<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><!-- start MINUTES_HEADER -->
<style>
P {
font-family: Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt;
}
TD {
font-family: Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt;
}
BODY {
font-family: Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt;
}
PRE {
font-family: monospace;
}
PRE.highlight {
background-color: #CCF;
}
BLOCKQUOTE.highlight {
background-color: #CCF;
}
TD.ucc {
font-weight: bold;
background-color: #006699;
color: white;
text-align: right;
font-size: 16pt;
}
A.uccA {
color: #FFFFFF;
}
TD.highlight {
background-color: #CCF;
font-family: Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt;
}
TD.highlight P {
text-align: center;
}
TD.highlight A:link {
font-weight: bold;
}
P.title {
font-weight: bold;
color: #006699;
text-align: right;
font-size: 16pt;
}
P.intro {
text-align: right;
font-style: italic;
font-size: 10pt;
margin-left: 100;
}
P.contact {
text-align: right;
font-size: 10pt;
}
A {
color: #006699;
text-decoration: none;
}
A:hover {
color: #888888;
}
H1 {
color: #006699;
font-size: 18pt;
font-weight: normal;
}
H2 {
color: #006699;
font-size: 16pt;
font-weight: normal;
}
H3 {
color: #006699;
font-size: 14pt;
font-weight: normal;
}
H4 {
color: #006699;
font-size: 12pt;
font-weight: bold;
}
STRONG {
font-weight: bold;
}
</style><!-- end MINUTES_HEADER -->
<!-- start markdown -->
<h1>Ordinary General Meeting minutes Tuesday 4th September</h1>
<p><strong>Meeting opened 14:10.</strong></p>
<h1>Attendance:</h1>
<h2>Present:</h2>
<ul>
<li>[GOZ] Andrew Gozzard [President]</li>
<li>[JWB] William Chesnutt [Vice President]</li>
<li>[CFE] Zack Wong [Treasurer]</li>
<li>[FVP] Felix von Perger [Secretary]</li>
<li>[LCY] Chien Yi Lo [OCM]</li>
<li>[CHB] Alden Bong [OCM]</li>
<li>[EED] Alistair Mcleod</li>
<li>[NTU] Nick Bannon</li>
<li>[THA] Tom Almeida</li>
<li>[krish36] Tristan Hancock</li>
<li>[jimbo] James Arcus</li>
<li>[jsullivan] Jasmine Sullivan</li>
<li>[ASS] Chase Houghton</li>
<li>[DOC] Vincent Dalstra</li>
<li>[TAY] Taylor Home</li>
<li>[DAS] Donald Sutherland</li>
<li>[PJA] Peter Allnutt</li>
<li>[TBB] Alfred Burgress</li>
<li>[DBA] David Adams</li>
</ul>
<h2>Arrived late:</h2>
<ul>
<li>[GIR] Caira Bayman [Fresher Rep]</li>
<li>[beejay98] Braden Thorne</li>
<li>[guilren] Chris Scherini</li>
<li>[JDN] Jordan Meerwald</li>
</ul>
<h1>Committee reports</h1>
<h2>President's Report</h2>
<ul>
<li>Thankfully not much on the agenda today.</li>
<li><em>[JDN] arrives 14:11.</em></li>
<li>I'm not going to report anything so I don't waste anyone's
time.
<ul>
<li>UCC is somewhat better. Go UCC!</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<h2>Vice President's Report</h2>
<ul>
<li>I continue to be disappointed by the clubs that get
affiliated.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Secretary's Report</h2>
<ul>
<li>Things are going in the right direction.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Treasurer's Report</h2>
<ul>
<li>Accounts:
<ul>
<li>Guild: $2970.26</li>
<li>Mastercard: $81.23</li>
<li>Cheque: $4266.58</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><em>[GIR] and [beejay98] arrive 14:13.</em></li>
<li>[TAY] Who is the biggest spender right now?
<ul>
<li>Question is not answered since details are not
available.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<h2>Fresher Rep's Report</h2>
<ul>
<li>Nothing to report.</li>
</ul>
<h2>OCM Reports</h2>
<ul>
<li>[LCY] has nothing specifically to report.</li>
<li>[CHB] has nothing to report.</li>
</ul>
<h1>Machine Technical Reports</h1>
<ul>
<li>[GOZ] There are machines, we are a technical club, this is
not usually on the agenda.</li>
</ul>
<h1>Election of Ordinary Committee Member</h1>
<ul>
<li>[GOZ] explains what happened; [KAT] retired, and a new OCM
must be elected.</li>
<li>Appointment of returning officers.
<ul>
<li>[GOZ] nominate [NTU] as returning officer.
<ul>
<li>[TBB] seconds.</li>
<li>[NTU] accepts.</li>
<li>Motion passes.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[GOZ] nominates [DAS] as returning officer.
<ul>
<li>[PJA] seconds.</li>
<li>[DAS] accepts.</li>
<li>Motion passes.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] Procedural motion to no longer require seconds on
motions in the meeting.
<ul>
<li>[GOZ] seconds.</li>
<li>Motion passes.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><em>Chris arrives 14:24.</em></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Standing nominations:
<ul>
<li>[TFD] has nominated for the position</li>
<li>[PJA] nominates [TBB], accepts.</li>
<li>[JWB] nominates [THA], accepts.</li>
<li>[TAY] nominates [DBA], accepts.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Candidates give their speeches
<ul>
<li>[TFD], speech delivered in absentia by [GOZ]
<ul>
<li>Tim is a recent graduate from the university</li>
<li>Has been around UCC for 6 years and will be around
until at least halfway through next year.</li>
<li>Has a lot of time.</li>
<li>Has taken interest in rearranging the room and
selling off some of our old sun machines.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TBB] I've been around the club for a long time.
<ul>
<li>Has committee experience, including at UCC, and is
on committees of other clubs.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[THA] I'm Tom, in 3rd year doing software engineering.
<ul>
<li>Been a part of the club since coming to UWA.</li>
<li>Currently on door and winadmin/sprocket, so
apparently I'm considered reliable by most of
committee, and went to the same school as rest of
committee as well.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[DBA] David Adams
<ul>
<li><em>Conversation about TLAs ensues, [DBA] chooses
the TLA [DBA].</em></li>
<li>Going to keep it short & sharp.</li>
<li>I'm a fresher, I think it is one of the best clubs
at UWA and want to get involved in running things.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Questions
<ul>
<li>[LCY] Question for nominees: Do you have a car?
<ul>
<li>[TBB] I have a nice car.</li>
<li>[DBA] has a license but not a car.</li>
<li>[THA] has both a car and a license.</li>
<li>[TFD] has not yet got a learner's permit.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[jsullivan] Will you be planning to hold the position
until the next AGM?
<ul>
<li>[TBB] Yes.</li>
<li>[DBA] Yes.</li>
<li>[THA] Yes.</li>
<li>[TFD] Yes.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[GOZ] What other committee positions do you currently
hold?
<ul>
<li>[TBB] Tenancy and JapSoc, both OCM.</li>
<li>[DBA] Fresher rep for SPACE, OCM for Makers.</li>
<li>[THA] OCM for Programming Competition Society (PCS).</li>
<li>[TFD] is not on any other committees.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[GOZ] Do you plan to run for an executive position next
year?
<ul>
<li>[TBB] No.</li>
<li>[DBA] No.</li>
<li>[THA] Maybe.</li>
<li>[TFD] No.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[NTU] and [DAS] explain the voting procedure.</li>
<li>Candidates leave the room.
<ul>
<li>Votes are called for the candidates.</li>
<li>Candidates are called back into the room.</li>
<li>[DAS] Please welcome your new OCM, [THA]!</li>
<li>Returning officers return proceedings to the chair
([GOZ]).</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<h1>General Business</h1>
<ul>
<li>[TAY] First thing of many things I've written down: Decision
earlier this year by committee to interpret "policy" in
committee.
<ul>
<li>Right now, a "Policy" [constitutional] must be voted by
a majority in a general meeting.</li>
<li>This means that standing policies could be in place and
effective between committee years.</li>
<li>[GOZ] explains the constitutional context behind the
discussion.
<ul>
<li>Constitution is ambiguous about whether or not
committee is able to create policies which are binding
for future committees.</li>
<li>Committee has sole power of interpretation over the
constitution.</li>
<li>Committee thus interpreted the constitution such
that the existing "standing policies" were able to
continue to be valid.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[NTU] Constitutionally-defined "Policy" is not a recent
modification to the constitution.
<ul>
<li>Some documents that had previously been called
"guidelines" were updated, and ambiguously referred to
as "policies".</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] What is generally considered good practise is to
let the existing standing policies expire at the AGM, and
then re-approve them as necessary.
<ul>
<li>
<ul>
<li>[NTU] Point of order: until recently, there were
no well documented Constitutional Policies. Other
things are "guidelines", "rules", "regulations",
etc.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] Essentially this decision means that committee can
create standing committee regulations for an indefinite
amount of time and these are virtually the same as a
Constitutional Policy.
<ul>
<li>[JWB] No, that is wrong, they have never been the
same and have entirely different restrictions.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] We should make sure that these policies get
properly re-approved at every AGM.
<ul>
<li>[GOZ] Last year's committee thought that policies
needed to be reinstated and never actually got around
to it themselves.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] Motion to require committee to do a re-vote of any
current regulations / whatever is called a "policy" within
a next 10 days.
<ul>
<li>[NTU] There is nothing that would force us to do
this, but it is a good practise and it improves
documentation.</li>
<li>Motion passes, 2 abstentions and 1 against.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] With the whole door regulations shenanigans, there
have been new door regulations in the works. Any progress?
<ul>
<li>[JWB] At the last committee meeting, I said that it was
in progress and I am fairly sure I shared it with
committee.
<ul>
<li>[TAY] It's been a semester and I think that this is
kind of important, something should be happening.
<ul>
<li>Door members as a group of people should be
keeping the clubroom good and welcoming.</li>
<li>Review of door members is important to make sure
that they are doing their job.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[JWB] Summary of changes to the standing regulation:
<ul>
<li>Want to make it easier for door members to keep
control of the room</li>
<li>Short term doorings (without having to send an
email) were unofficially a thing but now they are
part of the "policy" [sic].</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Only having to attend 2 or 3 cleanups.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><em>[LDT] arrives 14:55.</em></li>
<li>[TAY] A lot of discussion in the past about how strict
door regulations should be, what constitutes being on door
and so on.
<ul>
<li>IMO, having been a president in the past, it's good
to have a small set of regulations accompanied by some
more detailed/helpful guidelines.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[NTU] Clearly names do make a difference especially when
it comes to rules lawyering.
<ul>
<li>"Door group" is defined as a set of members that are
formally trusted to make good judgement calls about
the guidelines.</li>
<li>Pre-incorporation, these things were called
"guidelines", now they are called something else.</li>
<li>If door members don't make good judgement calls,
then committee can remove them from door.</li>
<li>[GOZ] I would prefer to see "spirit of the law"
guidelines.
<ul>
<li>[TAY] explains how the Unigames "gatekeepers"
use this kind of system.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[jsullivan] Do you have a "how to door" type document
anywhere?
<ul>
<li>You can't expect people to know what is appropriate
and what is not.</li>
<li>[GOZ] The "policy" [sic] document is the only
documentation currently.</li>
<li>[JWB] There is a "Door Group Handbook" as appendix A
to the Door "policy" [sic].</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] LOLCATDOG is more geared around the technical
requirements of being on door and not so much about the
social requirements.
<ul>
<li>It is important to ensure that UCC maintains a
welcoming atmosphere and follows university
guidelines, ethical, social etc.</li>
<li>Being more open to freshers, women, people you don't
know, and so on.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[GOZ] I am of the opinion that we should purge the door
group every semester, and hold a "welcome to door" event
so people know what to do.</li>
<li>[PJA] Door members should be required to to come to
committee meetings after application so that committee can
ask them questions.</li>
<li>[TAY] Cull of door members is one of the things that
people don't like to do because they're lazy;
<ul>
<li>But this is an OGM so may as well do a motion of
some sort...</li>
<li>[krish36] Once you get added to door, do you stay on
forever?
<ul>
<li>[GOZ] You generally only get removed if you mess
up (ie. missing cleanups) and get caught.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[NTU] We could postpone any purge of door until the
next AGM or some time with sufficiently long notice.</li>
<li>[JWB] There are no practical reasons to need to
purge and reappoint door, we do not function like
Unigames or UniSFA.</li>
<li>[jsullivan] This process allows a distinction to be
made in people's motivation for being on door;
<ul>
<li>Some people really want to be on door to help
the club and there are also those who simply want
to be on door for the sake of it and don't take
their responsibility seriously.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[LDT] For the other clubs, being on "door" is an
issue of whether or not the club continues to trust a
person.
<ul>
<li>For UCC, however, the position of being on door
is actually quite technical, and to be a good door
member requires a reasonable amount of skill.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[jimbo] I wouldn't agree that asking someone to
reapply once and maybe occasionally going forward can
be considered "treating them like sh*t".</li>
<li>[TAY] I agree with [jimbo], when people sign up
there is an understanding that there are certain
requirements for the position.
<ul>
<li>I don't think anyone would argue that
gatekeepers or CCC are treated badly when asked to
reapply.</li>
<li>Maybe UCC needs to reevaluate whether or not a
technical quiz should be the only way to apply -
perhaps they should get socially competent people
onto door and then teach them the technical side
of things.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[PJA] Change the reapplication process so people
only have a short interview rather than a full
application.</li>
<li>[JWB] There are people on door that are important
for the club who feel like they are being treated like
sh*t.</li>
<li>[GOZ] rejects further input as meeting is going
overtime, proceeding to motion.</li>
<li>[TAY] Motion to do a full wipe and reappointment of
the door group within the next 20 days.
<ul>
<li>Committee can choose to reappoint door members
who have recently sent in a reapplication.</li>
<li>Motion fails: 10 in favour, 8 against and 3
abstain.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>[TAY] There really should be a regulation that says that
Wheel exists and what their rights and responsibilities are.
<ul>
<li><em>[jimbo] and [krish36] leave at 15:22.</em></li>
<li>[NTU] The group guidelines for door, wheel, etc are on
the website.</li>
<li>[THA] We should discuss this in the future, at the next
AGM perhaps, since we are running out of time.</li>
<li>[FVP] As a new wheel member myself, I would agree that
the documentation about wheel is hard to find and isn't in
a format readily accessible for non-wheel or non-technical
members.</li>
<li>[TAY] The general perception is that wheel is some kind
of illuminati and its operations are quite opaque.</li>
<li>[GOZ] Meeting is running overtime, need to close the
meeting now, unless we have a motion then meeting is
closed.
<ul>
<li>No formal motion is presented;</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><strong>Meeting closed at 15.25</strong></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p><em>Minutes uploaded by [FVP] at 22:14 on 2018-09-11</em></p>
<!-- end minutes body, start MINUTES_FOOTER -->
<!-- end MINUTES_FOOTER -->
<p>Meeting minutes are also available <a
href="https://ucc.asn.au/infobase/minutes/2018/2018-09-04_ogm.ucc"
moz-do-not-send="true">here</a>.</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>