17:00:00 UTC now 13:00 10:00 AM 13:00 Would everyone who is here & watching please say something? 13:00 everybody's there ? 13:00 :) 13:00 Nathan here and watching. 13:00 * drewr is present 13:01 docelic isn't even in here yet. 13:01 i know he was awake in #hcoop about 50 minutes ago 13:02 *** docelic (~docelic@195.246.23.200) has joined channel #hcoop-meeting 13:02 Ah lol, I joined the channel but misspelled it 13:02 * docelic ready. 13:02 OK. I suspect other people will drift in and out of paying attention. 13:03 where shall we start? 13:03 I'm going to walk down the items on the ActionItems page, barring other suggestions. 13:03 http://users.hcoop.net/abu/ActionItems 13:03 "Schedule first board meeting".... this undertaking was a resounding success! :D 13:03 on the second iteration 13:04 I guess there's no more to say about that, so on to the next one. 13:04 "Switch to group finances" 13:04 anything new to report on this, Mr. President-Treasurer? 13:05 No. It looks like we've had just three suggestions for a bank so far. 13:05 The two that I visited, plus Jason's Farm Bureau suggestion. 13:05 It's not clear what the benefits of Farm Bureau are, and, as ntk says, there's no local branch for me to use. (Assuming ntk investigated that thoroughly :) 13:05 I suspect that going with any of these fee-free options would be as good. I had nothing new to suggest other than other major national banks such as Citi or Wachovia, 13:06 but I suspect they would have little to offer over Wells Fargo 13:06 Well, you didn't add them on the web site, so your suggestions don't exist yet! ;) 13:06 true 13:07 Is there a proof of our non-profit status somewhere on the web? I couldn't find it last I looked. 13:07 (I would need it to open an account with the appropriate bells and whistles.) 13:07 I think you should go ahead and open an account at Wells Fargo. you're going to be the treasurer for the indefinite future in any event, and Wells Fargo has branches in major cities anyway 13:08 The only proof of our nonprofit status we have at this point is our articles of incorporation and the letter we received from the state, along with our bylaws I suppose 13:08 I haven't scanned the letter from the state yet, will do this later in the afternoon 13:08 The letter from the state is enough. What's the URL? 13:08 Oh, OK. 13:09 We also need to orchestrate an authentication action, where you designate me as the president of the corporation so I can open the account. 13:09 the first page of the articles itself ought to be enough--it has the Secretary of the Commonwealth's signature and a stamp for the date it was filed 13:09 that is online already, however I will also scan the letter 13:09 Oh, I see. 13:10 *** MackTheKnife (~chaotic@CPE0030bdc7ccb3-CM014290003896.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) has quit: Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer) 13:10 what do you mean by "authentication mechanism"? 13:10 *** MackTheKnife (~chaotic@CPE0030bdc7ccb3-CM014290003896.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) has joined channel #hcoop-meeting 13:10 adam: actually I already did scan the letter, it is dosletter.jpg 13:11 oh no 13:11 that's something else sorry 13:11 The only person authorized in the eyes of the law to represent the corporation is you, at present. 13:11 Which means I need your permission to open the account.... 13:11 And your permission in a provable form satisfactory to banks. 13:12 Well, actually in the documents I filed the only thing I am authorized to do is incorporate. I can give you a letter saying whatever you want but what really gives you the authority was our board election and our first board meeting. perhaps printouts of that accompanied by your signature would suffice 13:12 we do have to file an annual report with the state that lists our officers if they have changed by the previous year, 13:12 But our bylaws aren't official yet. 13:12 So we don't have an official "board".... 13:12 but it's only stored on microfilm with the state 13:13 Everywhere I say "official," I mean "officially recognized by the government." 13:13 Should we be filing an officers update now, then? 13:13 adam: our bylaws our official. they were adopted by our "organic law." corporations don't have to get all their actions rubberstamped by the government. only certain things 13:13 The fact still remains that banks must protect against fraud. 13:14 It would be _bad_ if they accepted my word that I had been elected. 13:14 I think we can any time in the next year. we might as well file it now, then file it annually after each election cycle 13:14 Or even if they accepted a print-out of some Internet stuff 13:14 well, if you look at the application for the farm bureau bank which is online, it basically just requires your signature and a stamp of the corporate seal 13:14 as well as the EIN for the corporation and it's address and that sort of thing 13:15 OK. So you think this is a non-issue, though it could only help to officially file the officers list? 13:15 just because I can open an account for "Microsoft, Inc." at some local bank, doesn't mean I can steal their money or the bank will never find out that I wasn't authorized :-) 13:15 yes, I don't think that a local california bank is going to be interested in getting our annual report from Pennsylvania just to open an account. I imagine you'll have to meet with a representative at Wells Fargo or call them to figure out exactly what they require. 13:16 the FBB form is very minimalistic 13:16 The one I met with gave me the impression this letter would be enough, or almost enough. 13:17 the letter about incorporation, or a letter from me? 13:17 The "you are a real non-profit corp" form from PA Sec. of State. 13:17 this letter from the state basically just says "HCOOP, INC. THE CORPORATION BUREAU IS HAPPY TO SEND YOU YOUR FILED DOCUMENT. PLEASE NOTE THE FILE DATE AND THE SIGNATURE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH 13:18 and then it goes on to thank us for doing business in PA and give some information about the department 13:18 along with our entity number and microfilm number 13:18 So it doesn't mean our application was accepted? 13:18 yes, it does. 13:18 OK. That's all that matters.... 13:19 but it's really just a cover letter for the filed document itself with the secretary's signature, which is the real proof. that's what I sent to the Somerset Legal Journal for them to put in the announcement 13:19 OK, so as to this action item, it seems that we have decided that I should open the Wells Fargo account, and see what else they require to do so. 13:19 Also, we'd might as well send in the official officers designation. 13:19 docelic, do you agree? 13:19 I agree. 13:20 OK, I'm going to BRB. ntk, would you like to start talking about the next item? 13:20 that's Pennsylvania form 5110, Annual Statement-Nonprofit Corporation. I will do that today and put up scans 13:20 okay, the bylaws 13:21 there were three suggested tweaks 13:21 the one that I added was about the distribution of the corporation's assets upon dissolution 13:21 This one is particularly important because it affects our application for 501(c)12 status 13:22 and it is generally specified in the bylaws if it is not in the articles of incorporation 13:22 ntk: what does 501(c)12 status require that we do with dissoluted assets? 13:22 someone else previously suggested that they be donated to a charity--which would in fact be required if we wanted 501(c)3 status 13:23 docelic: there doesn't seem to be any particular requirement that I can find, however there is a question in the application about what is done with them, and having it in the bylaws would provide a basis for backing up our claim 13:23 the standard thing for cooperatives is just to return assets equally to members 13:24 what i think they would frown upon would be something like the assets going to the president of the board or something like that. I'm not sure that question is particularly important for 501(c)12's, but it should definitely be addressed in our bylaws, because we have to provide a copy to the IRS along with our k1024 form 13:24 as we have a computed 'exact' balance, wouldn't it be fair do redistribute according to it ? 13:24 I would suggest to keep the eventual income from selling assets on the account and use it to expand hcoop operations 13:24 mattam: there are non-cash assets 13:24 i think that the bylaw should specifically state that the board is responsible for dividing the assets equally among members 13:25 so it would be up to the board to decide how it is best done, i.e. selling servers on ebay versus selling them cheaply to the hosting provider or whatever. 13:26 we could do the same thing if we were donating the assets to charity--i.e. have the board pick the charity and liquify the assets, but as we're a coop and not a charity it makes sense to return assets to members 13:27 (back) 13:28 We shouldn't expect to have much asset value per person. 13:28 Like, right now, we probably have $10 or so per person. :P 13:28 (Not counting people's already-separated balances) 13:29 anyway I should note that under our current bylaws revision of the bylaws is not something that the board has any special prerogative to do, although we can make suggestions 13:29 Therefore I think amount / number-of-members will end up being so small that dividing among members makes no sense. Keeping "income" for hcoop expansion seems good to me 13:29 right, separate balances are liabilities to members that would have to be returned before any asset distribution 13:29 I guess the hope was that lots of members would show up, and we'd have a discussion about the pro's and con's of each revision. :P 13:29 docelic, nono... 13:29 docelic, the whole idea is that this is what we do if we decide to end hcoop. 13:29 docelic: I would expect that the amount should increase over time 13:29 yes 13:30 not just if we decide to end hcoop 13:30 it's also if we were forced to dissolve for some legal reason 13:30 Smerdyakov, ntk: ah of course. Well then, dividing equally among members is reasonable 13:31 ok 13:31 Then it seems to me that saying "the board manages the equal division of assets" is a good idea. 13:31 redistributing equally with the board deciding how to liquidify should be ok then 13:31 Keeps our options open. 13:31 let's move on to elections 13:32 future elections should run more smoothly because the board (us) is authorized to arrange them, with the basic constraints that there has to be an election within a year, and that each member receive three votes etc. etc. 13:33 however it should be cleared up in the bylaws about whether nonmembers should be allowed to run, 13:33 I have some web election software that is basically ready to go, but I'd like to hold out while I develop more features. 13:33 I liked ntk's commandline idea better 13:34 both ways would be ideal 13:34 docelic, we can easily support both. 13:34 Ok. 13:34 But the web thing is part of a larger portal, with some nice integration into a big picture. 13:35 Ok. 13:35 Anyway, I don't think anyone disagrees that only members should be able to run. 13:35 It was just an oversight when writing the bylaws. 13:35 Right? 13:35 Yes, only members should be able to run. 13:35 right 13:36 I agree with that, especially for elections after the first election 13:36 OK. Then there's the quorom proportion. 13:36 What changes to quorum proportion you had in mind ? 13:36 I'm not sure who it was who put that one in, but I guess there's the question about whether 20% is too low or too high 13:36 Well, tarsin was vocal about thinking it's too low. 13:36 this is a less crucial matter at this time I think 13:37 yes, he was saying something like people should not be members if they're not going to vote. I don't think I agree. 13:37 We got around 75% turn-out for the first election. 13:37 Section 405: the vote is held during the meeting and any member can participate ? 13:37 So maybe we could bump it up a tad, to satisfy some. 13:38 We must count for a number of people who will not be active or see the voting announcement when required. 13:38 I think we got 28 votes out of 39, which is about 72% 13:38 mattam, we are explicitly avoiding having anyone but boardmembers vote on general policy issues. 13:38 the other thing is, the quorum right now is for everything 13:38 not just board elections... all our other decisions had much lower turnouts 13:38 ok 13:38 mattam, we don't want a one-week election to decide that we need to reconfigure a server set-up or similar. :) 13:38 only 13 people voted on the bylaws 13:39 so it's not Policy in the large 13:39 ntk, people are attracted to the social/competitive aspect, I guess. ;) 13:39 which is 33,3% exactly :) 13:39 i agree 13:39 I don't think we should increase the quorum at this time 13:39 mattam, members control who is on the board, basically; all other policy flows through that. 13:40 I agree with not increasing quorum at this time. 13:40 I don't see how that makes anything better. I see the quorum as guarding against a small group of members ambushing a major change on an apathetic general membership 13:40 mattam, oh, and they control the bylaws. 13:40 Keeping the quorom as is is OK by me. 13:40 here's my idea 13:40 oh 13:40 as to voting mechanisms, you previously mentioned some web-based solution 13:41 I was hoping to write a basic command-line voting client at some point in the next few weeks, that handles starting new votes, voting, and emailing results to the list, along with a basic web front-end for it 13:41 but anyway 13:41 Well, I guess I beat you to it. ;) 13:41 in the absence of that, any member can start a vote by creating a wiki page and emailing the list 13:42 so my idea is i will create a couple of wiki pages for the election and dissolution issues 13:42 What are the benefits of command-line voting vs. web, once we switch to SSL? 13:42 have votes on them separately 13:42 and have you two review them before I email the list to start the votes 13:42 That sounds good to me. 13:42 Smerdyakov: no real advantage if the web interface was lync-friendly 13:42 Oh, it is. Nothing more complicated than tables now. 13:43 I just thought a command-line client that basically edits a text-file would be an elegant & simple solution 13:43 (Because I live in 1998.) 13:43 but either way 13:43 well i guess i live in 1985 then 13:43 You can make prettier election reports on the web. 13:43 And have links to things! 13:43 well that's what a web-based interface would be for :-) 13:43 I prefer commanline tools over web interface, but I am willing to accept the decision made by people who will actually code it. 13:44 I like database transactions. I don't keep any state anywhere but in Postgres, so I don't have to worry about maintaining consistency in error conditions. :) 13:45 But that is neither Here nor There! 13:45 I guess we have resolved this item: ntk will prepare elections on the two items we decided are needed? 13:45 the policies (OurPolicy) are not up-to-date... 13:45 and if anyone else doesn't like them, they can put up their own bylaws votes 13:46 I think we need a wiki overhaul, anyway. :) 13:46 I want to move much of what's there to a portal, so that more stuff is linked from the top level. 13:46 And also make the wiki public, with private stuff handled specially on the portal. 13:46 But this isn't an official proposal to deliberate on now, just an idea. 13:47 there's also a bunch of policies that will need to be written by us, in particular policies regarding deposits and payments, especially nonpayment, but we should probably set those at a meeting after we have a bank account set up 13:47 OK. 13:47 Ok. 13:47 If this issue is closed, next is the contract. 13:48 Does anyone who is watching want to volunteer to take this one? :D 13:48 should we not have a policy wherein a member has to pay a minimum amount everytime and not lesser than that? 13:48 harsha, what is "everytime"? 13:49 i think that might go along with setting a flat monthly base payment, which I think is a good idea, especially once we get the new server. we might want to do that sooner as well, to get more cash ready to buy it 13:49 Everytime, his debit is exhausted ? 13:50 but again we may want an new account before that 13:50 harsha: that seems equivalent to requiring a minimum balance 13:50 ntk: Yes 13:50 I think, given the realities of how people pay, it is good to decouple payment (to a balance) from actual debiting for particular charges. 13:51 i think as long as we have a set policy against nonpayment and require refundable deposits we don't need to do that 13:51 right 13:51 Any requirements that people "pay enough" should be in the form of requiring high enough balances at particular times. 13:51 but we were talking about member contracts 13:51 ntk: If I had $50 to spare, I would add them to my hcoop balance. If I, however, had to pay a base amount each month, regardless of my very positive balance, I wouldn't send the $50 in in the first place, I'd keep just paying minimal monthly amounts with no advance payment. That's my thinking. 13:51 and i believe in particular lawyer review 13:51 Well, harsha was late in saying the last issue wasn't closed. 13:52 docelic: that's not really what i meant 13:52 harsha, do you want to keep discussing this, or should we move on to contracts? 13:52 what i meant was having fixed monthly dues debited from people's accounts 13:52 rather than being calculated dynamically based on the exact bandwidth bills from our uplink 13:52 Smerdyakov: we can move on I guess. 13:53 ntk, in fact, I am also a believer in the power of laywers! :D 13:53 and have that fixed monthly amount be greater than the amount we've been typically charging so far, which would accrue some working assets for the cooperative, and help avoid big one-time expenses 13:53 ntk, but we need someone on our side to be on charge of the process. 13:53 I don't think I can deal with talking to a lawyer at this point 13:53 however 13:54 Not necessarily greater than current charges.... but the _total_ monthly amount would be greater than our _total_ now. Could be lower per person with more members. 13:54 what I think is that we don't really need to worry about binding contracts 13:54 as long as we are billing people on a monthly basis 13:54 adam: right 13:54 ntk, what if someone uses hcoop to perpetrate a major computer crime? 13:55 then I believe we could sue them for damages--even without a contract, crime is crime 13:55 however 13:55 it would help to have it all spelled out in some way 13:55 ntk: I would agree for a little "extra" if it was a percentage or rounding-up , and not a fixed amount 13:55 ntk, then why do all ISP's have terms of service? 13:56 i think we can have certain "implied consent" contracts, in that "by using this service" you agree to blah blah blah. a really binding contract is necessary to get people to agree to perform certain things in the future, such as pay $X each month for a year 13:56 docelic, think of it as the amortized cost of new equipment per month. 13:56 of course, a lawyer would be needed to review "blah blah" and "blah" 13:56 if we wanted to be sure 13:56 ntk, I would certainly prefer cutting out the paper, signed contract aspect. 13:57 ntk, but I want the assurance of someone who knows that that would be safe. 13:57 right 13:57 ntk, our colo provider apparently doesn't think it's safe, f'rinstance. 13:57 In what range would be the extra amount? between $1 and $3 ? 13:58 docelic, I don't know. Think of how much new stuff we would buy a year, divide by 12, then divide by # of members.... 13:58 well, I imagine retaining a lawyer to represent hcoop in all legal matters would be very expensive, just talking to one to review our setup and help draft some agreements would be some significantly less but still expensive amount. 13:58 I don't think I want to do that myself because I don't have the confidence that I could get the coop's money's worth with a lawyer 13:58 ntk, and you are doing lots of stuff already, of course. 13:58 ntk, and so am I. 13:58 So that leaves us searching for someone willing to take this on. 13:58 but in any event, by being incorporated we have already shielded our members from liability for the actions of other members 13:59 having a tight contract could help shift liability from the coop to individual members for their actions 13:59 okay 13:59 Smerdyakov: I would agree to $3 or planned-upgrades/12/nmembers , whichever is less , recalculated each month 14:00 i don't see anyone jumping up and down to help us out here, and I don't think that we can expect Davor to find an expert on american contract law in Croatia 14:00 We have a few members who seem inclined to do this sort of thing under the right circumstances. 14:00 so we need to ask them 14:00 I'll make a mailing list plea after the meeting. 14:00 Ok. 14:00 *** drewr` (~drew@adsl-065-013-142-013.sip.bna.bellsouth.net) has joined channel #hcoop-meeting 14:00 couldn't we just say the board can vote to demand immediate reimbursment up to a zero balance so we're legally safe (i hope), and just have a calculated planned-expenses for information ? 14:01 Oh dear. Still mixing action items. :) 14:01 just as a coop policy? 14:01 mattam, which potential problem are you trying to prevent? 14:01 we can have whatever policy we want, Adam is concerned that members may try to dodge out of their monetary responsibilities or damage they may cause to the coop 14:01 apparently ntk proposes fixed rates to be legally safe, i don't like it 14:01 and that we might not be able to get a judgment against them 14:02 No, that's not it at all. 14:02 ah 14:02 mattam: that had nothing to do with liability 14:02 Fixed rates to let people plan how much they will owe. 14:02 Potentially unlimited charges to cover legal expenses if a member breaks the law with our services. 14:02 and also generate fixed income for the coop to save up for future expenses 14:02 19:56:04 < ntk> what I think is that we don't really need to worry about binding contracts 14:02 19:56:27 < ntk> as long as we are billing people on a monthly basis 14:02 in the worst case, such an incident could cause the coop to go bankrupt, cease operations, and members would lose their deposits and balances 14:03 mattam, and I responded saying ntk had misinterpreted my primary reason for a contract, which is criminal liability. 14:03 whereas before we were incorporated, every member could be personally liable for up to the full amount of such damages 14:03 ok 14:04 what 14:04 sorry 14:04 Smerdyakov, ntk: are we keeping the idea of hcoop members having "balances" with hcoop ? 14:04 I want to. 14:04 what Adam wants to do, is get contracts which will protect not just members but the cooperative itself, to be resilient in the face of such an incident 14:04 yes, that's what I expect 14:04 And I also want to find out what's binding, so we can avoid mailing paper from India to California, if possible. :) 14:05 Smerdyakov: Why, then, not just say that all "extra" that members put to their accounts can be used to expand operations ? 14:05 *** enthalpyX (dwb@unicron.plik.net) has joined channel #hcoop-meeting 14:05 the fact is that no matter what kind of legal protection and lawyers we have, litigation is expensive. if someone sues us for something completely stupid, we'll have certain court costs to deal with. 14:05 docelic, we could do that, but we also want to prevent people from "mooching" when we need to buy new stuff. 14:06 someone in Wisconsin could go to small-claims court and file a $4000 damage case against us, and if we didn't appear could win it on very flimsy evidence 14:06 docelic, I personally am all in favor of asking people to make specific "donations" for specific costs, but others want to keep things equal. 14:06 It's also good to have predictable costs from month to month, though. 14:07 And we apparently need to have official "budgets" for the gov't, anyway. 14:07 Ok. 14:07 is there more to say about contracts/lawyers now, or are we going to leave it at finding someone to delegate this to? 14:07 But I think this issue is postponed until we have a bank account and have switched operations to using it. 14:07 that's right 14:08 ntk, I have nothing more to say about it. 14:08 I vote for postponing the discussion until we have a person for it 14:08 ok 14:08 What does enthalpyX have to say? :) 14:08 let's talk about 501(c)12 then 14:09 I lack scrollback :) 14:09 I have a silly question. By lawyers what kind of lawyers are you talking about? Civil/Criminal? 14:09 I really have no idea about American Law system.. 14:10 harsha: contral law is civil 14:10 contracdt 14:10 contract 14:10 I am a bit curious though because my sister is a Civil laywer with DPW. 14:10 DPW? 14:10 department of public welfare 14:10 moving on, 14:11 davis polk and wardwell 14:11 If anyone wants to discuss past issues, please say so now. 14:11 If not, please don't bring them up anymore. 14:11 Adam has done up the budget figures for our k1024 form (IRS form for determination of 501(c) status) 14:12 and there is a wiki page for the form now. I will try to get a lot done on that later in the week 14:12 I might grab some empty portions of that if not. :) 14:12 it would be good if we could mail that out by the end of the month, contingent on getting the bylaw regarding dissolution passed 14:12 Anyone is free to mark up that wiki page, of course. 14:12 That's why I created it. 14:13 *** drewr (~drew@drewr.active.supporter.pdpc) has quit: Nick collision from services. 14:13 is there anything more to say about 501(c)12? I think it's coming along and we'll file it when it's done, that's about it. 14:13 *** drewr` (~drew@adsl-065-013-142-013.sip.bna.bellsouth.net) is now known as drewr 14:13 I have nothing to say about it. 14:13 okay 14:14 Anyone else? 14:14 as far as I'm concerned item 7 about stamps and seals is a petty expense and unless anyone feels strongly Adam should do whatever is necessary in the procurement of a bank account 14:15 in which case that leaves the fun item, number 6--new server/hosting 14:15 * Smerdyakov adds notes to ActionItems to record our decisions. 14:16 I agree with Adam doing whatever is neccessary in the procurement of a bank account 14:16 And I vote for skipping 6. Server Hosting at this tim 14:16 time* 14:16 it is premature 14:17 any other outstanding business then? 14:17 Official Hcoop logo? :) 14:17 I think nitsuj did some logo a while ago, no? 14:17 I think we need a logo. 14:17 all of them but the first one bore an uncanny resemblence to the Hooters owl, in my opinion... didn't like that 14:18 Oh boy, if I recall this thing nitsuj did, it was *a while* ago 14:18 and the first one with the concentric O's was not very recognizable 14:18 http://hcoop.net/~aku/hcoop_logo.html 14:18 Ah yea I remember 14:18 it wasn't nitsuj, it was aku 14:19 last logo is nice, if he would make letters equally distant so they dont overlap 14:19 tell me it's not just me 14:19 http://hootersgear.com/5695.jpg 14:19 and maybe also removing the dots. Just the font and color choice should be enough for me 14:20 ntk, they're not so similar, to me. 14:20 ntk: it's just you 14:20 damn 14:20 docelic, you like the overlapping O's, but not the other overlaps, is what you're saying? 14:20 well then i'm still with davor on removing the dots 14:21 but they are old, perhaps we could have a new logo contest 14:21 ntk: couldn't hurt... 14:21 maybe even have some credits as a prize, wouldn't have to be much & it would be cheaper than getting it done professionally 14:21 Smerdyakov: I like last logo on the page (the all-letters-horizontal one), if C, Ss, and P are properly separated without overlapping each other's space.. so, just plain typed hcoop with the proposed color and font scheme 14:22 docelic, that's what I thought. 14:22 I like it, too; but couldn't hurt to see other ideas. 14:22 However, I think we have more pressing matters first.... so a logo contest would be a distraction now. 14:22 But I thought I'd mention it anyway. ;) 14:22 true 14:22 On the other hand, having it on an official seal would be nice! 14:23 (If we need a seal anyway) 14:23 the dots from the Os, for example, could be made vertical and to the left of the letter 'h' 14:23 well, it's not something that needs to be set in stone 14:23 i can hardly think of any old company that still has its logo from its original years unchanged 14:23 ntk, only set in rubber. ;) 14:23 any other outstanding business? 14:24 I'm prepared to switch anything else to informal discussion in #hcoop. 14:24 I can't think of any, I would propose closing the shop for today 14:24 ok 14:24 Adam needs a gavel to adjourn our meetings 14:24 *BANG*