : purchase a TP-LINK TL-WR1043ND wireless N AP ($75) mattman : Returning signed tenancy agreement to SOC ASAP From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 6 16:15:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 16:15:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 45 minute warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110506081501.B49B96006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: bob : purchase 3 dev boards zanchey : purchase a TP-LINK TL-WR1043ND wireless N AP ($75) mattman : Returning signed tenancy agreement to SOC ASAP From mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 9 10:59:15 2011 From: mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Matt Didcoe) Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:59:15 +0800 Subject: [committee] [clubs] FW: 2011 Open Day In-Reply-To: <012a01cc0df4$9565cd80$c0316880$@uwa.edu.au> References: <012a01cc0df4$9565cd80$c0316880$@uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: I think we should get involved this year and do something to promote UCC - seems like an excellent opportunity. Anyone have thoughts on what we might be able to show people? Cheers, Matt [MRD] On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Tom Antoniazzi wrote: > Hi Clubs and Fac Socs > > > > The University is in the process of putting together a programme for this > year?s Open Day, which is an opportunity for prospective students to check > out the campus. > > > > The organisers have requested that Clubs and Fac Socs provide any > information on activities that they are running on Open Day so that they can > be included in the programme. > > > > It goes without saying that Open Day is a fantastic opportunity to engage > potential students before they start university. This particular Open Day > will be huge due to increased promotion and hype around New Courses ? so > make sure you make yourselves known! > > > > See the email below for information on what details are required and reply > to me ASAP please. > > > > Cheers > > > > Tom Antoniazzi > > 98th Guild President > > UWA Student Guild > > M300, 35 Stirling Highway > > CRAWLEY WA 6009 > > * * > > Ph: (08) 6488 2294 > > Mb: 0431 970 664 > > Em: president at guild.uwa.edu.au > > > > www.guild.uwa.edu.au > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Shoshanna Vernham [mailto:shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au] > *Sent:* Monday, 9 May 2011 9:21 AM > *To:* Tom Antoniazzi > *Subject:* RE: 2011 Open Day > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > Not a problem at all, I thought you might need this but wasn?t sure if you > had a brief from last year and didn?t want to bombard you with too much > information in one e-mail. > > > > The examples I can give you are: > > > > *Displays* > > *Tags* > > *Faculty* > > *Display* > > *Description* > > *Time* > > *Location* > > *Map* > > Accounting, Asian Business, Business Information Management, Commerce, > Economic History, Economics, Employment Relations, Entrepreneurship and > Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Finance, Human Resource > Management, HR, Management, Marketing, Money and Banking, Money, Banking, > Business, Information Management, Business School > > Business School > > **SIFE (Students in Free Enterprise) > > A student's perspective of studying at the UWA Business School; and an > overview of SIFE UWA's exciting Balya and 'Let's Can Hunger' Projects. > > 10am - 4.00pm > > Business School > > http://www.uwa.edu.au/campus_map?id=2172 > > Food, Refreshments, student clubs, Business School, ECOMS > > Business School > > ECOMS Committee - Students will host a sausage sizzle > > > > 10.00am-4.00pm > > Student Common Room > > http://www.uwa.edu.au/campus_map?id=2172 > > > Engineer, Engineering, Current Students, Life on campus, University > Engineers Club, engineering students, student clubs, Faculty of Engineering > Computer Science and Mathematics > > Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics > > University Engineers' Club (UEC) > > Meet engineering students to find out the inside word on being an > engineering student at UWA > > 10.00am-4.00pm > > Marquee - James Oval > > http://www.uwa.edu.au/campus_map?id=2047 > > > > > > Hope this helps, and please let me know if you have any other queries. > > > > Have a lovely start to the week, > > Shoshanna > > > > *Shoshanna Vernham (Ms)* > > *Project Manager (Events)* > > * * > > *Public Affairs* > > *The University of Western Australia* > > *M360* > > *35 Stirling Highway* > > *CRAWLEY WA 6009* > > * * > > *P: +61 8 6488 7302* > > *F: +61 8 6488 1020* > > *E: **shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au* * * > > *W: **www.uwa.edu.au* ** > > > > > > > > *CRICOS Provider Code: 00126G* > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Tom Antoniazzi [mailto:president at guild.uwa.edu.au] > *Sent:* Monday, 9 May 2011 8:42 AM > *To:* Shoshanna Vernham > *Subject:* RE: 2011 Open Day > > > > Hi Shoshanna > > > > Thanks for your email. > > > > Would you be able to give me an example of last year?s materials so I have > an idea of what you?re looking for? > > > > It?s just that we have over 80 clubs and societies all with a myriad of > events! > > > > Regards > > > > Tom. > > > > *From:* Shoshanna Vernham [mailto:shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au] > *Sent:* Friday, 6 May 2011 3:09 PM > *To:* Tom Antoniazzi > *Subject:* 2011 Open Day > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > Hope you?ve got back into the swing of things after Study Break! > > > > I am just confirming the content for the Open Day program and online > Application. > > > > Could you please advise what activities the Guild?s clubs and societies > have planned for this year? > > > > I would appreciate if you could compile a complete list of activities for > me by Wednesday, 18 May. > > > > Please don?t hesitate to call or drop me a line if you have any queries. > > > > I look forward to hearing from you and in the meantime have a lovely > weekend! > > > > Kindest Regards, > > Shoshanna > > > > > > *Shoshanna Vernham (Ms)* > > *Project Manager (Events)* > > * * > > *Public Affairs* > > *The University of Western Australia* > > *M360* > > *35 Stirling Highway* > > *CRAWLEY WA 6009* > > * * > > *P: +61 8 6488 7302* > > *F: +61 8 6488 1020* > > *E: **shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au* * * > > *W: **www.uwa.edu.au* ** > > > > > > > > *CRICOS Provider Code: 00126G* > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Guild clubs mailing list > https://mail.guild.uwa.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/clubs > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110509/a9b3ac1f/attachment-0001.htm From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Mon May 9 14:05:36 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 14:05:36 +0800 Subject: [committee] [clubs] FW: 2011 Open Day In-Reply-To: References: <012a01cc0df4$9565cd80$c0316880$@uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: It's unfortunately the coke machine is too large to lug around to where we are. If the Bob/Ash Nixie Clock of awesome is done by then, we can show them that, but it's interestingness is debatable. What's the oldest hardware we have that still runs? We can bring down the wirewrap computers; although they probably won't turn on. ACC Murphy can be an exhibit if he's not to heavy and dangerous to move. I think it should be a combination of the three sides of UCC: - Awesome new stuff - Awesome old stuff - Awesome made stuff Don't question the categories, they are perfect. As for the new stuff; I'm not too sure. On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Matt Didcoe wrote: > I think we should get involved this year and do something to promote UCC - > seems like an excellent opportunity. > > Anyone have thoughts on what we might be able to show people? > > Cheers, > Matt [MRD] > > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Tom Antoniazzi < > president at guild.uwa.edu.au> wrote: > >> Hi Clubs and Fac Socs >> >> >> >> The University is in the process of putting together a programme for this >> year?s Open Day, which is an opportunity for prospective students to check >> out the campus. >> >> >> >> The organisers have requested that Clubs and Fac Socs provide any >> information on activities that they are running on Open Day so that they can >> be included in the programme. >> >> >> >> It goes without saying that Open Day is a fantastic opportunity to engage >> potential students before they start university. This particular Open Day >> will be huge due to increased promotion and hype around New Courses ? so >> make sure you make yourselves known! >> >> >> >> See the email below for information on what details are required and reply >> to me ASAP please. >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> >> >> Tom Antoniazzi >> >> 98th Guild President >> >> UWA Student Guild >> >> M300, 35 Stirling Highway >> >> CRAWLEY WA 6009 >> >> * * >> >> Ph: (08) 6488 2294 >> >> Mb: 0431 970 664 >> >> Em: president at guild.uwa.edu.au >> >> >> >> www.guild.uwa.edu.au >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Shoshanna Vernham [mailto:shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au] >> *Sent:* Monday, 9 May 2011 9:21 AM >> *To:* Tom Antoniazzi >> *Subject:* RE: 2011 Open Day >> >> >> >> Hi Tom, >> >> >> >> Not a problem at all, I thought you might need this but wasn?t sure if you >> had a brief from last year and didn?t want to bombard you with too much >> information in one e-mail. >> >> >> >> The examples I can give you are: >> >> >> >> *Displays* >> >> *Tags* >> >> *Faculty* >> >> *Display* >> >> *Description* >> >> *Time* >> >> *Location* >> >> *Map* >> >> Accounting, Asian Business, Business Information Management, Commerce, >> Economic History, Economics, Employment Relations, Entrepreneurship and >> Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Finance, Human Resource >> Management, HR, Management, Marketing, Money and Banking, Money, Banking, >> Business, Information Management, Business School >> >> Business School >> >> **SIFE (Students in Free Enterprise) >> >> A student's perspective of studying at the UWA Business School; and an >> overview of SIFE UWA's exciting Balya and 'Let's Can Hunger' Projects. >> >> 10am - 4.00pm >> >> Business School >> >> http://www.uwa.edu.au/campus_map?id=2172 >> >> Food, Refreshments, student clubs, Business School, ECOMS >> >> Business School >> >> ECOMS Committee - Students will host a sausage sizzle >> >> >> >> 10.00am-4.00pm >> >> Student Common Room >> >> http://www.uwa.edu.au/campus_map?id=2172 >> >> >> Engineer, Engineering, Current Students, Life on campus, University >> Engineers Club, engineering students, student clubs, Faculty of Engineering >> Computer Science and Mathematics >> >> Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics >> >> University Engineers' Club (UEC) >> >> Meet engineering students to find out the inside word on being an >> engineering student at UWA >> >> 10.00am-4.00pm >> >> Marquee - James Oval >> >> http://www.uwa.edu.au/campus_map?id=2047 >> >> >> >> >> >> Hope this helps, and please let me know if you have any other queries. >> >> >> >> Have a lovely start to the week, >> >> Shoshanna >> >> >> >> *Shoshanna Vernham (Ms)* >> >> *Project Manager (Events)* >> >> * * >> >> *Public Affairs* >> >> *The University of Western Australia* >> >> *M360* >> >> *35 Stirling Highway* >> >> *CRAWLEY WA 6009* >> >> * * >> >> *P: +61 8 6488 7302* >> >> *F: +61 8 6488 1020* >> >> *E: **shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au* * * >> >> *W: **www.uwa.edu.au* ** >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *CRICOS Provider Code: 00126G* >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Tom Antoniazzi [mailto:president at guild.uwa.edu.au] >> *Sent:* Monday, 9 May 2011 8:42 AM >> *To:* Shoshanna Vernham >> *Subject:* RE: 2011 Open Day >> >> >> >> Hi Shoshanna >> >> >> >> Thanks for your email. >> >> >> >> Would you be able to give me an example of last year?s materials so I have >> an idea of what you?re looking for? >> >> >> >> It?s just that we have over 80 clubs and societies all with a myriad of >> events! >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> >> Tom. >> >> >> >> *From:* Shoshanna Vernham [mailto:shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au] >> *Sent:* Friday, 6 May 2011 3:09 PM >> *To:* Tom Antoniazzi >> *Subject:* 2011 Open Day >> >> >> >> Hi Tom, >> >> >> >> Hope you?ve got back into the swing of things after Study Break! >> >> >> >> I am just confirming the content for the Open Day program and online >> Application. >> >> >> >> Could you please advise what activities the Guild?s clubs and societies >> have planned for this year? >> >> >> >> I would appreciate if you could compile a complete list of activities for >> me by Wednesday, 18 May. >> >> >> >> Please don?t hesitate to call or drop me a line if you have any queries. >> >> >> >> I look forward to hearing from you and in the meantime have a lovely >> weekend! >> >> >> >> Kindest Regards, >> >> Shoshanna >> >> >> >> >> >> *Shoshanna Vernham (Ms)* >> >> *Project Manager (Events)* >> >> * * >> >> *Public Affairs* >> >> *The University of Western Australia* >> >> *M360* >> >> *35 Stirling Highway* >> >> *CRAWLEY WA 6009* >> >> * * >> >> *P: +61 8 6488 7302* >> >> *F: +61 8 6488 1020* >> >> *E: **shoshanna.vernham at uwa.edu.au* * * >> >> *W: **www.uwa.edu.au* ** >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *CRICOS Provider Code: 00126G* >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Guild clubs mailing list >> https://mail.guild.uwa.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/clubs >> >> > -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110509/af29b4f2/attachment-0001.htm From committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 9 17:00:01 2011 From: committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 4 day warning: Notice of Ordinary Committee Meeting Message-ID: <20110509090001.C664A6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> An Ordinary Committee Meeting will be held as usual at 5pm this Friday in the UCC Clubroom, unless otherwise stated. From mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 9 21:20:05 2011 From: mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Matt Didcoe) Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 21:20:05 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Some concern was expressed that this Memorandum of Understanding between UCC and the Guild had not already been forwarded, soooo in an effort to appear as transparent and inclusive as possible, please find a copy attached. Committee are reviewing it thoroughly now and debating bits and pieces and your valued opinions are sought before we make the final sign off. Regards, Matt Didcoe [MRD] Vice President (2011) mattman at ucc ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bob Adamson Date: Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:47 PM Subject: Fw: MOU for UCC To: committee-only at ucc.asn.au Here is the draft MOU. Sorry it took so long, Rachel had to resend it to me as I didn't receive it the first time. [BOB] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: University Computer Club and UWA Guild.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 23807 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110509/740e2924/attachment-0001.bin From maxine.gamble at uwa.edu.au Tue May 10 06:43:56 2011 From: maxine.gamble at uwa.edu.au (Maxine Gamble) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 06:43:56 +0800 Subject: [committee] FW: AARNet Charges for Apr 11 Message-ID: <47A587C505FBA144BF714B310D9928130EF6C251@ITS-WIN-063.staffad.uwa.edu.au> From: root [mailto:root at elysium.uwa.edu.au] Sent: Friday, 6 May 2011 1:06 PM To: bills at elysium.uwa.edu.au; Maxine Gamble Subject: AARNet Charges for Apr 11 UWA Network Traffic Charges Report. This notice is for your information only, not a request for payment. As of 1st January 2010, the cost of internet traffic for all business units is covered centrally. This means that ITS will no longer charge business units each month for traffic used; no journal entries will be passed to Financial Services. We will, however, continue to send notices in the same format to enable business units to monitor their traffic usage each month. Because Internet usage is being funded centrally, there may be potential for excessive usage of the Internet and/or large data downloads. This could have a detrimental effect on the UWA network ? and the University?s bottom line. Therefore, your assistance in monitoring and reporting (to ITS) excessive or unusual usage within your business units would be greatly appreciated. ITS is working to improve the usage monitoring tools to enable a clearer understanding of traffic usage and provide more real-time analysis. Information on this will be made available in due course. Apr 11 Charge period to 30.04.2011 Name of Unit: University Computer Club Contact: Account: N/A (will be invoiced) Unit's Project/Grant: Service or Dial ITS Host Username Type Time LAN Cache Host Total Apr 2011 130.95.13.0 ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.1 130.95.13.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.10 telnet.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.100 phosphorous.ucc. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.101 combtail.ucc.gu. 0.00 3.34 0.00 0.00 3.34 130.95.13.102 colmata.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.103 deepthought.ucc. 0.00 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.57 130.95.13.104 kormoran.ucc.gu. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.105 sophocles.ucc.gu 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 130.95.13.106 oolong.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 130.95.13.107 melissa.cacheboy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.108 angelfish.ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.109 robotnik.ucc.gu. 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 130.95.13.11 ssh.ucc.gu.uwa.e 0.00 5.14 0.00 0.00 5.14 130.95.13.110 jasmine.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.52 130.95.13.111 evil.ucc.gu.uwa. 0.00 5.97 0.00 0.00 5.97 130.95.13.112 lurc.ucc.gu.uwa. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.113 catfish.ucc.gu.u 0.00 72.14 0.00 0.00 72.14 130.95.13.114 napoli.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 13.65 0.00 0.00 13.65 130.95.13.115 130.95.13.115 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.116 130.95.13.116 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.117 red.ucc.gu.uwa.e 0.00 1.91 0.00 0.00 1.91 130.95.13.118 130.95.13.118 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.119 characid.ucc.gu. 0.00 47.61 0.00 0.00 47.61 130.95.13.12 ext-mx.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 130.95.13.120 dhcp0.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.121 dhcp1.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.16 130.95.13.122 dhcp2.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 42.02 0.00 0.00 42.02 130.95.13.123 dhcp3.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 3.67 0.00 0.00 3.67 130.95.13.124 dhcp4.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 130.95.13.125 dhcp5.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.04 130.95.13.126 dhcp6.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 31.20 0.00 0.00 31.20 130.95.13.127 net-2-bcast.ucc. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.128 130.95.13.128 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.129 130.95.13.129 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.13 enki.rcpt.to 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 130.95.13.130 130.95.13.130 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.131 130.95.13.131 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.132 130.95.13.132 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.133 130.95.13.133 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.134 130.95.13.134 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.135 130.95.13.135 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.136 130.95.13.136 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.137 130.95.13.137 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.138 130.95.13.138 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.139 130.95.13.139 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.14 dagon.rcpt.to 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.35 130.95.13.140 130.95.13.140 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.141 130.95.13.141 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.142 wireless-snat.uc 0.00 237.98 0.00 0.00 237.98 130.95.13.143 loft-nat.ucc.gu. 0.00 58.75 0.00 0.00 58.75 130.95.13.144 iodine-nat.ucc.g 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.145 netinstall-snat. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.146 130.95.13.146 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.147 vpn-snat.ucc.gu. 0.00 75.03 0.00 0.00 75.03 130.95.13.148 130.95.13.148 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.149 130.95.13.149 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.15 130.95.13.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.150 130.95.13.150 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.151 130.95.13.151 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.152 130.95.13.152 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.153 130.95.13.153 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.154 130.95.13.154 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.155 130.95.13.155 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.156 130.95.13.156 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.157 130.95.13.157 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.158 130.95.13.158 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.159 130.95.13.159 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.16 midshipman.ucc.g 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.160 130.95.13.160 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.161 130.95.13.161 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.162 130.95.13.162 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.163 130.95.13.163 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.164 130.95.13.164 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.165 130.95.13.165 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.166 130.95.13.166 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.167 130.95.13.167 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.168 130.95.13.168 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.169 130.95.13.169 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.17 mermaid.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.170 130.95.13.170 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.171 130.95.13.171 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.172 130.95.13.172 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.173 130.95.13.173 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.174 130.95.13.174 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.175 130.95.13.175 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.176 130.95.13.176 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.177 130.95.13.177 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.178 130.95.13.178 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.179 130.95.13.179 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.18 mussel.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 21.70 0.00 0.00 21.70 130.95.13.180 130.95.13.180 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.181 130.95.13.181 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.182 130.95.13.182 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.183 130.95.13.183 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.184 130.95.13.184 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.185 130.95.13.185 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.186 130.95.13.186 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.187 130.95.13.187 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.188 130.95.13.188 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.189 130.95.13.189 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.19 morwong.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.190 130.95.13.190 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.191 130.95.13.191 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.192 130.95.13.192 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.193 130.95.13.193 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.194 130.95.13.194 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.195 130.95.13.195 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.196 130.95.13.196 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.197 130.95.13.197 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.198 130.95.13.198 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.199 130.95.13.199 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.2 130.95.13.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.20 musundo.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 130.95.13.200 130.95.13.200 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.201 130.95.13.201 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.202 130.95.13.202 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.203 130.95.13.203 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.204 130.95.13.204 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.205 130.95.13.205 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.206 130.95.13.206 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.207 130.95.13.207 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.208 130.95.13.208 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.209 130.95.13.209 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.21 pomona.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 216.02 0.00 0.00 216.02 130.95.13.210 130.95.13.210 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.211 130.95.13.211 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.212 130.95.13.212 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.213 130.95.13.213 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.214 130.95.13.214 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.215 130.95.13.215 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.216 130.95.13.216 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.217 130.95.13.217 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.218 130.95.13.218 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 130.95.13.219 130.95.13.219 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.22 proxybox.ucc.gu. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.220 130.95.13.220 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.221 130.95.13.221 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.222 130.95.13.222 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.223 130.95.13.223 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.224 130.95.13.224 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.225 130.95.13.225 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.226 130.95.13.226 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.227 130.95.13.227 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.228 130.95.13.228 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.229 130.95.13.229 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.23 martello.ucc.gu. 0.00 56.57 0.00 0.00 56.57 130.95.13.230 130.95.13.230 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.231 130.95.13.231 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.232 130.95.13.232 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.233 130.95.13.233 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.234 130.95.13.234 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.235 130.95.13.235 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.236 130.95.13.236 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.237 130.95.13.237 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.238 130.95.13.238 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.239 130.95.13.239 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.24 rattle.bur.st 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 130.95.13.240 130.95.13.240 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.241 130.95.13.241 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.242 130.95.13.242 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.243 130.95.13.243 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.244 130.95.13.244 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.245 130.95.13.245 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.246 130.95.13.246 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.247 130.95.13.247 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.248 130.95.13.248 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.249 130.95.13.249 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.25 seven.sixlabs.or 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.250 130.95.13.250 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.251 130.95.13.251 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.252 net-v.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.253 musundo-v.ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.254 manduba.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.255 net-v-bcast.ucc. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.26 130.95.13.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.27 sms.ucc.gu.uwa.e 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.28 130.95.13.28 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 130.95.13.29 coolstore.ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.3 madako.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 130.95.13.30 130.95.13.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.31 plug-snat.ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.32 130.95.13.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.33 nayk.ucc.gu.uwa. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.34 medusa.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.35 130.95.13.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.36 meimei.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 130.95.13.37 130.95.13.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.38 130.95.13.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.39 custardrum.ucc.g 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 130.95.13.4 merlo.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 130.95.13.40 maraena.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.41 muskellunge.ucc. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.42 meersau.ucc.gu.u 0.00 1.45 0.00 0.00 1.45 130.95.13.43 mylah.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 130.95.13.44 dpp.ucc.gu.uwa.e 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 130.95.13.45 130.95.13.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.46 130.95.13.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.47 130.95.13.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.48 130.95.13.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.49 130.95.13.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.5 130.95.13.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.50 130.95.13.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.51 130.95.13.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.52 130.95.13.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.53 130.95.13.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.54 130.95.13.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.55 maaxen.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 130.95.13.56 130.95.13.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.57 130.95.13.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.58 130.95.13.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.59 130.95.13.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.6 130.95.13.6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.60 mumble.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.61 130.95.13.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.62 130.95.13.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.63 net-1-bcast.ucc. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.64 net-2.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.65 madako-2.ucc.gu. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.66 heathred.ucc.gu. 0.00 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.46 130.95.13.67 pluto.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.68 sacheto.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.69 crenicara.ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.7 motsugo.ucc.gu.u 0.00 17.63 0.00 0.00 17.63 130.95.13.70 caeruleus.ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.71 canevas.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.72 zarvora.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.73 130.95.13.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.74 pinball.ucc.gu.u 0.00 5.66 0.00 0.00 5.66 130.95.13.75 camwhore.ucc.gu. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.76 rome.ucc.gu.uwa. 0.00 10.02 0.00 0.00 10.02 130.95.13.77 rome-2.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 4.87 0.00 0.00 4.87 130.95.13.78 chaenopsis.ucc.g 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 130.95.13.79 ziggy.ucc.gu.uwa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.8 flame-tunnel.ucc 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 130.95.13.80 cichlid.ucc.gu.u 0.00 110.98 0.00 0.00 110.98 130.95.13.81 130.95.13.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.82 130.95.13.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.83 persephone.ucc.g 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.84 musdea.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 130.95.13.85 130.95.13.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.86 humpback.ucc.gu. 0.00 6.53 0.00 0.00 6.53 130.95.13.87 magenta.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.88 curdane.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.89 mudhead.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.9 mooneye.ucc.gu.u 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 4.47 130.95.13.90 cybium.ucc.gu.uw 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.91 130.95.13.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.92 130.95.13.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.93 mrcoffee.ucc.gu. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.94 machuto.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 130.95.13.95 130.95.13.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.96 130.95.13.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.97 130.95.13.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.98 chamomile.ucc.gu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.95.13.99 chimera.ucc.gu.u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 1085.48 0.00 0.00 1085.48 Total invoiced : $1085.48 Please check the statements carefully. Send comments/queries to ithelp-its at uwa.edu.au Explanatory Notes: Host IP number or name of recipient host or workstation. Name is username for cyllene or central student server. Name Name of workstation or user name if cyllene or central student server. Service Type U user account on cyllene or central student server S student account on central student server Dial time The dialup service has been decommissioned. LAN Cost of network traffic direct to department hosts or to a UWA dialin IP number. See notes 1 & 2. ITS Host Cost of email and other network traffic processed through central mail server, cyllene or student server. See notes 1 & 4. Cache Cost of traffic via the central www cache. See notes 1, 3 & 4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Notes. (1) The "charge" for received off-net traffic is $8 per gigabyte (international or Australian), as set in 2009. In 2010, no volume charges will be passed on to billing units, and this notice is an informational guide only. (2) The daily traffic volume to each departmental LAN is posted in the UWA Web pages. URL is http://www.its.uwa.edu.au/support/network/stats (3) Traffic via the central proxy cache is charged at the same rate as for direct subnet traffic; there is no charge for the overhead traffic or data already in the cache. (4) The source site for mail and cache traffic is identified and classified as local, national or international based on the site name. National and international traffic is further classified into on-net and off-net traffic. Last update: 12 Feb 2010 ----------------------------- Gaye Harvey Information Technology Services, University of Western Australia. ithelp-its at uwa.edu.au Phone (08) 6488 1515 Fax (08) 6488 1109 From danielax at gmail.com Wed May 11 02:28:10 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 02:28:10 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> Firstly, my apologies to committee for being so tardy on this issue. I should also point out that, whilst a law student, I am not a lawyer. (As I've mentioned on #committee,) I'm not particularly happy with this agreement for 3 main reasons: 1. I'm not sure if the acts of an unincorporated association can bind an incorporated association, even if the incorporated association is the successor of the unincorporated one. 2. AFAICT, despite the Guild's assertions, they are *not* incorporated under the Act, and a quick search on the Australian Business Register confirms this.[1] (They are actually incorporated under the University of Western Australia Act 1911.) As such, we couldn't legally give them the money anyway[2] - we'd be signing an agreement that is thus actually trying circumvent the Act. 3. On a less hard and fast sort of point, I believe that signing an agreement we know is invalid and unenforceable, is unethical, immoral and possibly illegal, especially knowing that the Guild believes it to be valid and enforceable.[3] Finally, there are other ways of achieving the guild's desires without making poor agreements. These have been canvassed on #committee, but I am happy to develop on them if anyone wants.[4] Thus ends the main rant. While I'm at it, here begins the second rant. We do not have a divine right to incorporate. If the Guild does not want us to incorporate, that is their call and we have to either abide by it, or sever our ties with them (which would kill the club). Putting conditions on our incorporation is not 'blackmail' or 'extortion', regardless of our opinions on the reasonability or otherwise of the conditions. Furthermore, no matter how unreasonable the guild has been, is, or will be, we are not for that reason excused from our moral, ethical and legal responsibilities. Even if the guild want to be difficult, it is not open to us to take advantage of that inadvertence or stupidity to get our way. Even if we perceive that the guild is not playing by the rules or playing fair, we are not thereby excused from following the rules and playing fair ourselves. Finally, if we want to work with the guild, it would be nice if we accepted that they're no more intrinsically evil than we are. Maybe if we assumed good faith until we had overwhelming evidence to the contrary, we could get more done. The guild is protecting their legitimate interest in keeping money at UWA: is that really so terrible? Thus ends the second rant. Night/morning all. [DJA] [1] http://goo.gl/yonCf which lists it as an "Other Unincorporated Entity"[5]. Compare PLUG: http://goo.gl/pc90r [2] the Act requires that money be distributed to another body incorporated under the act. [3] It's at this point I would customarily make a joke about the ethical standards, or lack thereof, held by engineers and lawyers. [4] just not at 2:22 in the morning. [5] I'm aware this is not the same as statutory corporation, which would be what I would expect. I put this down to the ABR website not supporting it: see http://goo.gl/b7rdE (Although I question why it wouldn't be listed as a State Gov't Company. Maybe the guild mis-registered it. But I digress.[6]) [6] Look, a doubly nested footnote! Hi [SZM]! On 09/05/2011, at 9:20 PM, Matt Didcoe wrote: > Some concern was expressed that this Memorandum of Understanding > between UCC and the Guild had not already been forwarded, soooo in an > effort to appear as transparent and inclusive as possible, please find > a copy attached. > > Committee are reviewing it thoroughly now and debating bits and pieces > and your valued opinions are sought before we make the final sign off. > > Regards, > Matt Didcoe [MRD] > Vice President (2011) > mattman at ucc > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Bob Adamson > Date: Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:47 PM > Subject: Fw: MOU for UCC > To: committee-only at ucc.asn.au > > > Here is the draft MOU. Sorry it took so long, Rachel had to resend it > to me as I didn't receive it the first time. > > [BOB] > From danielax at gmail.com Wed May 11 02:32:53 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 02:32:53 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> Message-ID: > While I'm at it, here begins the second rant. > > We do not have a divine right to incorporate. If the Guild does not want us to incorporate, that is their call and we have to either abide by it, or sever our ties with them (which would kill the club). Putting conditions on our incorporation is not 'blackmail' or 'extortion', regardless of our opinions on the reasonability or otherwise of the conditions. > I should just add that none of this is intended in any way to diminish the hard work that [BOB], [MRD] and others have put into incorporation. > Furthermore, no matter how unreasonable the guild has been, is, or will be, we are not for that reason excused from our moral, ethical and legal responsibilities. Even if the guild want to be difficult, it is not open to us to take advantage of that inadvertence or stupidity to get our way. Even if we perceive that the guild is not playing by the rules or playing fair, we are not thereby excused from following the rules and playing fair ourselves. > ... and that this should not be read as an accusation. > Finally, if we want to work with the guild, it would be nice if we accepted that they're no more intrinsically evil than we are. Maybe if we assumed good faith until we had overwhelming evidence to the contrary, we could get more done. The guild is protecting their legitimate interest in keeping money at UWA: is that really so terrible? ... and that this also should not be read as suggesting that anyone doesn't assume good faith. > Thus ends the second rant. > Well, at least I thought it did. Please don't take anything too personally, and please don't flame me. From astro at jaram.net.au Wed May 11 07:34:47 2011 From: astro at jaram.net.au (Jeremy Cole) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 07:34:47 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> Message-ID: <-1315109534673638767@unknownmsgid> >> Thus ends the second rant. >> > Well, at least I thought it did. Please don't take anything too personally, and please don't flame me. > I wish you luck there Dan! From alex at theducks.org Wed May 11 10:41:36 2011 From: alex at theducks.org (Alex Dawson) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 19:41:36 -0700 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> Message-ID: <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> I'm not even a law student, but I'll give you my two cents here: UCC does not exist in a vacuum. UCC is part of the Guild, which is part of The University of Western Australia. Our assets are their assets, under our control. The easiest way to prevent conflict around this issue are to ensure that neither party outside the UCC is never required to exercise control, and we do this through compromise. But, we can't see the future, which is presumably why the Guild wants these conditions. I agree with them, but I also agree that UCC should not make a knowingly unenforceable agreement, and I urge UCC to do anything necessary to make them work. You mention there are some ways to achieve the Guild's objectives - I suggest you work on them. Regards, Alex. On 10/05/2011, at 11:28 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: > Firstly, my apologies to committee for being so tardy on this issue. I should also point out that, whilst a law student, I am not a lawyer. > > (As I've mentioned on #committee,) I'm not particularly happy with this agreement for 3 main reasons: > > 1. I'm not sure if the acts of an unincorporated association can bind an incorporated association, even if the incorporated association is the successor of the unincorporated one. > > 2. AFAICT, despite the Guild's assertions, they are *not* incorporated under the Act, and a quick search on the Australian Business Register confirms this.[1] (They are actually incorporated under the University of Western Australia Act 1911.) As such, we couldn't legally give them the money anyway[2] - we'd be signing an agreement that is thus actually trying circumvent the Act. > > 3. On a less hard and fast sort of point, I believe that signing an agreement we know is invalid and unenforceable, is unethical, immoral and possibly illegal, especially knowing that the Guild believes it to be valid and enforceable.[3] > > Finally, there are other ways of achieving the guild's desires without making poor agreements. These have been canvassed on #committee, but I am happy to develop on them if anyone wants.[4] > > Thus ends the main rant. > > While I'm at it, here begins the second rant. > > We do not have a divine right to incorporate. If the Guild does not want us to incorporate, that is their call and we have to either abide by it, or sever our ties with them (which would kill the club). Putting conditions on our incorporation is not 'blackmail' or 'extortion', regardless of our opinions on the reasonability or otherwise of the conditions. > > Furthermore, no matter how unreasonable the guild has been, is, or will be, we are not for that reason excused from our moral, ethical and legal responsibilities. Even if the guild want to be difficult, it is not open to us to take advantage of that inadvertence or stupidity to get our way. Even if we perceive that the guild is not playing by the rules or playing fair, we are not thereby excused from following the rules and playing fair ourselves. > > Finally, if we want to work with the guild, it would be nice if we accepted that they're no more intrinsically evil than we are. Maybe if we assumed good faith until we had overwhelming evidence to the contrary, we could get more done. The guild is protecting their legitimate interest in keeping money at UWA: is that really so terrible? > > Thus ends the second rant. > > Night/morning all. > [DJA] > > [1] http://goo.gl/yonCf which lists it as an "Other Unincorporated Entity"[5]. Compare PLUG: http://goo.gl/pc90r > > [2] the Act requires that money be distributed to another body incorporated under the act. > > [3] It's at this point I would customarily make a joke about the ethical standards, or lack thereof, held by engineers and lawyers. > > [4] just not at 2:22 in the morning. > > [5] I'm aware this is not the same as statutory corporation, which would be what I would expect. I put this down to the ABR website not supporting it: see http://goo.gl/b7rdE (Although I question why it wouldn't be listed as a State Gov't Company. Maybe the guild mis-registered it. But I digress.[6]) > > [6] Look, a doubly nested footnote! Hi [SZM]! > > On 09/05/2011, at 9:20 PM, Matt Didcoe wrote: > >> Some concern was expressed that this Memorandum of Understanding >> between UCC and the Guild had not already been forwarded, soooo in an >> effort to appear as transparent and inclusive as possible, please find >> a copy attached. >> >> Committee are reviewing it thoroughly now and debating bits and pieces >> and your valued opinions are sought before we make the final sign off. >> >> Regards, >> Matt Didcoe [MRD] >> Vice President (2011) >> mattman at ucc >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Bob Adamson >> Date: Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:47 PM >> Subject: Fw: MOU for UCC >> To: committee-only at ucc.asn.au >> >> >> Here is the draft MOU. Sorry it took so long, Rachel had to resend it >> to me as I didn't receive it the first time. >> >> [BOB] >> > From danielax at gmail.com Wed May 11 23:57:33 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 23:57:33 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> Message-ID: <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> > But, we can't see the future, which is presumably why the Guild wants these conditions. I agree with them, but I also agree that UCC should not make a knowingly unenforceable agreement, and I urge UCC to do anything necessary to make them work. You mention there are some ways to achieve the Guild's objectives - I suggest you work on them. OK, so in response to both Alex and Bob, this is what I would propose: === Begin Message === Hi Rachel, Thanks for drafting the MOU. We agree that it's a good idea and would be keen to implement something along these lines. We just have two fairly simple concerns. Firstly, I'm not sure if the acts of an unincorporated association can bind an incorporated association, even if the incorporated association is the successor of the unincorporated one. Whether or not that's the case, all that would be needed to avoid any uncertainty is for the agreement to be entered into after incorporation. This also gives the added bonus that the agreement can be made under the new incorporation's common seal. The committee would be happy to make personal guarantees that it will vote for and sign the new agreement after incorporation if you think that's appropriate. Secondly, I'm not sure if the Guild is actually incorporated under the Associations Incorporation Act 1978. As far as I can tell, it's created by ss 28(4) of the University of Western Australia Act 1911. I've reproduced here to save you looking it up (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/wa/consol_act/uowaa1911382/s28.html): The Guild of Undergraduates shall be a body corporate by that name with perpetual succession and a common seal; and shall by that name be capable in law of suing and being sued, and shall have such other powers and authorities and shall be subject to such obligations as shall have been or shall from time to time be prescribed by or under the Statutes for the time being in force. This proposition is also supported by a brief check of the Australian Business Register: the Guild of Undergraduates is listed as an "Other Unincorporated Entity". On the other hand, the Royal Automobile Club of WA Inc (the largest incorporated association in WA!) is listed as an "Other Incorporated Entity". The dissolution clause (which reflects the terms of the Act) requires that we transfer our assets to another association incorporated under the Act. But rather than getting caught up in the technical details of how the Guild is a legal person, I was wondering if a different scheme would be better. Specifically, I had envisioned an agreement where: - The club, in consideration of its continued affiliation with SOC/the Guild, agrees that upon winding up permanently, all the grants it has ever received will be repaid, with a generous rate of compound interest. - As the exact amount of grants given in from the 70s onwards is difficult to prove, the contract would provide that the Guild may elect to levy some set figure per year, say $1500. The aim is to get to a net figure that, with compound interest, basically covers all the club's assets. (even without interest, 1500 x 40 years is already more than the club's net balance) - The guild agrees that it will accept a transfer of all the club's assets in full discharge of the debt. - All the provisions you drafted regarding distribution of the funds received by the guild (which was a thoughtful gesture, thank you!) would remain the same. If you'd be interested in pursuing this suggestion I'd be happy to draft it up properly for you. By the way, good luck re: the property assignment marks -- do you know when we're getting them back? Best regards, Daniel Axtens UCC OCM 2011/token Law student on committee === End message === Feedback? (esp if you're on committee and wouldn't be willing to promise to sign an mou in the terms I've suggested!) [DJA] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110511/f6c8f2b9/attachment.htm From jacques at chester.id.au Thu May 12 01:12:54 2011 From: jacques at chester.id.au (Jacques Chester) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 02:42:54 +0930 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> Message-ID: Daniel; I'm not a lawyer either, but the general rule of thumb is that you can't use contractual terms to evade the clear meaning of an Act of Parliament. Both the MOU and your own phrasing would probably fail in this event. Furthermore, the MOU is not a contract in my reading. It couldn't bind on the future committee and there's no enforcement mechanism save for being expelled in the guild. In the case that the UCC was winding up I doubt this would seem like a very grave threat. Without looking into the details of the guild arrangements, it is also possible that the affiliation relationship with the guild does not, of itself, constitute a contract. And even if it does, it may not be possible to protect the guild from a future argument that the UCC may be affiliated *only* according the the UWA Act and by-laws, and that to add requirements to those by-laws through contract would be ultra vires. The semi-public nature of the Guild makes this a very murky area. Quite frankly I found administrative law to be incredibly tedious and I believe I failed it quite heroically. So to sum up: 1. The MOU is probably not a contract and can't bind the UCC; 2. Any contract based on using affiliation as consideration might fail as the UCC may, under existing by-laws, be entitled to it according to a process and not an exchangeable right; 3. If the Guild tried to make the MOU a condition of affiliation it might be acting ultra vires; and 4. A judge could easily ignore points 1-3 and rule that the Act overrides all this jiggery-pokery. My advice to the committee is to talk to some MPs about amending one or both of the conflicting Acts. I'm pretty sure they won't bite. Minor procedural amendments like these go through on the nod quite frequently. Cheers, JC. From danielax at gmail.com Thu May 12 11:31:09 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 11:31:09 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5FA2538A-F617-4801-B463-5C61FF4C4627@gmail.com> Erm. Rather than addressing the points in that (it will suffice to say that I accept unquestioningly pt 4, dispute pt 1, find pt 2 interesting and don't offer an opinion on pt 3), I now think it might be better to bring the concerns in my email to Rachel, and see what the guild thinks. [BOB]: I believe you raised the status of the Guild with Rachel at some point? Can you provide any more details about the Guild's POV? BR, Daniel On 12/05/2011, at 1:12 AM, Jacques Chester wrote: > Daniel; > > I'm not a lawyer either, but the general rule of thumb is that you > can't use contractual terms to evade the clear meaning of an Act > of Parliament. Both the MOU and your own phrasing would probably > fail in this event. > > Furthermore, the MOU is not a contract in my reading. It couldn't > bind on the future committee and there's no enforcement mechanism > save for being expelled in the guild. In the case that the UCC > was winding up I doubt this would seem like a very grave threat. > > Without looking into the details of the guild arrangements, it is > also possible that the affiliation relationship with the guild > does not, of itself, constitute a contract. And even if it does, it > may not be possible to protect the guild from a future argument that > the UCC may be affiliated *only* according the the UWA Act and by-laws, > and that to add requirements to those by-laws through contract would > be ultra vires. The semi-public nature of the Guild makes this a very > murky area. Quite frankly I found administrative law to be incredibly > tedious and I believe I failed it quite heroically. > > So to sum up: > > 1. The MOU is probably not a contract and can't bind the UCC; > 2. Any contract based on using affiliation as consideration might > fail as the UCC may, under existing by-laws, be entitled to it > according to a process and not an exchangeable right; > 3. If the Guild tried to make the MOU a condition of affiliation it > might be acting ultra vires; and > 4. A judge could easily ignore points 1-3 and rule that the Act > overrides all this jiggery-pokery. > > My advice to the committee is to talk to some MPs about amending one > or both of the conflicting Acts. I'm pretty sure they won't bite. > Minor procedural amendments like these go through on the nod quite > frequently. > > Cheers, > > JC. > From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 12 14:47:54 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 14:47:54 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: <5FA2538A-F617-4801-B463-5C61FF4C4627@gmail.com> References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> <5FA2538A-F617-4801-B463-5C61FF4C4627@gmail.com> Message-ID: According to Rachel Lee, Wayne has documents that show the Guild is incorporated with the Department of Commerce. I realise the Australian Business Register says something to the contrary, but the ABR also says that UCC is an "other incorporated entity", so I wouldn't put much stock in it. I did specifically raise this issue with Rachel at the meeting I had with her, and it was dismissed for the above reason. Whether or not the Guild is incorporated under the Act is relevant, but I think the first MOU can be dismissed as weak/unenforceable even without pointing out this fact. [BOB] On Thu, 12 May 2011, Daniel Axtens wrote: > Erm. > > Rather than addressing the points in that (it will suffice to say that I accept unquestioningly pt 4, dispute pt 1, find pt 2 interesting and don't offer an opinion on pt 3), I now think it might be better to bring the concerns in my email to Rachel, and see what the guild thinks. > > [BOB]: I believe you raised the status of the Guild with Rachel at some point? Can you provide any more details about the Guild's POV? > > BR, > Daniel > > On 12/05/2011, at 1:12 AM, Jacques Chester wrote: > > > Daniel; > > > > I'm not a lawyer either, but the general rule of thumb is that you > > can't use contractual terms to evade the clear meaning of an Act > > of Parliament. Both the MOU and your own phrasing would probably > > fail in this event. > > > > Furthermore, the MOU is not a contract in my reading. It couldn't > > bind on the future committee and there's no enforcement mechanism > > save for being expelled in the guild. In the case that the UCC > > was winding up I doubt this would seem like a very grave threat. > > > > Without looking into the details of the guild arrangements, it is > > also possible that the affiliation relationship with the guild > > does not, of itself, constitute a contract. And even if it does, it > > may not be possible to protect the guild from a future argument that > > the UCC may be affiliated *only* according the the UWA Act and by-laws, > > and that to add requirements to those by-laws through contract would > > be ultra vires. The semi-public nature of the Guild makes this a very > > murky area. Quite frankly I found administrative law to be incredibly > > tedious and I believe I failed it quite heroically. > > > > So to sum up: > > > > 1. The MOU is probably not a contract and can't bind the UCC; > > 2. Any contract based on using affiliation as consideration might > > fail as the UCC may, under existing by-laws, be entitled to it > > according to a process and not an exchangeable right; > > 3. If the Guild tried to make the MOU a condition of affiliation it > > might be acting ultra vires; and > > 4. A judge could easily ignore points 1-3 and rule that the Act > > overrides all this jiggery-pokery. > > > > My advice to the committee is to talk to some MPs about amending one > > or both of the conflicting Acts. I'm pretty sure they won't bite. > > Minor procedural amendments like these go through on the nod quite > > frequently. > > > > Cheers, > > > > JC. > > > From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 12 15:14:03 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 15:14:03 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> <5FA2538A-F617-4801-B463-5C61FF4C4627@gmail.com> Message-ID: I should also point out that the guild could legally receive our funds/assets as a charitable institution, but writing the MOU to take advantage of this fact will not work because; 1. Our dissolution clause was not written to include that possibility and would require a constitution change. 2. It would not solve the Guild's alleged problem of no administrative members being available to wind up the club properly. The Guild would still have to be able to demonstrate similarity of objects to the Commissioner before he/she releases the funds to them (which they can't do without some serious 'linguistic gymnastics'). Bob On Thu, 12 May 2011, Bob Adamson wrote: > According to Rachel Lee, Wayne has documents that show the Guild is > incorporated with the Department of Commerce. I realise the Australian > Business Register says something to the contrary, but the ABR also says > that UCC is an "other incorporated entity", so I wouldn't put much stock > in it. I did specifically raise this issue with Rachel at the meeting I > had with her, and it was dismissed for the above reason. > > Whether or not the Guild is incorporated under the Act is relevant, but I > think the first MOU can be dismissed as weak/unenforceable even without > pointing out this fact. > > [BOB] > > On Thu, 12 May 2011, Daniel Axtens wrote: > > > Erm. > > > > Rather than addressing the points in that (it will suffice to say that I accept unquestioningly pt 4, dispute pt 1, find pt 2 interesting and don't offer an opinion on pt 3), I now think it might be better to bring the concerns in my email to Rachel, and see what the guild thinks. > > > > [BOB]: I believe you raised the status of the Guild with Rachel at some point? Can you provide any more details about the Guild's POV? > > > > BR, > > Daniel > > > > On 12/05/2011, at 1:12 AM, Jacques Chester wrote: > > > > > Daniel; > > > > > > I'm not a lawyer either, but the general rule of thumb is that you > > > can't use contractual terms to evade the clear meaning of an Act > > > of Parliament. Both the MOU and your own phrasing would probably > > > fail in this event. > > > > > > Furthermore, the MOU is not a contract in my reading. It couldn't > > > bind on the future committee and there's no enforcement mechanism > > > save for being expelled in the guild. In the case that the UCC > > > was winding up I doubt this would seem like a very grave threat. > > > > > > Without looking into the details of the guild arrangements, it is > > > also possible that the affiliation relationship with the guild > > > does not, of itself, constitute a contract. And even if it does, it > > > may not be possible to protect the guild from a future argument that > > > the UCC may be affiliated *only* according the the UWA Act and by-laws, > > > and that to add requirements to those by-laws through contract would > > > be ultra vires. The semi-public nature of the Guild makes this a very > > > murky area. Quite frankly I found administrative law to be incredibly > > > tedious and I believe I failed it quite heroically. > > > > > > So to sum up: > > > > > > 1. The MOU is probably not a contract and can't bind the UCC; > > > 2. Any contract based on using affiliation as consideration might > > > fail as the UCC may, under existing by-laws, be entitled to it > > > according to a process and not an exchangeable right; > > > 3. If the Guild tried to make the MOU a condition of affiliation it > > > might be acting ultra vires; and > > > 4. A judge could easily ignore points 1-3 and rule that the Act > > > overrides all this jiggery-pokery. > > > > > > My advice to the committee is to talk to some MPs about amending one > > > or both of the conflicting Acts. I'm pretty sure they won't bite. > > > Minor procedural amendments like these go through on the nod quite > > > frequently. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > JC. > > > > > > From danielax at gmail.com Thu May 12 15:28:47 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 15:28:47 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> <5FA2538A-F617-4801-B463-5C61FF4C4627@gmail.com> Message-ID: > I should also point out that the guild could legally receive our > funds/assets as a charitable institution, but writing the MOU to take > advantage of this fact will not work because; > > 1. Our dissolution clause was not written to include that possibility and > would require a constitution change. > 2. It would not solve the Guild's alleged problem of no administrative > members being available to wind up the club properly. The Guild would > still have to be able to demonstrate similarity of objects to the > Commissioner before he/she releases the funds to them (which they can't do > without some serious 'linguistic gymnastics'). > > Bob Yeah, I've been thinking about that. Do you think the Guild would be OK with us changing to the charitable purposes dissolution clause? 1. I don't think an SGM is that onerous a requirement. 2. No MOU will solve the second problem, so unless the Guild proposes some additional requirement to fix it, I'm happy to allow them to take the risk. I think if they were really concerned about that they'd have made it a more prominent feature of the proposed MOU. At any rate, (and as much as it makes me feel like a conspiracy-theorist republican) do you think it would be possible for us to sight the documents the Guild claims it has? [DJA] (Who was born in Fremantle, honest!) From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 12 17:00:02 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 17:00:02 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 24 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110512090002.355136006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: atyndall : Ask not what door can do for me, ask what I can do for door. Ashley Tyndall Door Nomination 2011. Where were you when Ashley Tyndall nominated himself for door? atyndall : Now that you've recovered from the intense voting that was involved in Ashley Tyndall Door Nomination 2011, we must discuss backups. Namely the offsite backups. Namely the offsite backups that don't exist. I motion that we compel wheel to setup offsite backups, possibly in arts. atyndall : Finally (hopefully), I would like some web hosting to give to another outstanding UWA club of which I have absolutely no conflict of interest in. From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 12 17:09:57 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 17:09:57 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> <5FA2538A-F617-4801-B463-5C61FF4C4627@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 May 2011, Daniel Axtens wrote: > Yeah, I've been thinking about that. Do you think the Guild would be OK with us changing to the charitable purposes dissolution clause? > > 1. I don't think an SGM is that onerous a requirement. True, but the DoC discourages having the clause in a constitution because of the ambiguity of 'charitible institution/purposes'. You may recall they advised us of this at the incorporation info night that the executive attended. Seeing as they don't have lawyers check the constitution and are simply operating off a list of guidelines, I'm not sure whether they would reject a constitution on those grounds. > 2. No MOU will solve the second problem, so unless the Guild proposes some additional requirement to fix it, I'm happy to allow them to take the risk. I think if they were really concerned about that they'd have made it a more prominent feature of the proposed MOU. Under S 36 of the Associations Incorporation Act 1987, if the incorporation of a club is declared to be cancelled because it's defunct, the property of the club vests in the Commissioner. Also, under Subsection 36.3 of of the same act, the Commissioner only has discretion once the debts and liabilities of the club have been paid. Essentially, using the debt method in the MOU would take any choice out of the Commissioners hands, and would relieve the guild of the responsibility of having to apply for our funds as any other charity would. > At any rate, (and as much as it makes me feel like a conspiracy-theorist republican) do you think it would be possible for us to sight the documents the Guild claims it has? Sure, drop Wayne an email if you want, he's pretty reasonable about these things I find. Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 13 11:00:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110513030001.137E56006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: atyndall : Ask not what door can do for me, ask what I can do for door. Ashley Tyndall Door Nomination 2011. Where were you when Ashley Tyndall nominated himself for door? atyndall : Now that you've recovered from the intense voting that was involved in Ashley Tyndall Door Nomination 2011, we must discuss backups. Namely the offsite backups. Namely the offsite backups that don't exist. I motion that we compel wheel to setup offsite backups, possibly in arts. atyndall : Finally (hopefully), I would like some web hosting to give to another outstanding UWA club of which I have absolutely no conflict of interest in. tpg : A snack/coke run was done, reimburse [BOB] $371.82 zanchey : buy a D-Link DIR-825 (as detailed on tech@) - $175-200 From danielax at gmail.com Fri May 13 15:40:55 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 15:40:55 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: References: <7CB1D845-20C5-4113-A75C-6AB9D7B325F4@gmail.com> <3040227F-34EB-4DD3-817E-3432813C193B@theducks.org> <380D69BD-482C-4665-AAE0-D1B05641F3B3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <85103892-84AE-4793-8880-49F093FDBA54@gmail.com> Further, we could avoid pts 2 and 3 by making the agreement a deed under seal, which, if I remember Contract 1 correctly, avoids the requirement of consideration. It would also need to be done after incorporation. On 12/05/2011, at 1:12 AM, Jacques Chester wrote: > Daniel; > > I'm not a lawyer either, but the general rule of thumb is that you > can't use contractual terms to evade the clear meaning of an Act > of Parliament. Both the MOU and your own phrasing would probably > fail in this event. > > Furthermore, the MOU is not a contract in my reading. It couldn't > bind on the future committee and there's no enforcement mechanism > save for being expelled in the guild. In the case that the UCC > was winding up I doubt this would seem like a very grave threat. > > Without looking into the details of the guild arrangements, it is > also possible that the affiliation relationship with the guild > does not, of itself, constitute a contract. And even if it does, it > may not be possible to protect the guild from a future argument that > the UCC may be affiliated *only* according the the UWA Act and by-laws, > and that to add requirements to those by-laws through contract would > be ultra vires. The semi-public nature of the Guild makes this a very > murky area. Quite frankly I found administrative law to be incredibly > tedious and I believe I failed it quite heroically. > > So to sum up: > > 1. The MOU is probably not a contract and can't bind the UCC; > 2. Any contract based on using affiliation as consideration might > fail as the UCC may, under existing by-laws, be entitled to it > according to a process and not an exchangeable right; > 3. If the Guild tried to make the MOU a condition of affiliation it > might be acting ultra vires; and > 4. A judge could easily ignore points 1-3 and rule that the Act > overrides all this jiggery-pokery. > > My advice to the committee is to talk to some MPs about amending one > or both of the conflicting Acts. I'm pretty sure they won't bite. > Minor procedural amendments like these go through on the nod quite > frequently. > > Cheers, > > JC. > From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 13 16:15:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 16:15:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 45 minute warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110513081501.9C8746006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: atyndall : Ask not what door can do for me, ask what I can do for door. Ashley Tyndall Door Nomination 2011. Where were you when Ashley Tyndall nominated himself for door? atyndall : Now that you've recovered from the intense voting that was involved in Ashley Tyndall Door Nomination 2011, we must discuss backups. Namely the offsite backups. Namely the offsite backups that don't exist. I motion that we compel wheel to setup offsite backups, possibly in arts. atyndall : Finally (hopefully), I would like some web hosting to give to another outstanding UWA club of which I have absolutely no conflict of interest in. tpg : A snack/coke run was done, reimburse [BOB] $371.82 zanchey : buy a D-Link DIR-825 (as detailed on tech@) - $175-200 matches : It will be inevitable that the MOU is discussed, so since no one added it, I will add it. atyndall : In the interest of me having lots and lots of items on the agenda, Madge wants UCC and CSSE to watch each other's backs at SOC meetings and sign for each other if either club somehow doesn't attend. atyndall : Do I wish to add an item to the agenda? Yes I do. Do I have anything further to add to the agenda? No I don't. From frenchie at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 13 18:22:41 2011 From: frenchie at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (James French) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:22:41 +0800 Subject: [committee] [ucc] Minutes of Meeting 13th May 2011 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > - [ASH] Web hosting for the Atheist and Agnostic society > ?- [MRD] motions to discuss this on the lists, [CJS] seconds. Unanimous. > ? ?- Discussion to occur on committee@ for price list for hosting for other > ? ? ?clubs Traditionally done by the other club buying a UCC membership (guild member price iirc) and using an associated account living in /home/other/ but that sort of arrangement probably won't work after incorporation. It'd be rather clean and easy to have the other club purchase hosting at the value of a nominated level of membership annually (say the discounted $10 one). I'd pin the price to the cost of membership (not that it's changed in a long time). Given just how little effort is required in maintaining that sort of setup, (ten or fifteen minutes here and there until it's setup) I'd be very disappointed if we tried to charge anything approaching commercial rates. Typically this sort of thing requires negligible disk space and it's not like we pay for network or power. I'd suggest it'd be appropriate to write up a standard form for the purpose and include a couple of conditions eg. such as obeying the UWA network guidelines and we reserve the right to terminate accounts for inappropriate/excessive traffic. F. From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 13 21:03:34 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 21:03:34 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Involving Freshers in the Club Message-ID: Hi all, It appears to me that the number of freshers that we have managed to retain in the club this year is pretty poor. Even if this is just in my imagination, you can't deny that the number of fresher focussed events we have run this semester is lacking. I have been tasked with sending some ramblings to the list with some ideas of what we can do. Anyway, here goes: -send an email to all freshers (NOT to their ucc address) reminding them to come to the club, activate their accounts, sign up to the lists, and come to our events (anyone know how we might technically do this?). Also when did we last do a bulk signup of freshers from the memberdb to the announce list? -hold a second Learn 2 Linux night, where we cover some of the more fun stuff like setting up a server and making it accessible to the world. I'm happy to do this on Wednesday May 25. -more lans. This is purely limited by enthusiasm and the number of people willing to organise them. -I have more ideas, but I feel that we're limited by the number of people willing to take the initiative to run events at the moment. Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Sat May 14 11:27:57 2011 From: matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Sam Moore) Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 11:27:57 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] [unisfa-committee] Quiz Night (fwd) Message-ID: For those who are interested, here is the continuing Quiz Night discussion. For those who are not interested, do not read this email. Summary: - 11/08/11 was suggested (by me) as a date, and no one on ucc committee had a problem with it. - Jeremy Cole spoke to Gary and booked the date. - However, there may be an issue with the band competition which runs in August - The concern raised by Nick is that the Activities Officer might take our booking away because of this - The concern raised by Violet is that it might be too much hassle to work around the band competition anyway - If we are forced to or choose to avoid the band competition, we can't book the tavern until at least September - Band competition runs from 3:00pm to 7:00pm; we can only have the tavern to 11:00pm, so I asked if anyone who had prior experience thought that this gave us enough time to set up and run the quiz night. - [DJA] and I are still working on questions - I asked if [DJA] and I could do anything else to help I am aware that lots of other things need to be organised, like sponsors and tickets and advertising etc, but I think we need a fixed date first. Feedback/Comments/Trolling/Flames? PS: The band competition was not mentioned on any of the calendars/schedules that I looked at before suggesting the date. Sam Moore [SZM] (matches) Ordinary Committee Member 2011 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 11:06:28 +0800 (WST) From: Sam Moore To: Nicholas Browning Cc: Violet Squirrel , UniSFA Committee , jacob Subject: Re: [unisfa-committee] Quiz Night Hello, If there is an issue with that date (11/08), I'd imagine that we'd just have to do it in September; unless it would be preferable to have the quiz night the week before? I wasn't aware of the band competition when I suggested week 2; it is not actually on the tavern schedule yet. http://www.guild.uwa.edu.au/home/tavern According to the guild website, the band competition heats run for 3 weeks, on Thursdays and fridays from Week 2 to Week 4, from 3:00pm to 7:00pm. http://www.guild.uwa.edu.au/home/activities/ncbc So, I would imagine that we wouldn't be able to start any earlier than 8:00pm? Does anyone know how much time it normally takes for the whole running of the quiz night? I think someone said that the latest we can have the tavern is 11:00pm, so it might be cutting things a bit fine to have the event on the same day as the band competition. Anyway Daniel Axtens (dja) and I have started writing questions; if there is anything else we can help with at this stage, let me know. Sam Moore [SZM] On Thu, 12 May 2011, Nicholas Browning wrote: > The band thing went into the following week as well and I'm led to believe > the other Thursdays were booked until September. > > From: Violet Squirrel > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 9:31 PM > To: Nicholas Browning > Cc: UniSFA Committee ; jacob ; Sam Moore > Subject: Re: [unisfa-committee] Quiz Night > > Was that the only night 'available' around that time? It sounds like it'd be > easier to just have it a different week and not have to worry about the > whole band thing. > > On 12 May 2011 21:29, Nicholas Browning wrote: > So, Jeremy talked to Gary to book the quiz night (he's done it > every year apparently) and we've got Thursday 11th August (Week > 2) booked with Gary for Quiz Night, there are a few things we'll > have to work around as the tav band competition (whatever it's > called) is on before us but it won't upset anything much anyway. > ? > The main problem may be if the Activities Officer decides to take the > booking from us as Gary's unsure whether we can actually use the night > given it's a day for the band thing (Jeremy, correct me if/when I'm > wrong). In which case many problems may arise. Jeremy or I will inform > the others organising the quiz if this happens and we'll panic then. > ? > Nic > > _______________________________________________ > UniSFA-Committee mailing list > UniSFA-Committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au > http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/unisfa-committee > > > From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Sun May 15 14:54:19 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 14:54:19 +0800 Subject: [committee] Prices for Club Hosting Message-ID: Several proposals: - Membership price (or $25 suggested by Bob) p/a for hosting equivalent to what members can do; or - $50 for VPS What are people's opinions? Also, I think the billing period should be in late Sem 1, to avoid the chaos that is sometimes AGMs and new committees. -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110515/6466e10f/attachment.htm From mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Sun May 15 20:35:23 2011 From: mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Matt Didcoe) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 20:35:23 +0800 Subject: [committee] Prices for Club Hosting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few thoughts/questions: 1) We can offer no SLA given the constantly changing nature of our setup and systems - this needs to be communicated to anyone who wants to use us 2) The guild offer free hosting[1] - whats the point in using UCC also offering it (sure we'd probably run ours a little bit better...but do we want the responsibility?) 3) Space for VMs - what resources are we offering for this $50 VPS? Where can we put them? I'm not saying its a bad idea - I think the guild hosting is terrible[2] (case in point, the fact they got fucked over by failing to secure their server and club websites were down for ages). We need to put some thought into it and I'd like some of my fellow wheel colleagues to weigh in with any thoughts they might have (now CC'd). Cheers, Matt [MRD] Vice-President (2011) / Wheel member [1] http://www.guild.uwa.edu.au/home/subcouncils2/soc/forms/hosting?pageid=6458 [2] In case the guild come reading, that's my opinion, not UCCs...and you knew it already [3] Oh look, footnotes! And it's not an email from [DJA] On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Ash Tyndall wrote: > Several proposals: > > Membership price (or?$25 suggested by Bob) p/a?for hosting equivalent to > what members can do; or > $50 for VPS > > What are people's opinions? > Also, I think the billing period should be in late Sem 1, to avoid the chaos > that is sometimes AGMs and new committees. > > -- > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > 2011 Fresher Rep > > From filter79 at gmail.com Sun May 15 20:42:23 2011 From: filter79 at gmail.com (Anil Sharma) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 20:42:23 +0800 Subject: [committee] Prices for Club Hosting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7AFFC18B-2F5A-4372-ABCF-AD5FA82116A9@gmail.com> Now that the VC is paying for our traffic, I do not think it is wise for the club to have commercial hosting. On 15/05/2011, at 14:54, Ash Tyndall wrote: > Several proposals: > Membership price (or $25 suggested by Bob) p/a for hosting equivalent to what members can do; or > $50 for VPS > What are people's opinions? > > Also, I think the billing period should be in late Sem 1, to avoid the chaos that is sometimes AGMs and new committees. > > -- > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > 2011 Fresher Rep > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110515/2f197990/attachment.htm From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Sun May 15 22:15:19 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 22:15:19 +0800 Subject: [committee] Fwd: Prices for Club Hosting In-Reply-To: References: <7AFFC18B-2F5A-4372-ABCF-AD5FA82116A9@gmail.com> Message-ID: Whoops. Missed the Reply to all button. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ash Tyndall Date: Sun, May 15, 2011 at 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [committee] Prices for Club Hosting To: Anil Sharma It's hardly commercial, seeing as it's limited to UWA Clubs; which are basically non-profit organisations. On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Anil Sharma wrote: > Now that the VC is paying for our traffic, I do not think it is wise for > the club to have commercial hosting. > > > > On 15/05/2011, at 14:54, Ash Tyndall wrote: > > Several proposals: > > - Membership price (or $25 suggested by Bob) p/a for hosting equivalent > to what members can do; or > - $50 for VPS > > What are people's opinions? > > Also, I think the billing period should be in late Sem 1, to avoid the > chaos that is sometimes AGMs and new committees. > > -- > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > 2011 Fresher Rep > > -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110515/7e101294/attachment.htm From matt at ucc.asn.au Sun May 15 22:25:21 2011 From: matt at ucc.asn.au (Matt Johnston) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 22:25:21 +0800 Subject: [committee] [ucc] Minutes of Meeting 13th May 2011 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110515142521.GL7103@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 06:22:41PM +0800, James French wrote: > I'd suggest it'd be appropriate to write up a standard form for the > purpose and include a couple of conditions eg. such as obeying the UWA > network guidelines and we reserve the right to terminate accounts for > inappropriate/excessive traffic. Hi All, [ASH]: don't start new threads. Hosting for clubs is a good idea. A sensible use for free VC traffic too. That said, (replying to the broken thread now) we probably don't want to be running VPSes for too many people we don't know well. Random boxes get owned due to non-updated-Drupal- modules/bad PHP mailer scripts/crap SSH passwords etc, and then UCC is sending spam out and gets blacklisted - not good. I think that would be the main thing to impress on the standard form - if people are going to use dynamic websites then they need to be secure about them. We don't have that many problems with UCC members themselves, probably because the people who are playing with that sort of thing are more likely to secure them anyway. Matt From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 16 11:06:40 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 11:06:40 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] [ucc] Minutes of Meeting 13th May 2011 In-Reply-To: <20110515142521.GL7103@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20110515142521.GL7103@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: On Sun, 15 May 2011, Matt Johnston wrote: > On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 06:22:41PM +0800, James French wrote: > > I'd suggest it'd be appropriate to write up a standard form for the > > purpose and include a couple of conditions eg. such as obeying the UWA > > network guidelines and we reserve the right to terminate accounts for > > inappropriate/excessive traffic. > > Hi All, > > [ASH]: don't start new threads. > > Hosting for clubs is a good idea. A sensible use for free VC > traffic too. > > That said, (replying to the broken thread now) we probably > don't want to be running VPSes for too many people we don't > know well. Random boxes get owned due to non-updated-Drupal- > modules/bad PHP mailer scripts/crap SSH passwords etc, and > then UCC is sending spam out and gets blacklisted - not > good. > > I think that would be the main thing to impress on the > standard form - if people are going to use dynamic websites > then they need to be secure about them. > > We don't have that many problems with UCC members > themselves, probably because the people who are playing with > that sort of thing are more likely to secure them anyway. > > Matt > Currently, the only vps that I'm aware of for non-member hosting is custardrum, which is the cssc server. It is restricted to freenets only, and heavily firewalled. As far as I'm aware we haven't charged for it for the last few years because nobody noticed that spook's membership lapsed. That said, it only does a tiny amount of traffic and most people don't know it's there. The only other club I know that gets some hosting from us is unisfa for its wiki and catalogue, which we also haven't charged for in some time. As much as I think both UCC and the 'client' club could benefit from a charged vps service, I don't think we've considered the practicalities of it. If we're going to charge more than a standard membership fee, we should open these vps's up to all traffic, as which point we notice that we have no regular traffic monitoring or cpu/memory limits for our virtual machines. Eugh. At least if we don't charge exhorbitantly for these services we can put a stop to things if they get out of control. So, let's maintain the status quo for vps's - keep them locked down, and only charge a standard $25 membership fee. I say $25 because all clubs can afford this, and we get no grants from the guild for having a club as a member. I don't think we should offer them for free, since that devalues ucc memberships and is a kick in the teeth to those people who pay their membership fees in order to get services. As for boring old web hosting for clubs, what I propose is this: --clubs that want web hosting have one contact who's name is attached to a ucc account with their club as the username (eg a club called uass would have the username uass, with the account name set to Ashley Tyndall). --the club's shell would be set to rssh, which limits them to file transfers only, and as I understand it, prevents shell access. This means that the password to the account can be shared with other members of the club without the potential for serious abuse. --this setup should ensure that the clubs site is not forgotten and left sitting there for several years, since the account will come under normal locking procedures --ucc will have a record of who to contact about problems with the name attached to the account, instead of records being comments in our bind config files --these sites can be open to the entire internet, since wheel is responsible for the security --$25, for the same reasons listed in my vps section Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 16 17:00:01 2011 From: committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 4 day warning: Notice of Ordinary Committee Meeting Message-ID: <20110516090001.36D9F6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> An Ordinary Committee Meeting will be held as usual at 5pm this Friday in the UCC Clubroom, unless otherwise stated. From matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Wed May 18 20:54:16 2011 From: matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Sam Moore) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 20:54:16 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Soc Meeting (fwd) Message-ID: Behold, my upside down report on the Soc meeting! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 20:20:12 +0800 From: matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au To: committee at ucc.asn.au Subject: Soc Meeting Behold, my report on the Soc meeting! [DJA] was also in attendance. Sam Moore [SZM] OCM 2011 -------------- next part -------------- [Attachment stripped: Original attachment type: "application/pdf", name: "SOC18501.PDF"] From matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Wed May 18 21:06:45 2011 From: matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 21:06:45 +0800 Subject: [committee] Soc Meeting Attempt 3 Message-ID: <20110518210645.494377upxoaa0jgg@secure.ucc.asn.au> Behold, the report on the Soc meeting! With 10% more attachments. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SOC18501.PDF Type: application/pdf Size: 194223 bytes Desc: The notes Url : http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110518/8f1a5010/attachment-0001.pdf From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 19 17:00:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 24 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110519090001.2EC7C6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: atyndall : Pricing for club web hosting. Variety of suggestions. I'd support normal membership price (credit trs80 and more) for basic web services. $50p/a for VPS service (suggested by bob). I do however suggest we make the bills due around the middle or end of Sem 1; as AGMs shake up committees and the bills could potentially get lost if they coincide with that perioud. pseudoabdul : I (Oliver O'Neill) wish to apply for door. From prothoss at gmail.com Thu May 19 17:09:30 2011 From: prothoss at gmail.com (Conrad Pogson) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:09:30 +0800 Subject: [committee] 24 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda In-Reply-To: <20110519090001.2EC7C6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20110519090001.2EC7C6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: Apologies from me, I'm heading into work tomorrow so it's unlikely I'll be able to make it to the club before 5. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Committee Agenda Daemon < committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> wrote: > The current agenda is: > > * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher > Rep) > > * Machine Technical Reports > - Servers > - Network > - Desktops > - New equipment > > * Drinks and Snacks > > * Mail, Guild and SOC > > * Action Items > > * General Business: > > atyndall : Pricing for club web hosting. Variety of suggestions. I'd > support normal membership price (credit trs80 and more) for basic web > services. $50p/a for VPS service (suggested by bob). I do however suggest we > make the bills due around the middle or end of Sem 1; as AGMs shake up > committees and the bills could potentially get lost if they coincide with > that perioud. > pseudoabdul : I (Oliver O'Neill) wish to apply for door. > -- Conrad Pogson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110519/c3faea93/attachment.htm From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Thu May 19 20:10:07 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 20:10:07 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers Message-ID: I have received complaints from freshers regarding the policy that freshers cannot be on groups until Semester 2 of any given year. Freshers feel this policy is arbitrary and is not justifiable. For example, the fresher rep has a precedented exemption from this policy. In this way, the policy assigns a higher level of trust to a role that is not elected on trust. The policy is thus inconsistent and hard to logically defend. I would ask the committee to present the reasons for this decision and to consider a policy where *every* person is reviewed for groups based on trust and never due to arguably meaningless labels. -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110519/4b25657d/attachment.htm From danielax at gmail.com Thu May 19 21:44:44 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 21:44:44 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3CC5B98A-BBC5-49A0-8DC2-4F67B936B5D5@gmail.com> > I would ask the committee to present the reasons for this decision and to consider a policy where *every* person is reviewed for groups based on trust and never due to arguably meaningless labels. This is arguably already the case. I think "no freshers until sem 2" is better understood as received wisdom rather than a hard and fast rule. AIUI, the reasoning is this: - 3 months is not a long time to get to know someone; and - UCC group membership entitles people to considerable powers (dooring, dealing with money), and scary amounts of responsibility (dooring, dealing with money, security); and, - UCCans are a a paranoid lot who don't make friends easily, and whose trust is difficult to gain and trivial to lose IMO freshers who wish to apply for groups should; but they should expect extra scrutiny. I would suggest just being around ucc is not enough, but this is my opinion only. [dja] From vanbujm at gmail.com Thu May 19 20:16:36 2011 From: vanbujm at gmail.com (Jonathan Van buren) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 20:16:36 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I agree with Ash, and would like to add that we NEED more coke members. So after talking to BOB i did some number crunching on the coke-logs. TPG does a casual 20% of all add balance transactions, with me and VOX comprising another 15%. Another alarming thing that needs to be addressed is the 10% of the additions are done by wheel members using root! I would also like to mention that as we all know being on coke is a pretty damn thankless job so anyone actually wants to take this responsibility should be given fair trail. Regards Jonathan Van Buren [ODF] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110519/dfd1be3d/attachment.htm From stryker at tpgi.com.au Thu May 19 21:52:46 2011 From: stryker at tpgi.com.au (Christopher Bobridge) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 21:52:46 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ash, The policy is a shorthand way of needing six months to assess someone and their character before being comfortable placing them in a position of trust. What is arbitrary, meaningless or inconsistent in that? As a member of those groups, you are answerable to committee. As fresher rep, you are answerable to the membership. And I suspect you're selling yourself short in saying that you were not elected on at least some measure of trust. Chris On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Ash Tyndall wrote: > I have received complaints from freshers regarding the policy that freshers > cannot be on groups until Semester 2 of any given year. > Freshers feel this policy is arbitrary and is not justifiable. > For example, the fresher rep has a precedented exemption from this policy. > In this way, the policy assigns a higher level of trust to a role that is > not elected on trust. The policy is thus inconsistent and hard to logically > defend. > I would ask the committee to present the reasons for this decision and to > consider a policy where *every* person is reviewed for groups based on trust > and never due to arguably meaningless labels. > > -- > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > 2011 Fresher Rep > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110519/bc9d5bef/attachment.htm From vanbujm at gmail.com Thu May 19 21:51:46 2011 From: vanbujm at gmail.com (Jonathan Van buren) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 21:51:46 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: <3CC5B98A-BBC5-49A0-8DC2-4F67B936B5D5@gmail.com> References: <3CC5B98A-BBC5-49A0-8DC2-4F67B936B5D5@gmail.com> Message-ID: I agree to this, but should stress the "should expect extra scrutiny", implying that applications to groups from freshers should not be rejected purely baised not the fact they are a fresher, which was what i was hearing from certain people. [odf] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110519/c372d235/attachment.htm From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 19 23:07:40 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 23:07:40 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 19 May 2011, Jonathan Van buren wrote: >Another alarming thing that needs to be addressed is the 10% of the >additions are done by wheel members using root! I don't see how this is alarming or needs to be addressed. If you can't trust wheel, you can't trust anybody, and I don't like what your statement implies. Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From danielax at gmail.com Thu May 19 23:40:57 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 23:40:57 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> Another alarming thing that needs to be addressed is the 10% of the >> additions are done by wheel members using root! > > I don't see how this is alarming or needs to be addressed. If you can't > trust wheel, you can't trust anybody, and I don't like what your statement > implies. Again I find myself advocating due process. :/ I was under the impression that the new version of coke designed to reduce dispense as root. Furthermore, not knowing any wheel members who are not also coke members, I'm unsure what could be accomplished by dispensing as root as opposed to dispensing as self? Feel free to enlighten me. I also distinctly remember being told off by someone (trs80, I think) for using dispense as root, and am a better person as a result of the reproof :P [DJA] From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 19 23:53:30 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 23:53:30 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 19 May 2011, Daniel Axtens wrote: > >> Another alarming thing that needs to be addressed is the 10% of the > >> additions are done by wheel members using root! > > > > I don't see how this is alarming or needs to be addressed. If you can't > > trust wheel, you can't trust anybody, and I don't like what your statement > > implies. > > Again I find myself advocating due process. :/ > > I was under the impression that the new version of coke designed to reduce dispense as root. Furthermore, not knowing any wheel members who are not also coke members, I'm unsure what could be accomplished by dispensing as root as opposed to dispensing as self? Feel free to enlighten me. > > I also distinctly remember being told off by someone (trs80, I think) for using dispense as root, and am a better person as a result of the reproof :P > > [DJA] The root user is an admin that can add/subtract money, set an account to an arbitrary value, and create accounts. The new system was designed so that root can't dispense items. This was aimed at preventing wheel members from accidentally dispensing an item as root (which charges the root account) when they weren't paying attention to what shell they had open, and unknowingly getting free items. There is no gain or loss for wheel members adding/subtracting credit as root - it still has to be applied to a non-root account and the safe still has to balance at the end of the week. I would point out that only 51 'dispense adds' have been done as root this year (the other 44 were new users being given credit), of which 22 were myself. Not exactly a huge number. Personally, my 'dispense adds' are generally due to the fact that I'm in the middle of doing something on a server when someone asks me for credit, and I want to get back to what I was doing with minimal effort. Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From atyndall at gmail.com Fri May 20 00:06:26 2011 From: atyndall at gmail.com (Ash Tyndall) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 00:06:26 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am personally of the opinion that a clear-cut audit trail is always nice, trust or not. There is always the potential to need to investigate a dispense log entry, but if time has past since the event, the wheel member involved may have even forgotten that they were responsible for the dispense. If we're going to keep logs, we should be doing it properly. I would support modifying dispense so that in general, it cannot perform actions as root; probably with the exemption of automated events like initial membership credit. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Bob Adamson wrote: > On Thu, 19 May 2011, Daniel Axtens wrote: > > > >> Another alarming thing that needs to be addressed is the 10% of the > > >> additions are done by wheel members using root! > > > > > > I don't see how this is alarming or needs to be addressed. If you can't > > > trust wheel, you can't trust anybody, and I don't like what your > statement > > > implies. > > > > Again I find myself advocating due process. :/ > > > > I was under the impression that the new version of coke designed to > reduce dispense as root. Furthermore, not knowing any wheel members who are > not also coke members, I'm unsure what could be accomplished by dispensing > as root as opposed to dispensing as self? Feel free to enlighten me. > > > > I also distinctly remember being told off by someone (trs80, I think) for > using dispense as root, and am a better person as a result of the reproof :P > > > > [DJA] > > The root user is an admin that can add/subtract money, set an account to > an arbitrary value, and create accounts. The new system was designed so > that root can't dispense items. This was aimed at preventing wheel members > from accidentally dispensing an item as root (which charges the root > account) when they weren't paying attention to what shell they had open, > and unknowingly getting free items. > > There is no gain or loss for wheel members adding/subtracting credit as > root - it still has to be applied to a non-root account and the safe still > has to balance at the end of the week. I would point out that only 51 > 'dispense adds' have been done as root this year (the other 44 were new > users being given credit), of which 22 were myself. Not exactly a huge > number. Personally, my 'dispense adds' are generally due to the fact that > I'm in the middle of doing something on a server when someone asks me for > credit, and I want to get back to what I was doing with minimal effort. > > Bob Adamson > UCC President > > |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | > |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | > | ---Peter's Laws | > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/5091ad6a/attachment.htm From matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 00:29:09 2011 From: matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Sam Moore) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 00:29:09 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 1. I think we are off topic, but I agree with Ash 2. http://www.ucc.asn.au/infobase/policies/guidelines.ucc That page lists the group admission guidelines. It does not mention any restrictions on group applications for freshers. That being said, it also neglects to mention the LOLDOG test for door members. I have had complaints that this page is hard to find. Should we consider relocating it? 3. I was not aware of any recent group applications that had been rejected due to this "policy". 4. People do not get on groups by complaining that they are not on a group. This attitude irritates me. [SZM] On Fri, 20 May 2011, Ash Tyndall wrote: > I am personally of the opinion that a clear-cut audit trail is always nice, > trust or not. There is always the potential to need to investigate a > dispense log entry, but if time has past since the event, the wheel member > involved may have even forgotten that they were responsible for the > dispense. If we're going to keep logs, we should be doing it properly. I > would support modifying dispense so that in general, it cannot perform > actions as root; probably with the exemption of automated events like > initial membership credit. > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Bob Adamson wrote: > On Thu, 19 May 2011, Daniel Axtens wrote: > > > >> Another alarming thing that needs to be addressed is the 10% of > the > > >> additions are done by wheel members using root! > > > > > > I don't see how this is alarming or needs to be addressed. If you > can't > > > trust wheel, you can't trust anybody, and I don't like what your > statement > > > implies. > > > > Again I find myself advocating due process. :/ > > > > I was under the impression that the new version of coke designed to > reduce dispense as root. Furthermore, not knowing any wheel members > who are not also coke members, I'm unsure what could be accomplished > by dispensing as root as opposed to dispensing as self? Feel free to > enlighten me. > > > > I also distinctly remember being told off by someone (trs80, I > think) for using dispense as root, and am a better person as a result > of the reproof :P > > > > [DJA] > > The root user is an admin that can add/subtract money, set an account > to > an arbitrary value, and create accounts. The new system was designed > so > that root can't dispense items. This was aimed at preventing wheel > members > from accidentally dispensing an item as root (which charges the root > account) when they weren't paying attention to what shell they had > open, > and unknowingly getting free items. > > There is no gain or loss for wheel members adding/subtracting credit > as > root - it still has to be applied to a non-root account and the safe > still > has to balance at the end of the week. I would point out that only 51 > 'dispense adds' have been done as root this year (the other 44 were > new > users being given credit), of which 22 were myself. Not exactly a huge > number. Personally, my 'dispense adds' are generally due to the fact > that > I'm in the middle of doing something on a server when someone asks me > for > credit, and I want to get back to what I was doing with minimal > effort. > > Bob Adamson > UCC President > > |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous ? ? > ? ?| > |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when > necessary" | > | ---Peter's Laws ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? > ? ?| > > > > From vanbujm at gmail.com Fri May 20 01:22:22 2011 From: vanbujm at gmail.com (Jonathan Van buren) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 01:22:22 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: @BOB: I just found it odd that there was so many balance adds by root, i it seemed to me that the point of the logs was so see clearly who is adding what to where and having a group of anonymous root adds counteracts this, it was never a issue of trust. @SZM: You are correct that no applications have been denied lately, it was just that the way people put it to Cain his application was a waste of time because he was a first year, and i can verify(i was there) that many people he was asking when trying to submit his LOLCAT application seemed to dismiss him. The reason i brought this up is i was worried that word would get around that freshers should not even bother trying to get into groups because of this, and i personally believe that this would be a significantly negative thing to insinuate. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/15872008/attachment.htm From danielax at gmail.com Fri May 20 01:25:55 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 01:25:55 +0800 Subject: [committee] Dispense as root (was Re: Restrictions on group applications for freshers) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <583A94DD-0D23-4996-BFEA-51FC21FA4A55@gmail.com> This is now irredeemably off topic. > There is no gain or loss for wheel members adding/subtracting credit as > root - it still has to be applied to a non-root account and the safe still > has to balance at the end of the week. I would point out that only 51 FWIW, these unattributed transactions add up to $217.65 [1] Who would we chase if the safe _didn't_ balance? I realise full well that having a username attached to an operation is no guarantee of truthfulness, and that wheel are by definition highly trusted.[2] Nonetheless, I feel dispense add as root is completely unnecessary and I am yet to see a compelling use-case for it. So, lest I be accused of ceaseless complaining, I have written and attached patches to prevent it. Also, leafing through the code reinforced my moderate disappointment with the cabal nature of the admin group created by the new system (USER_FLAG_ADMIN) but that's a discussion for another time. [DJA] Footnotes: [1] grep "by root" ~coke/cokelog|grep "money in safe"|grep -v BOB|awk 'BEGIN {sum=0}; {sum += $7}; END {print sum}' This is included to demonstrate the power of awk. Come to whatever l2linux it is that [BOB] is arranging for me to speak at to learn this sort of stuff. [2] Although, interestingly, not to the point of having a safe key in the MR. Technical Notes for the patches: - I'm slightly hamstrung by the fact that CokeBank doesn't have a USER_FLAG_ROOT: I've added a direct test against the username instead. I notice this is already done in server/dispense.c (although it is labeled an evil hack). - I noticed USER/PASS authentication sets Client->Username, but AUTOAUTH doesn't. I fixed this. - I haven't updated the client to understand the error returned: it will tell root that [s]he isn't in coke. This is, aiui, a one line fix if done hackily, and ~5 lines to do better. - The patched code compiles cleanly, but is untested. This is left as an exercise for the maintainer. :P -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 0001-Save-username-in-Client-struct-in-Server_Cmd_AUTOAUT.patch Type: application/octet-stream Size: 709 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/673bf681/attachment-0002.obj -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 0002-Prevent-root-from-using-dispense-add.patch Type: application/octet-stream Size: 758 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/673bf681/attachment-0003.obj From danielax at gmail.com Fri May 20 01:42:11 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 01:42:11 +0800 Subject: [committee] Dispense as root (was Re: Restrictions on group applications for freshers) In-Reply-To: <583A94DD-0D23-4996-BFEA-51FC21FA4A55@gmail.com> References: <583A94DD-0D23-4996-BFEA-51FC21FA4A55@gmail.com> Message-ID: <04C8B99B-BB75-4841-9D1F-FF48BDC37DD6@gmail.com> s/cabal/undocumented/ > Also, leafing through the code reinforced my moderate disappointment with the cabal nature of the admin group created by the new system (USER_FLAG_ADMIN) but that's a discussion for another time. [DJA] From shmookey at shmookey.net Fri May 20 03:29:28 2011 From: shmookey at shmookey.net (Luke Williams) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 03:29:28 +0800 Subject: [committee] Dispense as root (was Re: Restrictions on group applications for freshers) In-Reply-To: <583A94DD-0D23-4996-BFEA-51FC21FA4A55@gmail.com> References: <583A94DD-0D23-4996-BFEA-51FC21FA4A55@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: > Who would we chase if the safe _didn't_ balance? I realise full well that having a username attached to an operation is no guarantee of truthfulness, and that wheel are by definition highly trusted. Good point. Years ago the note field in a deposit record was used to store a unique number written on a little zip-lock pouch for each deposit. If the safe didn't balance, each deposit could be verified. It was a lot of work for the treasurer. Does the safe get rigorously checked at the moment? Does it usually match the expected amount perfectly? Luke > > So, lest I be accused of ceaseless complaining, I have written and attached patches to prevent it. > > Also, leafing through the code reinforced my moderate disappointment with the cabal nature of the admin group created by the new system (USER_FLAG_ADMIN) but that's a discussion for another time. > > [DJA] > > Footnotes: > [1] grep "by root" ~coke/cokelog|grep "money in safe"|grep -v BOB|awk 'BEGIN {sum=0}; {sum += $7}; END {print sum}' > This is included to demonstrate the power of awk. Come to whatever l2linux it is that [BOB] is arranging for me to speak at to learn this sort of stuff. > > [2] Although, interestingly, not to the point of having a safe key in the MR. > > Technical Notes for the patches: > - I'm slightly hamstrung by the fact that CokeBank doesn't have a USER_FLAG_ROOT: I've added a direct test against the username instead. I notice this is already done in server/dispense.c (although it is labeled an evil hack). > - I noticed USER/PASS authentication sets Client->Username, but AUTOAUTH doesn't. I fixed this. > - I haven't updated the client to understand the error returned: it will tell root that [s]he isn't in coke. This is, aiui, a one line fix if done hackily, and ~5 lines to do better. > - The patched code compiles cleanly, but is untested. This is left as an exercise for the maintainer. :P > > > From mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 07:14:22 2011 From: mattman at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Matt Didcoe) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 07:14:22 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Oh good, more list drama! I feel that perhaps this thread didn't get off to the right start, so lets forget all about coke for now and address the actual point Ashley raised :) 1) To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time "complaints" have been made regarding this longstanding UCC practice. 2) Chris says the next bit quite well, so I refer you back to his email :) 3) I would add to Chris' email, that respect is something that, much like trust, is earned over time and this respect is very important, particularly for door members who are tasked with maintaining order and trying to get people to leave as required. 4) Jon - who are these people who were telling him it was a waste of time (feel free to email names off list) Applications after this period are assessed on trust already, with the addition of some basic questioning to ensure the applicant understands the exactly what the role entails. I don't feel anything needs to be changed in the way we assess people for roles within the club (its worked pretty darn well for the last god knows how many years) - if there's someone really exceptional and keen, they'll stick around and do little bits of pieces for the first six months, happily waiting for the opportunity to step up. Remember, being on one of our groups is not an entitlement you get when you sign up. [MRD] On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Jonathan Van buren wrote: > @BOB: I just found it odd that there was so many balance adds by root, i it > seemed to me that the point of the logs was so see clearly who is adding > what to where and having a group of anonymous root adds counteracts this, it > was never a issue of trust. > > @SZM: You are correct that no applications have been denied lately, it was > just that the way people put it to Cain his application was a waste of time > because he was a first year, and i can verify(i was there)? that many people > he was asking when trying to submit his LOLCAT application seemed to dismiss > him. The reason i brought this up is i was worried that word would get > around that freshers should not even bother trying to get into groups > because of this, and i personally believe that this would be a significantly > negative thing to insinuate. > From tpg at ucc.asn.au Fri May 20 08:24:01 2011 From: tpg at ucc.asn.au (John Hodge) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 08:24:01 +0800 Subject: [committee] Dispense as root (was Re: Restrictions on group applications for freshers) In-Reply-To: References: <583A94DD-0D23-4996-BFEA-51FC21FA4A55@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DD5B4A1.2030706@ucc.asn.au> Sadly, the documentation for the new system is a little lacking :S I tend to check the safe every week, and it tends to balance (after a little chasing), and when it doesn't (except last week) there's more in there than is expected (probably memberships) Part of the reason that root was allowed to do use `dispense add` is for the initial balance, but that could be hacked in with another string compare on the add message. John Hodge [TPG] 2011 Treasurer On 20/05/11 03:29, Luke Williams wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: >> Who would we chase if the safe _didn't_ balance? I realise full well that having a username attached to an operation is no guarantee of truthfulness, and that wheel are by definition highly trusted. > > Good point. Years ago the note field in a deposit record was used to > store a unique number written on a little zip-lock pouch for each > deposit. If the safe didn't balance, each deposit could be verified. > It was a lot of work for the treasurer. > > Does the safe get rigorously checked at the moment? Does it usually > match the expected amount perfectly? > > Luke > >> >> So, lest I be accused of ceaseless complaining, I have written and attached patches to prevent it. >> >> Also, leafing through the code reinforced my moderate disappointment with the cabal nature of the admin group created by the new system (USER_FLAG_ADMIN) but that's a discussion for another time. >> >> [DJA] >> >> Footnotes: >> [1] grep "by root" ~coke/cokelog|grep "money in safe"|grep -v BOB|awk 'BEGIN {sum=0}; {sum += $7}; END {print sum}' >> This is included to demonstrate the power of awk. Come to whatever l2linux it is that [BOB] is arranging for me to speak at to learn this sort of stuff. >> >> [2] Although, interestingly, not to the point of having a safe key in the MR. >> >> Technical Notes for the patches: >> - I'm slightly hamstrung by the fact that CokeBank doesn't have a USER_FLAG_ROOT: I've added a direct test against the username instead. I notice this is already done in server/dispense.c (although it is labeled an evil hack). >> - I noticed USER/PASS authentication sets Client->Username, but AUTOAUTH doesn't. I fixed this. >> - I haven't updated the client to understand the error returned: it will tell root that [s]he isn't in coke. This is, aiui, a one line fix if done hackily, and ~5 lines to do better. >> - The patched code compiles cleanly, but is untested. This is left as an exercise for the maintainer. :P >> >> >> From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Fri May 20 09:00:56 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 09:00:56 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think the heart of my problem with the six-months rule is I see it as a double-standard: It only applies to some people, and those who are exempt are IMHO not by virtue of their position any more worthy of this exemption than anyone else. i.e. We trust the Fresher Rep earlier, but the Fresher Rep is basically just an enthusiastic club member. Logically, we should trust any similarly enthusiastic club member regardless of any position they may or may not hold. I would agree that the current system works, but that does not mean it cannot be improved. Do people understand what I'm getting at? On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 7:14 AM, Matt Didcoe wrote: > Oh good, more list drama! > > I feel that perhaps this thread didn't get off to the right start, so > lets forget all about coke for now and address the actual point Ashley > raised :) > > 1) To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time "complaints" > have been made regarding this longstanding UCC practice. > 2) Chris says the next bit quite well, so I refer you back to his email :) > 3) I would add to Chris' email, that respect is something that, much > like trust, is earned over time and this respect is very important, > particularly for door members who are tasked with maintaining order > and trying to get people to leave as required. > 4) Jon - who are these people who were telling him it was a waste of > time (feel free to email names off list) > > Applications after this period are assessed on trust already, with the > addition of some basic questioning to ensure the applicant understands > the exactly what the role entails. I don't feel anything needs to be > changed in the way we assess people for roles within the club (its > worked pretty darn well for the last god knows how many years) - if > there's someone really exceptional and keen, they'll stick around and > do little bits of pieces for the first six months, happily waiting for > the opportunity to step up. Remember, being on one of our groups is > not an entitlement you get when you sign up. > > [MRD] > > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Jonathan Van buren > wrote: > > @BOB: I just found it odd that there was so many balance adds by root, i > it > > seemed to me that the point of the logs was so see clearly who is adding > > what to where and having a group of anonymous root adds counteracts this, > it > > was never a issue of trust. > > > > @SZM: You are correct that no applications have been denied lately, it > was > > just that the way people put it to Cain his application was a waste of > time > > because he was a first year, and i can verify(i was there) that many > people > > he was asking when trying to submit his LOLCAT application seemed to > dismiss > > him. The reason i brought this up is i was worried that word would get > > around that freshers should not even bother trying to get into groups > > because of this, and i personally believe that this would be a > significantly > > negative thing to insinuate. > > > -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/eadc29fe/attachment.htm From danielax at gmail.com Fri May 20 10:29:47 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:29:47 +0800 Subject: [committee] Dispense as root (was Re: Restrictions on group applications for freshers) In-Reply-To: <4DD5B4A1.2030706@ucc.asn.au> References: <583A94DD-0D23-4996-BFEA-51FC21FA4A55@gmail.com> <4DD5B4A1.2030706@ucc.asn.au> Message-ID: On 20/05/2011, at 8:24 AM, John Hodge wrote: > Sadly, the documentation for the new system is a little lacking :S > > I tend to check the safe every week, and it tends to balance (after a little chasing), and when it doesn't (except last week) there's more in there than is expected (probably memberships) > > Part of the reason that root was allowed to do use `dispense add` is for the initial balance, but that could be hacked in with another string compare on the add message. > Surely that could be done as part of the useradd command; or even the user set balance command? Also, I'm quite impressed with the simplicity of the system: I was able to go from git checkout to patch in a couple of hours, and I didn't see any truly awful code. Well done John. [DJA] > John Hodge [TPG] > 2011 Treasurer > > On 20/05/11 03:29, Luke Williams wrote: >> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: >>> Who would we chase if the safe _didn't_ balance? I realise full well that having a username attached to an operation is no guarantee of truthfulness, and that wheel are by definition highly trusted. >> >> Good point. Years ago the note field in a deposit record was used to >> store a unique number written on a little zip-lock pouch for each >> deposit. If the safe didn't balance, each deposit could be verified. >> It was a lot of work for the treasurer. >> >> Does the safe get rigorously checked at the moment? Does it usually >> match the expected amount perfectly? >> >> Luke >> >>> >>> So, lest I be accused of ceaseless complaining, I have written and attached patches to prevent it. >>> >>> Also, leafing through the code reinforced my moderate disappointment with the cabal nature of the admin group created by the new system (USER_FLAG_ADMIN) but that's a discussion for another time. >>> >>> [DJA] >>> >>> Footnotes: >>> [1] grep "by root" ~coke/cokelog|grep "money in safe"|grep -v BOB|awk 'BEGIN {sum=0}; {sum += $7}; END {print sum}' >>> This is included to demonstrate the power of awk. Come to whatever l2linux it is that [BOB] is arranging for me to speak at to learn this sort of stuff. >>> >>> [2] Although, interestingly, not to the point of having a safe key in the MR. >>> >>> Technical Notes for the patches: >>> - I'm slightly hamstrung by the fact that CokeBank doesn't have a USER_FLAG_ROOT: I've added a direct test against the username instead. I notice this is already done in server/dispense.c (although it is labeled an evil hack). >>> - I noticed USER/PASS authentication sets Client->Username, but AUTOAUTH doesn't. I fixed this. >>> - I haven't updated the client to understand the error returned: it will tell root that [s]he isn't in coke. This is, aiui, a one line fix if done hackily, and ~5 lines to do better. >>> - The patched code compiles cleanly, but is untested. This is left as an exercise for the maintainer. :P >>> >>> >>> From adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 10:41:18 2011 From: adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Adrian Chadd) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:41:18 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110520024118.GA29375@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Damned zipf distributions. Adrian On Thu, May 19, 2011, Jonathan Van buren wrote: > I agree with Ash, and would like to add that we NEED more coke members. So > after talking to BOB i did some number crunching on the coke-logs. TPG does > a casual 20% of all add balance transactions, with me and VOX comprising > another 15%. Another alarming thing that needs to be addressed is the 10% of > the additions are done by wheel members using root! I would also like to > mention that as we all know being on coke is a pretty damn thankless job so > anyone actually wants to take this responsibility should be given fair > trail. > > > > Regards > Jonathan Van Buren [ODF] From susie at ucc.asn.au Fri May 20 10:52:33 2011 From: susie at ucc.asn.au (Susie Johnston) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:52:33 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110520025232.GA13630@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> No freshers in door or coke until Semester 2 is a rule of thumb, not a hard and fast rule. Just like no freshers in wheel. There has been freshers in wheel before, and there will be again, but as a general rule we don't allow them in. If someone joins UCC in third year and isn't well known to members, they would probably be rejected to join coke in the first six months too. It isn't really to do with labels, it's to do with trust. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 08:10:07PM +0800, Ash Tyndall wrote: > I have received complaints from freshers regarding the policy that freshers > cannot be on groups until Semester 2 of any given year. > Freshers feel this policy is arbitrary and is not justifiable. > For example, the fresher rep has a precedented exemption from this policy. > In this way, the policy assigns a higher level of trust to a role that is > not elected on trust. The policy is thus inconsistent and hard to logically > defend. > I would ask the committee to present the reasons for this decision and to > consider a policy where *every* person is reviewed for groups based on trust > and never due to arguably meaningless labels. > > -- > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > 2011 Fresher Rep From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 11:00:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 11:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110520030001.EB8996006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: atyndall : Pricing for club web hosting. Variety of suggestions. I'd support normal membership price (credit trs80 and more) for basic web services. $50p/a for VPS service (suggested by bob). I do however suggest we make the bills due around the middle or end of Sem 1; as AGMs shake up committees and the bills could potentially get lost if they coincide with that perioud. pseudoabdul : I (Oliver O'Neill) wish to apply for door. From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 11:04:17 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 11:04:17 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The fresher rep, by virtue of their position, has more opportunities to prove their trustworthiness than other freshers. For example the fresher rep is able to accept membership forms, and organise club events such as lans. Ash: you in particular have been able to prove to us that you care about the club and are prepared to put some work into it - you've actually done a coke run (or two?), you help fill up the coke machine, you've helped fix a clubroom machine, you have root on heathred already, you've helped organise/run a lan, you were there on oday helping us, and you're an active webmaster. All of these facts meant we can justify ignoring precedent and put you on door - other than taking memberships (a rare occurence for the fresher rep), we haven't put you in a money handling role. The fresher who is applying for coke has done none of these things for the club, and yet seems to think he's guaranteed to get on coke if he does LOLCAT and nothing else. This alone says to me that he needs to wait for longer so he gets to know how the club works. On a side note, it was me that told Cain we don't accept freshers onto groups before semester two. It's the same thing I was told when I joined the club and I'm better for it - it meant I took actions to *prove* I was worth putting on coke/door. Bob On Fri, 20 May 2011, Ash Tyndall wrote: > I think the heart of my problem with the six-months rule is I see it as a double-standard: It only applies to some people, and those who are exempt are IMHO not by virtue of their position any more > worthy of this exemption than anyone else. i.e. We trust the Fresher Rep earlier, but the Fresher Rep is basically just an enthusiastic club member. Logically, we should trust any similarly enthusiastic > club member regardless of any position they may or may not hold. > I would agree that the current system works, but that does not mean it cannot be improved.? > > Do people understand what I'm getting at? > > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 7:14 AM, Matt Didcoe wrote: > Oh good, more list drama! > > I feel that perhaps this thread didn't get off to the right start, so > lets forget all about coke for now and address the actual point Ashley > raised :) > > 1) To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time "complaints" > have been made regarding this longstanding UCC practice. > 2) Chris says the next bit quite well, so I refer you back to his email :) > 3) I would add to Chris' email, that respect is something that, much > like trust, is earned over time and this respect is very important, > particularly for door members who are tasked with maintaining order > and trying to get people to leave as required. > 4) Jon - who are these people who were telling him it was a waste of > time (feel free to email names off list) > > Applications after this period are assessed on trust already, with the > addition of some basic questioning to ensure the applicant understands > the exactly what the role entails. I don't feel anything needs to be > changed in the way we assess people for roles within the club (its > worked pretty darn well for the last god knows how many years) - if > there's someone really exceptional and keen, they'll stick around and > do little bits of pieces for the first six months, happily waiting for > the opportunity to step up. Remember, being on one of our groups is > not an entitlement you get when you sign up. > > [MRD] > > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Jonathan Van buren wrote: > > @BOB: I just found it odd that there was so many balance adds by root, i it > > seemed to me that the point of the logs was so see clearly who is adding > > what to where and having a group of anonymous root adds counteracts this, it > > was never a issue of trust. > > > > @SZM: You are correct that no applications have been denied lately, it was > > just that the way people put it to Cain his application was a waste of time > > because he was a first year, and i can verify(i was there)? that many people > > he was asking when trying to submit his LOLCAT application seemed to dismiss > > him. The reason i brought this up is i was worried that word would get > > around that freshers should not even bother trying to get into groups > > because of this, and i personally believe that this would be a significantly > > negative thing to insinuate. > > > > > > > -- > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > 2011 Fresher Rep > > > From vanbujm at gmail.com Fri May 20 13:18:36 2011 From: vanbujm at gmail.com (Jonathan Van buren) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 13:18:36 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The thing is Cain (and other freshers) HAS shown to be trustworthy on many occasions. Yes his list does not stand up to Ash's but he is an active club member (he is here almost as much as me), he is polite and actually fairly well knowing. For instance i recall one time he needed a refund for a bad dispense (this was shortly after the new dispense came in) and when he asked me I said i was not quite sure how to use the new refund system. What surprised me was instead of giving up or harassing me to learn to do it, he simply looked up how to do it himself then showed me. The only reason i am emailing back and forth for this cause is i do NOT believe he is being given a fair application here. He displays many of the traits that would make him and excellent coke memeber (and a good door member for that fact) and yet is being turned down because of this stigma that 6 months is the minimum time to earn peoples trust. I'm not sure about other people but i say he HAS earned many peoples trust and has time and time again shown himself to be more responsible then i would expect from any fresher (and most other club memebers). While i do not speak for everyone i sencerily wish that you atleast give him the chance to speak for himself at a committee meeting and maybe attempt to get to know him as a person before you shut him down over this 6 month thing. [odf] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/960c1ffa/attachment.htm From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 13:51:35 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 13:51:35 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Coke Group Application In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 17 May 2011, Cain Nixey wrote: > Hey, Cain aka BlargZap aka [BLZ] here. I am submitting my formal application for Coke Group. Following is my completed LOLCAT (at 4:16 pm on Tuesday May 17): What is your current account balance? > 1. $0.57 Correct What is the current account balance of the account zanchey? >2. $14.84 Correct Where is the log of dispensed drinks kept? > 3. ~coke/cokelog. Correct What was the last drink that trs80 dispensed? > 4. Pinapple Fanta. Correct Name someone who currently has keys to the vending machine. > 5. [BOB] Correct Slot 0 is out of drinks, but it doesn't have an emptiness detector. As a Coke member, what do you do? > 6. Lock the slot and inform someone with keys that the slot is empty. Incorrect. The question asks what you would do as a coke member, the assumption being that you have access to a key. How do you put a space (not an underscore) in a slot name, for example, how would you rename a slot to vanilla coke? > 7. put the slot name in quotation marks. Correct What is wrong with this command?: dispense acct Zanchey +500 "money in safe" > 8. Capital Z on zanchey. Correct. This question can now be removed since the new dispense is case sensitive everywhere. Who has permissions to edit the snack machine slot names and prices? > 9. People listed in coke.controllers on ~coke. Namely dja, vox, vanbujm, tpg etc. Incorrect for both old and new dispense. What does naming slots to stupid (non-standard) names break? > 10. Coke scripts, and accounting. Makes it difficult to grep stuff. Partially correct, though ucc.asn.au/dispense is currently broken anyway. > I can attend the meeting this friday, so I will see you there. > > Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From shmookey at shmookey.net Fri May 20 14:04:09 2011 From: shmookey at shmookey.net (Luke Williams) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:04:09 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Come on guys, this is going around in circles. If a prospective group member doesn't know committee well enough to feel confident to apply and defend their application, what good will it do to bring it to vote at a committee meeting? Trustworthiness is in the eye of the beholder; the beholder that matters is committee. Vouch for the applicant or raise your concerns. Realise that trust comes from experience and quit trying to reason why anyone is trustworthy. Luke On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Jonathan Van buren wrote: > The thing is Cain (and other freshers) HAS shown to be trustworthy on many > occasions. Yes his list does not stand up to Ash's but he is an active club > member (he is here almost as much as me), he is polite and actually fairly > well knowing. For instance i recall one time? he needed a refund for a bad > dispense (this was shortly after the new dispense came in) and when he asked > me I said i was not quite sure how to use the new refund system. What > surprised me was instead of giving up or harassing me to learn to do it, he > simply looked up how to do it himself then showed me. The only reason i am > emailing back and forth for this cause is i do NOT believe he is being given > a fair application here. He displays many of the traits that would make him > and excellent coke memeber (and a good door member for that fact) and yet is > being turned down because of this stigma that 6 months is the minimum time > to earn peoples trust. I'm not sure about other people but i say he HAS > earned many peoples trust and has time and time again shown himself to be > more responsible then i would expect from any fresher (and most other club > memebers). While i do not speak for everyone i sencerily wish that you > atleast give him the chance to speak for himself at a committee meeting and > maybe attempt to get to know him as a person before you shut him down over > this 6 month thing. > > [odf] > From susie at ucc.asn.au Fri May 20 14:07:07 2011 From: susie at ucc.asn.au (Susie Johnston) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:07:07 +0800 Subject: [committee] Coke Group Application In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110520060707.GA4174@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 01:51:35PM +0800, Bob Adamson wrote: > Slot 0 is out of drinks, but it doesn't have an emptiness detector. As a > Coke member, what do you do? > > 6. Lock the slot and inform someone with keys that the slot is empty. > Incorrect. The question asks what you would do as a coke member, the > assumption being that you have access to a key. Not all coke members have keys. From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 14:12:41 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:12:41 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Coke Group Application In-Reply-To: References: <20110520060707.GA4174@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 May 2011, Jonathan Van buren wrote: > In fact?the keys are normally in the Machine room which is not?accessible?by non-wheel members. > By that logic a non-wheel coke member would never fill up the machine. This is not the case, and finding excuses to not do things is not what we want in a coke a member. Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From vanbujm at gmail.com Fri May 20 14:07:59 2011 From: vanbujm at gmail.com (Jonathan Van buren) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:07:59 +0800 Subject: [committee] Coke Group Application In-Reply-To: <20110520060707.GA4174@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20110520060707.GA4174@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: > > In fact the keys are normally in the Machine room which is > not accessible by non-wheel members. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/4e55a2d4/attachment.htm From vanbujm at gmail.com Fri May 20 14:30:22 2011 From: vanbujm at gmail.com (Jonathan Van buren) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:30:22 +0800 Subject: [committee] Coke Group Application In-Reply-To: References: <20110520060707.GA4174@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: -.- I think you are straw manning him a bit here. I think what can be gleamed from this response is he recognizes he needs a wheel member to get the keys, and his response is what should be done before getting the keys. If you want to be like that he could inform himself (who has access to the keys as a coke member) that the slot is empty and then fix it. I think it may just be a better idea to wait for the committee meeting at this point... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110520/6310bdef/attachment.htm From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 16:15:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 16:15:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 45 minute warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110520081501.D917B6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: atyndall : Pricing for club web hosting. Variety of suggestions. I'd support normal membership price (credit trs80 and more) for basic web services. $50p/a for VPS service (suggested by bob). I do however suggest we make the bills due around the middle or end of Sem 1; as AGMs shake up committees and the bills could potentially get lost if they coincide with that perioud. pseudoabdul : I (Oliver O'Neill) wish to apply for door. From matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 20 19:43:44 2011 From: matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Sam Moore) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 19:43:44 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Your door group application Message-ID: Hi, Apparently you have successfully completed LOLDOG, and emailed the door group? If so, could you please forward it to me, as I do not seem to have got the email. Unfortunately your application was not voted on at the committee meeting; current policy is that you have to attend the committee meeting for your application to be voted on. Thanks, Sam Moore [SZM] (matches) OCM 2011 From adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Sat May 21 12:51:27 2011 From: adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Adrian Chadd) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 12:51:27 +0800 Subject: [committee] Restrictions on group applications for freshers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110521045127.GB29375@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> This is starting to sound like an election platform for next year... Adrian On Fri, May 20, 2011, Jonathan Van buren wrote: > The thing is Cain (and other freshers) HAS shown to be trustworthy on many > occasions. Yes his list does not stand up to Ash's but he is an active club > member (he is here almost as much as me), he is polite and actually fairly > well knowing. For instance i recall one time he needed a refund for a bad > dispense (this was shortly after the new dispense came in) and when he asked > me I said i was not quite sure how to use the new refund system. What > surprised me was instead of giving up or harassing me to learn to do it, he > simply looked up how to do it himself then showed me. The only reason i am > emailing back and forth for this cause is i do NOT believe he is being given > a fair application here. He displays many of the traits that would make him > and excellent coke memeber (and a good door member for that fact) and yet is > being turned down because of this stigma that 6 months is the minimum time > to earn peoples trust. I'm not sure about other people but i say he HAS > earned many peoples trust and has time and time again shown himself to be > more responsible then i would expect from any fresher (and most other club > memebers). While i do not speak for everyone i sencerily wish that you > atleast give him the chance to speak for himself at a committee meeting and > maybe attempt to get to know him as a person before you shut him down over > this 6 month thing. > > [odf] From astro at jaram.net.au Sat May 21 15:28:01 2011 From: astro at jaram.net.au (Jeremy Cole) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 15:28:01 +0800 Subject: [committee] Coke Group Application In-Reply-To: References: <20110520060707.GA4174@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: Yeah I gotta say I agree here... The question doesn't provide enough information to give the answer you expect. If you want people to make assumptions like that then I doubt many people before this point have ever gotten that question right. I think the thing we are hearing loud and clear is that there isn't enough coke members in the club currently and being as pedantic as you are being is exacerbating this problem Bob. On 20/05/2011, at 14:30, Jonathan Van buren wrote: > -.- I think you are straw manning him a bit here. I think what can be gleamed from this response is he recognizes he needs a wheel member to get the keys, and his response is what should be done before getting the keys. If you want to be like that he could inform himself (who has access to the keys as a coke member) that the slot is empty and then fix it. > > I think it may just be a better idea to wait for the committee meeting at this point... From matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Sat May 21 16:22:48 2011 From: matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Sam Moore) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 16:22:48 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Your door group application In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, LOLDOG is a set of questions for prospective door members; you should try to answer them all as best as you can. It stands for something silly (LOLCAT is the coke group equivelant). The emailing to doorgroup is to give door members a chance to ask you any questions not on LOLDOG that they feel are important, and raise any objections (or support you!). You don't actually have to come to a meeting if it is physically impossible, but its probably a good idea to try and come. Anyway, there's no harm in reapplying (there was no vote either way at the last meeting). Sam [SZM] For convenience, I've put LOLDOG below. Goodluck! ==== Open Questions ==== Why do you want to be on door? ==== Can You Find And Read The Policy Questions ==== Where would you find door policy? Where would you find the Door Note? Why do we have door members? What are the 3 key attributes of door members: There's a fire in the machine room. What do you do? (Please include who you should contact at the university, with a phone number. Hint: there's a sign in the Cameron Hall stairway that tells you.) Who should you contact with questions/concerns about the policy? ==== Other Useful Things To Know ==== (ask someone who is on door or committee for help if you have no idea) What is the coke machine code to unlock the door? If someone is violent, refuses to leave, or otherwise poses a danger to people or property, you should call UWA Security. What is their number? Give both the emergency and non-emergency numbers. (Hint: this information is posted above the phone in the clubroom.) At what time of night will security come round to kick you out if Committee hasn't got a letter from the Guild permitting people to be in Cameron Hall? Please briefly describe how the door system works (what runs on what, what programs, what hardware): If for some reason you cannot dispense door from the snack machine, how else should you open the door (there are at least 2 methods)? Who has clubroom keys on their person and who is able to get the *clubroom* key out from guild reception? On Sat, 21 May 2011, Oliver O'Neill wrote: > Yeah I wasn't sure about all this policy stuff, I just asked sulix and he > said to send an email and put it on the agenda and I thought you guys > discuss it. What is LOLDOG? I tried to send the email but it wouldn't go > through. I will forward it to you now if you want but is there any point? > > Oliver > > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Sam Moore > wrote: > Hi, > > Apparently you have successfully completed LOLDOG, and emailed > the door group? > > If so, could you please forward it to me, as I do not seem to > have got the email. > > Unfortunately your application was not voted on at the committee > meeting; current policy is that you have to attend the committee > meeting for your application to be voted on. > > Thanks, > Sam Moore [SZM] (matches) > OCM 2011 > > > > From committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 23 17:00:01 2011 From: committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 4 day warning: Notice of Ordinary Committee Meeting Message-ID: <20110523090001.8F41D6006B@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> An Ordinary Committee Meeting will be held as usual at 5pm this Friday in the UCC Clubroom, unless otherwise stated. From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Tue May 24 22:23:08 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 22:23:08 +0800 Subject: [committee] Club Hosting: VPSs vs Integration Message-ID: On IRC, [JCF] has raised an objection to the necessity of VPSs, even for the use case that UASS has. It was suggested that due to the infrequency of the request, and the lack of issues with account locking in the past, that the security benefits of integration outweigh the advantages of VPS-based service isolation. "We're probably better off sticking with what we do well rather than introducing something we're less likely to maintain in the interests of security." I am personally for integration; it makes it much easier. However, what is committee's opinion? Is this something that should be brought to tech@ or wheel@ for discussion? -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110524/f5b4c5b4/attachment.htm From danielax at gmail.com Wed May 25 00:34:33 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 00:34:33 +0800 Subject: [committee] Which mailing list to use; was Re: Club Hosting: VPSs vs Integration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > I am personally for integration; it makes it much easier. However, what is committee's opinion? Is this something that should be brought to tech@ or wheel@ for discussion? Yes: tech@ first, then committee@ once there's either a clear solution or at least a clear, reasoned set of alternatives. The following hierarchy is basically is how I decide on the mailing list. It is by no means a perfect or universally accepted system. (I'm sending this to committee@ because I'd like comment, as debate about what list to send stuff to is becoming more common for some reason. If it gains some broader measure of acceptance I'll forward it to ucc@ for everyone's edification.) If it's an important announcement: ucc-announce@ (and get a list master to approve it) If it's to do with something technical: is it something all of UCC should know/would be interested in? ucc@ is it something confidential? wheel@ if it's something we need to buy or which needs a formal club decision: Has it been discussed on tech@? committee@ Otherwise: tech@ Otherwise: tech@ If it's to do with door/coke group specifically: If it requires a formal club decision: Has it been discussed on the relevant list? committee@ Otherwise: door/coke Otherwise: door/coke If it's to do with some aspect of the running of the club: (e.g. mail, guild, SOC, policy, constitution, general adminstrivia)? is it something all of UCC should know/would be interested in? ucc@ is it confidential? committee-only@ if it discusses a member personally, particularly in a critical way: is there something committee can do? committee-only@ otherwise, and particularly if it's a private spat between two members, no-one else cares.[1] Otherwise: committee@ If it's something of general interest to at least some club members: (e.g. google talks, general socialising, jobs, etc): ucc@ None of the above: You probably shouldn't be sending it to an ucc mailing list. Best regards, Daniel who has on many occasions been told he's sending stuff to the wrong list [1] This has come up. Committee didn't much care then, and likely cares even less now. From bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Wed May 25 15:26:07 2011 From: bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Bob Adamson) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 15:26:07 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] Which mailing list to use; was Re: Club Hosting: VPSs vs Integration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 25 May 2011, Daniel Axtens wrote: > If it's to do with something technical: > is it something all of UCC should know/would be interested in? ucc@ > is it something confidential? wheel@ > if it's something we need to buy or which needs a formal club decision: > Has it been discussed on tech@? committee@ > Otherwise: tech@ > Otherwise: tech@ Can I also remind people of the hwc@ list for making purchases - it mails hardware (tech@), wheel and committee without spamming doubles to everyone. Bob Adamson UCC President |"Bureaucracy is a challenge to the be conquered with a righteous | |attitude, an intolerance for stupidity, and a bulldozer when necessary" | | ---Peter's Laws | From danielax at gmail.com Thu May 26 11:40:30 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 11:40:30 +0800 Subject: [committee] MOU for UCC In-Reply-To: <50834.121.209.104.182.1305987493.squirrel@mail.guild.uwa.edu.au> References: <50834.121.209.104.182.1305987493.squirrel@mail.guild.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: Hi Rachel, Thanks for your email. Yes, property went quite well - I was pleasantly surprised. We're not entirely convinced by any of your responses: the Acts Incorporation Act is quite clear that funds have to pass to another body incorporated under "the Act" --- which is defined to be the Acts Incorporation Act, not any other act. However, realistically the Guild is the one bearing all the risk with this agreement. UCC agrees with the spirit of the agreement and acknowledges and accepts it's purpose. However, we have brought to your attention that we believe it not to be legally binding or enforceable because: - it is contrary to the Acts Incorporation Act, - it attempts to bind a legal person which does not yet exist, and - it lacks consideration. However, we recognise that there are a lot more law students in the Guild than there are in UCC, so if you are happy with it's legal standing, or are happy for it to exist as a "gentleman's agreement", we will sign it. I reiterate and highlight that UCC has every intention of keeping the agreement, notwithstanding questions of legal enforceability. It's your call. If possible we'd like to get this sorted before exams. Best regards, Daniel Axtens On 21/05/2011, at 10:18 PM, Rachel Lee wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Sorry for my delayed response, I was awaiting feedback from the Managing > Director. Yeah property went well, hope yours also was good. > > The Guild is created as a body corporate under the statute which is why we > do not have the 'inc' therefore we are incorporated by statute not by the > executive. For your purposes this means we fit within the scope an an > incorporated entity in the final clause of your Constitution. > > I will have to chat more with the President if a deed is required but I do > not think this is necessary given the guild is a body corporate. > > Kind regards > > Rachel > > > Daniel Axtens wrote: >> Hi Rachel, >> >> Thanks for drafting the MOU. We agree that it's a good idea and would be >> keen to implement something along these lines. >> >> We just have two fairly simple concerns. >> >> Firstly, I'm not sure if the acts of an unincorporated association can >> bind an incorporated association, even if the incorporated association is >> the successor of the unincorporated one. Whether or not that's the case, >> all that would be needed to avoid any uncertainty is for the agreement to >> be entered into after incorporation. This also gives the added bonus that >> the agreement can be made under the new incorporation's common seal. >> >> The committee would be happy to make personal guarantees that it will vote >> for and sign the new agreement after incorporation if you think that's >> appropriate. >> >> Secondly, I'm not sure if the Guild is actually incorporated under the >> Associations Incorporation Act 1978. As far as I can tell, it's created by >> ss 28(4) of the University of Western Australia Act 1911. This proposition >> is also supported by a brief check of the Australian Business Register >> online. As you're aware, our proposed dissolution clause (which reflects >> the terms of the Act) requires that we transfer our assets to another >> association incorporated under the Act. But rather than getting caught up >> in the technical details of how the Guild is a legal person, I was >> wondering if a different scheme would be better. Specifically, I had >> envisioned the following: >> >> - The club enters into an agreement in the form of a deed (so as not to >> require consideration) after incorporation. >> >> - The agreement states that upon winding up permanently, all the grants >> UCC has ever received will be repaid, with a generous rate of compound >> interest. >> >> - As the exact amount of money granted from the 70s onwards is difficult >> to prove, the deed would provide that the Guild may instead elect to levy >> some set figure per year, say $1500. The aim is to get to a net figure >> that, with compound interest, covers all the club's assets. (Even without >> interest, 1500 x 40 years is already more than the club's net balance.) >> >> - The guild agrees that it will accept a transfer of all the club's >> assets in full discharge of the debt. >> >> - All the provisions you drafted regarding distribution of the funds >> received by the guild (which was a thoughtful gesture, thank you!) would >> remain the same. >> >> If you'd be interested in pursuing this suggestion I'd be happy to draft >> it up properly for you. >> >> By the way, hope your property assignment marks were good! Do you know >> when we're getting the equity midsem back? >> >> Best regards, >> Daniel Axtens >> UCC OCM 2011/token Law student on committee > > > -- > Rachel Lee > Chair of Guild Council > 98th UWA Student Guild > 0423 129 281 > rachel.lee11 at guild.uwa.edu.au > From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Thu May 26 17:00:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 24 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110526090001.586EE6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: bob : make having knowledge of, discussing, watching, playing, singing, or otherwise having involvement with My Little Pony be a doorable offence From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 27 11:00:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 11:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: bob : make having knowledge of, discussing, watching, playing, singing, or otherwise having involvement with My Little Pony be a doorable offence bob : purchase rack nuts and bolts spartanhelmet : My Little Marathon Night bob : dooring of spartanhelmet :P atyndall : Oh yeah, so it's a bad thing when *I* add a whole bunch of crap to the agenda! DOUBLE STANDARDS RANT RANT RANT etc. Also, me for winadmin. From danielax at gmail.com Fri May 27 11:17:10 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 11:17:10 +0800 Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda In-Reply-To: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: <1EB826ED-13B6-4612-8B32-AF74B70F34E5@gmail.com> I have cleaned up the agenda file. Please do not spam it or otherwise abuse it. This is a waste of everyone's time and locking of your account may result. [DJA] On 27/05/2011, at 11:00 AM, Committee Agenda Daemon wrote: > The current agenda is: > > * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) > > * Machine Technical Reports > - Servers > - Network > - Desktops > - New equipment > > * Drinks and Snacks > > * Mail, Guild and SOC > > * Action Items > > * General Business: > > bob : make having knowledge of, discussing, watching, playing, singing, or otherwise having involvement with My Little Pony be a doorable offence > bob : purchase rack nuts and bolts > spartanhelmet : My Little Marathon Night > bob : dooring of spartanhelmet :P > atyndall : Oh yeah, so it's a bad thing when *I* add a whole bunch of crap to the agenda! DOUBLE STANDARDS RANT RANT RANT etc. Also, me for winadmin. From danielax at gmail.com Fri May 27 11:19:04 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 11:19:04 +0800 Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda In-Reply-To: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> References: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: > atyndall : me for winadmin. Hi Ash, Thanks for your application to winadmin. Can you spell out briefly why you'd like to be on winadmin and how this would benefit the club? Best regards, Daniel Axtens From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Fri May 27 11:44:25 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 11:44:25 +0800 Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda In-Reply-To: References: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: There are periods, frequently on weekends/early mornings/late nights, when I door, where there are no winadmins/wheel members in the room. The primary problem ATM, as you may be aware, is Steam. To be able to connect *at all* you must Run as Administrator AFAIK. Then there is the myriaid of circumstances where Steam will need admin credentials to install things, write to annoying registry locations etc. This means that winadmins are in a fairly high demand. There could also be the issue of people leaving Steam open on their account, then switching out (if that is indeed possible), preventing anyone else from using Steam without a winadmin killing the other Steam process or the computer being restarted. The problem of computers also being locked and forgotten by people can be solved without an abrupt power cycle if a winadmin is present. Then there is task of ensuring that the Windows computers have the latest security patches, antivirus updates, etc. This, coupled with the fact that I am and will continue to be a very active door member means that it would benefit the club if I was on winadmin. On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: > > atyndall : me for winadmin. > > Hi Ash, > > Thanks for your application to winadmin. > > Can you spell out briefly why you'd like to be on winadmin and how this > would benefit the club? > > Best regards, > Daniel Axtens > -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110527/7b871afd/attachment.htm From danielax at gmail.com Fri May 27 14:12:57 2011 From: danielax at gmail.com (Daniel Axtens) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 14:12:57 +0800 Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda In-Reply-To: References: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: Hi Ash, Thanks for your answers. One other thing: In your capacity as webmaster, you recently sent live a 'improved' version of [TPG]'s photo,[1] which would have shown up in at least 2 parts of the club's web presence. Now, you argue that you did this with [BOB]'s approval, and I'm not debating that. My question is simply: are you going to play other pranks on us with these extra privileges? If no, why should we believe you? Best regards, [DJA] [1] http://www.ucc.asn.au/infobase/groups/photos/tpg_better.jpg On 27/05/2011, at 11:44 AM, Ash Tyndall wrote: > There are periods, frequently on weekends/early mornings/late nights, when I door, where there are no winadmins/wheel members in the room. > > The primary problem ATM, as you may be aware, is Steam. To be able to connect *at all* you must Run as Administrator AFAIK. Then there is the myriaid of circumstances where Steam will need admin credentials to install things, write to annoying registry locations etc. This means that winadmins are in a fairly high demand. > > There could also be the issue of people leaving Steam open on their account, then switching out (if that is indeed possible), preventing anyone else from using Steam without a winadmin killing the other Steam process or the computer being restarted. > > The problem of computers also being locked and forgotten by people can be solved without an abrupt power cycle if a winadmin is present. > > Then there is task of ensuring that the Windows computers have the latest security patches, antivirus updates, etc. > > This, coupled with the fact that I am and will continue to be a very active door member means that it would benefit the club if I was on winadmin. > > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: > > atyndall : me for winadmin. > > Hi Ash, > > Thanks for your application to winadmin. > > Can you spell out briefly why you'd like to be on winadmin and how this would benefit the club? > > Best regards, > Daniel Axtens > > > > -- > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > 2011 Fresher Rep > From atyndall at ucc.asn.au Fri May 27 14:40:14 2011 From: atyndall at ucc.asn.au (Ash Tyndall) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 14:40:14 +0800 Subject: [committee] 6 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda In-Reply-To: References: <20110527030001.304BC6006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Message-ID: Now I know this isn't overtly stated on the email, but you've made your position quite clear that you don't trust me.[1] Now, putting aside the fact that I am already in two trusted roles (door and webmasters), and that the only person who has expressed a problem with the actions noted is you, I think fundamentally I cannot answer your questions to your satisfaction. No, I won't play pranks on anyone with my winadmin privileges. But how can I make anyone believe me? I think most of committee would be of the opinion that I have sufficient trust to take my word for it. But seeing as you have apparently come to this issue with your decision already made, I will make no attempt to sway you. [1] 2011-05-27 14:19 in #committee On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Daniel Axtens wrote: > Hi Ash, > > Thanks for your answers. > > One other thing: > > In your capacity as webmaster, you recently sent live a 'improved' version > of [TPG]'s photo,[1] which would have shown up in at least 2 parts of the > club's web presence. Now, you argue that you did this with [BOB]'s approval, > and I'm not debating that. My question is simply: are you going to play > other pranks on us with these extra privileges? If no, why should we believe > you? > > Best regards, > [DJA] > > [1] http://www.ucc.asn.au/infobase/groups/photos/tpg_better.jpg > On 27/05/2011, at 11:44 AM, Ash Tyndall wrote: > > > There are periods, frequently on weekends/early mornings/late nights, > when I door, where there are no winadmins/wheel members in the room. > > > > The primary problem ATM, as you may be aware, is Steam. To be able to > connect *at all* you must Run as Administrator AFAIK. Then there is the > myriaid of circumstances where Steam will need admin credentials to install > things, write to annoying registry locations etc. This means that winadmins > are in a fairly high demand. > > > > There could also be the issue of people leaving Steam open on their > account, then switching out (if that is indeed possible), preventing anyone > else from using Steam without a winadmin killing the other Steam process or > the computer being restarted. > > > > The problem of computers also being locked and forgotten by people can be > solved without an abrupt power cycle if a winadmin is present. > > > > Then there is task of ensuring that the Windows computers have the latest > security patches, antivirus updates, etc. > > > > This, coupled with the fact that I am and will continue to be a very > active door member means that it would benefit the club if I was on > winadmin. > > > > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Daniel Axtens > wrote: > > > atyndall : me for winadmin. > > > > Hi Ash, > > > > Thanks for your application to winadmin. > > > > Can you spell out briefly why you'd like to be on winadmin and how this > would benefit the club? > > > > Best regards, > > Daniel Axtens > > > > > > > > -- > > Ash Tyndall [ASH] > > 2011 Fresher Rep > > > > -- Ash Tyndall [ASH] 2011 Fresher Rep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/private/committee/attachments/20110527/e55000bd/attachment.htm From adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 27 15:20:53 2011 From: adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Adrian Chadd) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 15:20:53 +0800 Subject: [committee] apologies Message-ID: <20110527072053.GA11088@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> Hi, Just FYI, I've ordered two of the Dlink DIR-825's. I'll bring UCC's one around when it arrives. I'll leave flashing openwrt, etc up to club members. Thanks, Adrian From committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Fri May 27 16:15:01 2011 From: committee at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 16:15:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 45 minute warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <20110527081501.0F1B86006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> The current agenda is: * Office Bearers Reports (President/Vice Pres/Treasurer/Secretary/Fresher Rep) * Machine Technical Reports - Servers - Network - Desktops - New equipment * Drinks and Snacks * Mail, Guild and SOC * Action Items * General Business: bob : make having knowledge of, discussing, watching, playing, singing, or otherwise having involvement with My Little Pony be a doorable offence bob : purchase rack nuts and bolts spartanhelmet : My Little Marathon Night atyndall : me for winadmin. bob : matches to get ID so we can have tav meetings From committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au Mon May 30 17:00:01 2011 From: committee-only at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Committee Agenda Daemon) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 17:00:01 +0800 (WST) Subject: [committee] 4 day warning: Notice of Ordinary Committee Meeting Message-ID: <20110530090001.B87E16006C@motsugo.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> An Ordinary Committee Meeting will be held as usual at 5pm this Friday in the UCC Clubroom, unless otherwise stated.