Rosie Gray
PM
okay, I call the meeting to order at 7:55 am
Rosie Gray
3:56 PM
we are here to review the CDS RA New Sim Commission Report, make any changes we agree on, in order to take the report to the RA
so who wants to start?
first though... sorry
Patroklus
3:56 PM
shall we take it section by section?
Leslie
3:56 PM
question on first point?
Rosie Gray
3:57 PM
I just want to say that everything here that I put in is a direct quote from motions made during our meetings
yes, let's start with a.
Patroklus
3:57 PM
i agree with section a
Rosie Gray
3:57 PM
comments?
Gaius
3:57 PM
None here.
Leslie
3:57 PM
There is no reason not to fill out the CDS region with a 6th sim. Everyone agrees with that, however a further sim should be considered along with an update to the general plan, especially since NFS East wasn't part of the public conversation, My question is if we purchase 2 sims now, and it takes the "usual" amount of time to execute a plan, will we be paying tier for the second sim?
Rosie Gray
3:57 PM
hmmm
disagree with you Leslie
Gaius
3:58 PM
We will not be purchasing NFS E "now", however, Leslie.
Rosie Gray
3:58 PM
NFS East was a part of the public survey, and discussion
Leslie
3:58 PM
I understand that
Gaius
3:58 PM
Indeed.
Patroklus
3:58 PM
maybe 'put funds aside to purchase' instead of 'purchase'
Rosie Gray
3:58 PM
please see b.
Widget
3:58 PM
agrees with Pat
Patroklus
3:58 PM
so it's clear we are not saying 'buy it now and build it later'
Leslie
3:58 PM
a says purchase 2 regions
Gaius
3:59 PM
Yes, but there's an addendum in b, Leslie.
Rosie Gray
3:59 PM
I'd agree with that wording, Pat
Gaius
3:59 PM
Regardless, I believe Pat is right.
Leslie
3:59 PM
B does not amend a
Gaius
4:00 PM
But it adds to A.
Rosie Gray
4:00 PM
how is that now?
Leslie
4:00 PM
Moot now
Rosie Gray
4:00 PM
the rewording
Patroklus
4:00 PM
ok
Leslie
4:00 PM
good
Gaius
4:00 PM
Hm...
No, now I disagree.
Purchase one sim and put funds aside for NFS E.
Rosie Gray
4:00 PM
amended it to say 2 full regions
Leslie
4:01 PM
I agree Gaius
Gaius
4:01 PM
Otherwise, we mught be putting funds aside for a while until the RA authorises the purchase!
Leslie
4:01 PM
But we won't want to purchase until the plan is ready
Rosie Gray
4:01 PM
I agree we won't
Gaius
4:01 PM
Add that, then.
Leslie
4:02 PM
Or we are paying tier, while we work through a process that is obviously extended
Patroklus
4:02 PM
we don't a have a sim plan yet. we can't buy it until we have the plan ready or we'll be burning tier until we have one
Gaius
4:02 PM
"Purchase a sim west of NFS when the plan is ready and approved, and put funds aside in preparation for a sim east of NFS."
Leslie
4:02 PM
ty Pat
nods to Gaius
Patroklus
4:02 PM
happy with gains amends
gaius. damn autocorrect
Rosie Gray
4:02 PM
so, should it say "Put aside funds to purchase 2 full regions, searching for best deals on used regions, and to be actually purchased when plans are ready to being construction."
Leslie
4:03 PM
agree, Rosie
Gaius
4:03 PM
Alright, that looks good
Patroklus
4:03 PM
i think that works too rosie
Widget
4:03 PM
Sims to be purchased when plans are ready to being construction."
Rosie Gray
4:03 PM
begin* (not being)
Gaius
4:03 PM
Widget
4:03 PM
begin
Rosie Gray
4:03 PM
all agreed?
Gaius
4:04 PM
Aye
Leslie
4:04 PM
aye
Widget
4:04 PM
Simple sentences are harder to misconstrue.
Rosie Gray
4:04 PM
indeed
Patroklus
4:04 PM
agreed
Rosie Gray
4:04 PM
are you agree, Widget?
Widget
4:05 PM
Sims to be purchased when plans are ready to begin construction.
Rosie Gray
4:05 PM
okay
Gaius
4:05 PM
Hm...
Rosie Gray
4:05 PM
so now, 'b'
Widget
4:06 PM
wai
shouldnt we be consistent in using 'regions' as opposed to 'sims'?
Gaius
4:06 PM
I've suggested an edit.
Patroklus
4:06 PM
yes. let's try to be consistent
Rosie Gray
4:06 PM
yes I guess so re Regions
Widget
4:06 PM
y
Rosie Gray
4:06 PM
Gaius, it already says 2 full regions in the first sentence
Widget
4:06 PM
ty
Patroklus
4:07 PM
"each region to be purchased"?
Widget
4:07 PM
better, Rosie
Gaius
4:07 PM
Good, good.
Now to B!
Rosie Gray
4:07 PM
all good?
Patroklus
4:07 PM
yes
Gaius
4:07 PM
Yup!
Leslie
4:08 PM
yes
Rosie Gray
4:08 PM
okay.. on to 'b'
Widget
4:08 PM
Placement of region should be separate from timing
Leslie
4:09 PM
I agree that reality demands flexibility and caution.
Patroklus
4:09 PM
does 'b' mean we do NFS W first and then NFS E? it's a bit ambiguous as drafted
Leslie
4:09 PM
I have comment on b
Rosie Gray
4:09 PM
let's hear your comment, Leslie
Leslie
4:10 PM
As a public servant it is difficult to balance what one wants, what the public wants, what is good for the public and what will actually work. I would like to see NFS East, personally, however I am not sure the the other three apply.
I will support it, but would like to do it carefully
Rosie Gray
4:10 PM
in the survey, NFS E was the favoured choice
and that was a survey that 50 citizens participated in
Gaius
4:10 PM
I believe that most of our attention was placed on NFS W, primarily because that is the natural place that many of us wish to see the rectangle complete.
Leslie
4:10 PM
not in the discussions
Rosie Gray
4:11 PM
but the survey it was, and that involved more people
Leslie
4:11 PM
A survey is full of leading questions
Rosie Gray
4:11 PM
I disagree, I think they were neutral
Gaius
4:11 PM
I believe the timing in the document is indeed ambiguous, but I believe that NFS W should be dealt with first.
Patroklus
4:11 PM
i think that provided we do one quickly after the other, we are fine whichever order we go in
Gaius
4:11 PM
Indeed, Pat.
Rosie Gray
4:12 PM
I think that NFS W would be easier to do than NFS E
and should be the first one to do
Leslie
4:12 PM
I agree
Patroklus
4:12 PM
i would prefer NFS E first cos it's more parcels and therefore more citizens. NFS W is probably lower risk as there are fewer parcels to sell
Widget
4:12 PM
I wouldn't weight the survey over the discussions or weight either over the combined perspectives of the Commission.
Leslie
4:12 PM
Not necessarilly
necessarily
Rosie Gray
4:13 PM
I'm not sure Pat, if they are both full regions, then they will both require at least the number of parcels to support the tier
Patroklus
4:13 PM
NFS dense inner city and rural are always sold out though to i think both are pretty low risk
Rosie Gray
4:13 PM
and everyone seems to want the 'gap' to be filled first
Gaius
4:13 PM
Indeed, Rose.
Rosie, rather!
Widget
4:13 PM
comment
Leslie
4:13 PM
I have a plan for NFS west that will provide both
Rosie Gray
4:14 PM
we aren't discussing the plans at this point though
Widget
4:14 PM
the way the conversations were structured, we did not ask people about the desirability of coastal parcels
Gaius
4:14 PM
Do you mean timeline, Leslie?
Widget
4:14 PM
filling in the 'gap' reduces the shoreline
Rosie Gray
4:14 PM
there's no real shoreline up there at all, Widget
Leslie
4:15 PM
not necessariy
Rosie Gray
4:15 PM
the sims are too high for that
Leslie
4:15 PM
You are not considering an alternative way of filling in the gap
Widget
4:15 PM
could there be more shoreline?
Leslie
4:15 PM
yes
Gaius
4:15 PM
One day.
Rosie Gray
4:15 PM
only if you dropped the sims down almost vertically
Widget
4:15 PM
How could there be more shoreline?
Rosie Gray
4:15 PM
NFS and Monastery are up very high
Gaius
4:15 PM
I believe some plans for NFS W do indeed include a lake, however, Widget.
Leslie
4:15 PM
Do your remember my model Rosie?
Rosie Gray
4:15 PM
yes Leslie
Patroklus
4:16 PM
well, are we going with the GMP or not? NFS W is a mountain sim according to that
Gaius
4:16 PM
But... let's NOT focus on making plans just yet.
Rosie Gray
4:16 PM
but that would mean moving and rotating Monastery
I agree with Pat
Leslie
4:16 PM
Yes so?
Rosie Gray
4:16 PM
right now the GMP requires mountain sims
Leslie
4:17 PM
It is a mountain
Gaius
4:17 PM
Can we be more germane to the placement of the regions, instead of their plans?
Patroklus
4:17 PM
leslie, is your objection to theme? if so, that should come when we discuss item c
Rosie Gray
4:17 PM
I agree with Gaius, we should not be discussing plans right now
this is about placement of the sims
Patroklus
4:17 PM
i think the consensus is around placement to E and W of NFS
which is the bit we are trying to get right now
Gaius
4:17 PM
Now, are we agreed with the timeline in B?
Leslie
4:18 PM
yes
Rosie Gray
4:18 PM
I agree with that
Patroklus
4:18 PM
i think we should specify that the second region comes in this term or the next one
it should not drag on for two years!
Leslie
4:18 PM
this term ends when?
Patroklus
4:18 PM
new RA comes in 1 Dec
Widget
4:19 PM
Nov 22nd we install a new RA
oh
Gaius
4:19 PM
"in the year 2015"?
Leslie
4:19 PM
So both regions in one month?
Widget
4:19 PM
two regions in one month is a terrible idea
Patroklus
4:19 PM
no both by the middle of 2015
Rosie Gray
4:19 PM
that isn't what it says
Patroklus
4:19 PM
one this term hopefully. and one next term
Gaius
4:20 PM
Let's recommend the purchase of NFS E in 2015.
Rosie Gray
4:20 PM
referring back to a., to be purchased when plans are ready to begin construction
Gaius
4:20 PM
Indeed.
Rosie Gray
4:20 PM
so we should recommend NFS W first
Patroklus
4:20 PM
i agree with gaius. we need to specify a time or the recommendation loses empahsiis
Leslie
4:20 PM
Yes
Rosie Gray
4:21 PM
I agree also
Gaius
4:21 PM
Yes, I believe we all agree NFS W is our first priority, as NFS E might be more complicated.
Rosie Gray
4:21 PM
right
Gaius
4:21 PM
(but likewise more interesting as a sim!)
Leslie
4:21 PM
Or sims
Rosie Gray
4:22 PM
1 region to be placed west of NFS first, and the other to be placed east of NFS and to placed when the RA approves the purchase.
Gaius
4:22 PM
"...the purchase in 2015."
?
Patroklus
4:23 PM
"both to be in place before the end of May 2015" or something like that
ok with gaius wording
Rosie Gray
4:23 PM
okay now?
Patroklus
4:23 PM
brb. need tea!
Gaius
4:25 PM
Yes, agreed.
To get the ball moving, as well, I agree with C and the analysis there.
Rosie Gray
4:25 PM
are we all agreed on b now?
Leslie
4:25 PM
yes
Gaius
4:26 PM
Yes.
Rosie Gray
4:26 PM
Widget?
Widget
4:27 PM
thinking
it is my opinion that we need to balance the survey results with the discussion results with the accumulated thinking of this Commission
Rosie Gray
4:28 PM
hmmm, it might be construed that we are saying to purchase both in 2015 with this wording
Widget
4:28 PM
when I designed the survey, upon which the discussions were loosley designed, I had no idea about the possible themes
Rosie Gray
4:28 PM
I think we are doing that, Widget
Widget
4:28 PM
ie, we narrowed the choices from the beginning
I regret that now and the process that flowed from it
done
Rosie Gray
4:29 PM
Widget, we are also basing it on the GMP
Leslie
4:29 PM
which is up to date?
Rosie Gray
4:29 PM
which we are obliged to follow
it's from 2008, so absolutely does need to be updated
but right now, that is the GMP
Gaius
4:29 PM
I would rather a term worth of work of this commission not unravel now — think of the power that would have with people like CLEO, as she speaks from self-imposed exile.
Patroklus
4:29 PM
back somewhere need to say that the RA should start the ball rolling on the first sim 'immediately' so there's no reason for a delayed start
Leslie
4:30 PM
I think this is a cart before a horse
Rosie Gray
4:30 PM
I agree with Gaius' comment
Widget
4:30 PM
Can this commission recommend updating the GMP
seems to me it should
Rosie Gray
4:30 PM
it's already recommended for the other commission to do that, Widget
Gaius
4:30 PM
It can, but then that is not consistent with the discussions we have had with citizens.
Rosie Gray
4:30 PM
I agree we shouldn't be stepping backwards
Gaius
4:31 PM
I believe that we all (or a majority of us) agree with the wording of B.
Patroklus
4:31 PM
i'm fine with b
Widget
4:31 PM
when** the RA approves the purchase in 2015
Rosie Gray
4:32 PM
that's the line I'm looking at too
Widget
4:32 PM
Shouldn't that be when the RA approves the purchase?
Rosie Gray
4:32 PM
it seems to apply to both sims, but we don't mean that
Leslie
4:32 PM
agreed
Rosie Gray
4:33 PM
Pat's edit makes sense to me
Patroklus
4:33 PM
W first, then E in 2015
Gaius
4:33 PM
Yes.
Rosie Gray
4:33 PM
yes
Gaius
4:33 PM
I believe we are all agreed...?
Patroklus
4:34 PM
yes
Rosie Gray
4:34 PM
Leslie and Widget?
Leslie
4:34 PM
okay
Widget
4:34 PM
I'm advisory.... but I think it's the best we can do
Rosie Gray
4:35 PM
okay, good... now c
Widget
4:36 PM
given the assumptions here
What does this mean? >> Alpine Medieval themed sim set in modern times.
Rennaisance Faire?
Gaius
4:36 PM
I believe that means it will be the same theme as NFS is.
Indeed, it does mean that — that is the wording for NFS's theme.
Rosie Gray
4:36 PM
yes, that is what was voted on
Patroklus
4:36 PM
doesn't the GMP determine the theme? it says 'mitteleuropa' for that region. does this match that?
Gaius
4:37 PM
Indeed, Rosie.
Middle Europe does mean Alpine, yes, Pat.
Rosie Gray
4:37 PM
I think it does, although middle Europe is somewhat vague
Patroklus
4:37 PM
The NFS covenant says "The city of Neufreistadt is modeled after a medieval Bavarian city with a surrounding valley. The time period is indeterminate.
"
Gaius
4:38 PM
Yes, because "Middle Europe" could also be parts of many other countries.
Rosie Gray
4:38 PM
right
Gaius
4:39 PM
I believe the "modern times" means that the time period is synonymous with an indeterminate time period, so long as it remains rural and Alpine/Medieval.
Patroklus
4:39 PM
"Alpine" is the theme for AM, Monastery and sims to the E and W of it according to the GMP
Gaius
4:39 PM
We can't necessarily change this point now, either: as Rosie pointed out, it was voted on during a meeting.
Rosie Gray
4:39 PM
right
Patroklus
4:39 PM
my point is that it's inconsistent with the GMP
Rosie Gray
4:40 PM
how is it inconsistent, Pat?
Widget
4:40 PM
Voted on during a Commission meeting or a RA?
Rosie Gray
4:40 PM
Commission meeting
Gaius
4:40 PM
Commission meeting.
Patroklus
4:40 PM
the GMP draws a distinction between 'alpine' and 'mitteleuropa' so they must have had different themes in mind
Widget
4:40 PM
Commissions are advisory to the RA ... paying attention to Pat's point
Gaius
4:41 PM
That may be, Pat, but (1) Middle Europe is a broader distinction than Alpine, and (2) the GMP does not adequately define the term "mitteleuropa".
Widget
4:41 PM
Pointing to another reason to update the GMP
Gaius
4:42 PM
Aye, Widget, but not within the prerogative of our commission
Widget
4:42 PM
which, imo, is not at all a bad thing
Patroklus
4:42 PM
well the GMP needs work in any case. monastery does not fit with it (it's supposed to be a void sim) and NFS E and W are both supposed to be high density builds according to it....
Rosie Gray
4:42 PM
absolutely agreed that the GMP needs to be updated, but it's not our mandate
Gaius
4:43 PM
No, no, I completely agree: the GMP is out of date.
But we need to focus... we are an hour and 12 minutes into our meeting and we're working on the wording of the report, not deciding on the course of our (now completed) commission.
Rosie Gray
4:43 PM
so, getting back to the recommendations
yes, I agree with Gaius
these were all debated on in previous meetings, and voted on
Widget
4:44 PM
Thinking of the next 10 years of CDS, can we take a few minutes to consider what should come before issuing an RFP for sim design?
Rosie Gray
4:44 PM
I think we are doing that Widget
Widget
4:44 PM
ok
Rosie Gray
4:45 PM
don't forget that for years now a lot of citizens have been looking forward to these sims... we need to get on with them
Patroklus
4:45 PM
i'm fine with the rest of c. i just want to make sure that 'establish an outpost on another grid' is considered at the same time even if it's not a proposal from this commission
Gaius
4:46 PM
I think the remainder of C seems to be the analysis of the surveys and discussions.
I think it's already discussed enough, Pat.
Rosie Gray
4:46 PM
do you want to propose some wording for that at the bottom of the document, Pat?
Leslie
4:46 PM
I think the new commission will consider that Pat, with out this commissions nudge
Patroklus
4:46 PM
that's okay rosie. i'll suggest something separately
Rosie Gray
4:46 PM
okay
Leslie
4:47 PM
LUC has that build it
built
Rosie Gray
4:47 PM
okay good
so are we ready to leave 'c'?
Leslie
4:47 PM
aye
Gaius
4:47 PM
Yes!
Patroklus
4:47 PM
yes
Rosie Gray
4:48 PM
Widget?
Widget
4:49 PM
sorry yes
Rosie Gray
4:50 PM
thanks
okay now for d.
any issues with it?
Leslie
4:50 PM
no
Widget
4:51 PM
one thought
Patroklus
4:51 PM
'call for design proposals' is pretty open. you could get anything back. should we recommend the RA be more specific about public v. private, any special builds, single or double prim and so on? give people some parameters to work within?
Leslie
4:51 PM
that would be difficult to formulate not, Pat.
now
Rosie Gray
4:51 PM
I agree with Leslie
Leslie
4:52 PM
I would hope the LUC could do that.
Rosie Gray
4:52 PM
this is more of a frame for the Land Use Commission to get going with
Patroklus
4:52 PM
not for us to formulate leslie. i mean that the RA should do so before calling for proposals
Rosie Gray
4:52 PM
but any design proposals will need to follow these recommendations as to placement and theme
Widget
4:54 PM
in addition to survey and meetings, there has been some useful forum discussion about design... including one begun earlier today by EM Warden. Forums are a legitimate part of CDS public life, I'd make room for them in our language
Rosie Gray
4:55 PM
Widget, people have been bringing forward different ideas constantly on every aspect of new sims, then changing minds etc. for years. It changes with the seasons and with the players
I think we need to focus or it will never be accomplished
Widget
4:56 PM
Rosie, that's not a reason to ignore the forums
I'm not suggesting forum threads should drive our thinking
only that we include them in our understanding of public comment on public concerns
Rosie Gray
4:56 PM
we have moved past the point of public discussion on themes, but any design proposals would have to be brought to the complete community again
Widget
4:56 PM
you misread me
Rosie Gray
4:56 PM
by the Land Use Commission
Widget
4:56 PM
ok, passing on this
Rosie Gray
4:57 PM
did I?
sorry if I did
Widget
4:57 PM
yes
Rosie Gray
4:57 PM
please explain further
Widget
4:57 PM
I'm merely suggesting that we include comments made in forums as part of what a design proposal might take into account
Leslie
4:58 PM
Could we say that public comments include forum?
Or is that implicit?
Widget
4:58 PM
I'd like to, Les ... they don't have force of law and it's not implicit
Patroklus
4:58 PM
we need to avoid the mistakes of the LA redo though
Rosie Gray
4:58 PM
I thought we were referencing back to the work this commission has done
Leslie
4:59 PM
IMHO, the most important thing is appointing good drivers to the LUC, the best vehicle will be wrecked by bad drivers
Patroklus
4:59 PM
we have settled on a theme (i think). some people want to argue for something else - steampunk or French rural. if we go backwards we will never get a new region added!
Rosie Gray
4:59 PM
but I would expect that when the Land Use Commission calls for design proposals, that there would be more discussion again on those
Widget
4:59 PM
ok... there's much I don't know about all this
I'll watch and learn
Patroklus
5:01 PM
i think we need to pay attention to the forums and any other public input but, if someone comes along and says "why don't we build a region next to CN where Dougga was going to be" i think we need to say "no, we have had that discussion and we are moving on"
Widget
5:01 PM
nods
Rosie Gray
5:01 PM
I agree with Pat
Patroklus
5:01 PM
or it just goes round in circles endlessly
Rosie Gray
5:02 PM
it's one of the things I've witnessed constantly with the CDS... yes round and round
new people arrive, don't know what's already been agreed on or discussed, have different ideas... around we go one more time
and nothing gets done
Leslie
5:03 PM
So do we agree with d?
Widget
5:03 PM
ok
Patroklus
5:03 PM
i agree
Leslie
5:03 PM
I think it is a good balance between flexibility and commitment
Rosie Gray
5:03 PM
agreed
Widget
5:03 PM
remove my (Forums Discussion?) from text
Leslie
5:04 PM
either way
Rosie Gray
5:04 PM
I honestly think it just muddies the waters
Leslie
5:04 PM
I think forums is public and comment
Widget
5:04 PM
I do too
Rosie Gray
5:04 PM
yup
Leslie
5:05 PM
so it is implicit
if a bidder wants to use it, they can
Widget
5:05 PM
oh, ok
Leslie
5:05 PM
LUC will just have to decide.
Patroklus
5:05 PM
i think forums are public comment
Rosie Gray
5:05 PM
I do too
Widget
5:05 PM
ok, good
thank you
Rosie Gray
5:05 PM
so, we are all agreed?
Leslie
5:05 PM
I move we accept d
Gaius
5:05 PM
Yes
Widget
5:05 PM
agree
Rosie Gray
5:06 PM
then the second recommendation... request the newly established CDS Land-Use Commission to manage the creation of the new sims, as per their mandate.
Patroklus
5:06 PM
agree
Widget
5:06 PM
agree
Leslie
5:06 PM
agree
Gaius
5:06 PM
Agree.
Rosie Gray
5:06 PM
lovely!
Leslie
5:06 PM
yay
Rosie Gray
5:07 PM
I did not get to a draft legislation
Leslie
5:07 PM
Which would look how?
Rosie Gray
5:07 PM
let's skip that for a moment, and look at the finances
Patroklus
5:07 PM
ahem
Rosie Gray
5:07 PM
the last recommendation
yes Pat?
Leslie
5:08 PM
?
listens to Pat
Patroklus
5:08 PM
we could look at the 'In Theme Expansion' act as a legislative vehicle
http://portal.slcds.info/index.php/faqs ... nsion-act/
Rosie Gray
5:09 PM
well, we could... but it is outdated now
it references the New Guild
Widget
5:09 PM
NL 8-2 is on the Law Review docket for revision
Leslie
5:09 PM
I think we should avoid it, if possible
Patroklus
5:10 PM
if we don't use this law, how do we get the new sim developed?
Rosie Gray
5:10 PM
can we look at the last recommendation first to get through that, we could return to this
Patroklus
5:10 PM
if we don't use an existing law, are we going to make it up as we go along?
Rosie Gray
5:11 PM
brb
Leslie
5:11 PM
It says in addition to. what does that mean Pat?
Patroklus
5:11 PM
ok, happy to do finances first if you prefer
Widget
5:12 PM
Consider adoption of Trebor's analysis as primary guide?
Patroklus
5:13 PM
leslie, i'll reply to your point when get back to this item. okay?
Widget
5:13 PM
That should be above draft legislation anyhow
Rosie Gray
5:13 PM
well, I think we need to stick with 'adopt', rather than consider
Widget
5:13 PM
I mean consider now. discuss now
Rosie Gray
5:13 PM
oh
Widget
5:14 PM
sorry, incomplete sentence.
Rosie Gray
5:15 PM
okay... so this was a direct quote from what was voted on as a motion
but I agree the wording isn't great
does it need more explanation... as per your question on the document Widget?
Widget
5:16 PM
are we talking about 'adopt Trebor's analysis as the primary guide in determining the finances of a new sim. with some flexibility be allowed in consideration of public space useage
'?
Rosie Gray
5:16 PM
yes
Widget
5:17 PM
Not my wheelhouse, so no. I've no comment.
Rosie Gray
5:17 PM
we should include a link to it, at the very least
Gaius
5:17 PM
Same comment as Widget — not my specialty.
Rosie Gray
5:18 PM
let's find Trebor's document
on the forum somewhere
Patroklus
5:18 PM
i think it's fine. we just want the region to be financially viable but don't want trebor's calculations to only lead to once kind of region
Leslie
5:18 PM
I agree
Rosie Gray
5:19 PM
I'm looking for it
Leslie
5:19 PM
But it says guide, which is a model
Rosie Gray
5:19 PM
agreed
Leslie
5:19 PM
not the final documet
Rosie Gray
5:19 PM
Trebor is very good at this stuff
Widget
5:19 PM
ok, Pat's comment makes sense to me
Leslie
5:20 PM
So again a balance of commitment with flexibility
Patroklus
5:20 PM
*one kind
Widget
5:20 PM
we want the region to be financially viable but don't want trebor's calculations to only lead to one kind of region
Rosie Gray
5:21 PM
http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=5259
I agree with that Widget
his is an overview, in my opinion
but we need some flexibility
how do we word this?
Widget
5:24 PM
How about
Adopt Trebor's analysis as the primary guide in determining the finances of a new sim. Allow for flexibility in consideration of public space useage
or
Adopt Trebor's analysis as a primary guide in determining the finances of a new sim. Allow for flexibility in consideration of public space useage
Rosie Gray
5:24 PM
sounds good
and the link
Patroklus
5:24 PM
think i prefer 'the'
Widget
5:24 PM
what is public space useage
why, Pat?
Rosie Gray
5:24 PM
anything that isn't private
Widget
5:24 PM
useage?
Rosie Gray
5:25 PM
could drop that word
Widget
5:25 PM
what is useage
Rosie Gray shrugs
Leslie
5:25 PM
agreed
Widget
5:25 PM
what do we mean to say?
Patroklus
5:25 PM
i think you can only have one 'primary' guide. it it's only 'a primary' guide, what would the other ones be?
Widget
5:25 PM
ok Pat, point taken
Rosie Gray
5:25 PM
you are right Pat!
Widget
5:26 PM
any new sim or just this one?
Rosie Gray
5:26 PM
either of the 2 sims
Leslie
5:26 PM
These two
Rosie Gray
5:26 PM
both of the sims
rather
Widget
5:26 PM
Adopt Trebor's analysis as the primary guide in determining the finances of these new regions. Allow for flexibility in consideration of public space.
Leslie
5:27 PM
Wishing good luck for LUC.
with allowance?
Rosie Gray
5:27 PM
so much will depend on the design proposals! but it allows for flexibility
Leslie
5:27 PM
Yes
I move to accept.
Widget
5:27 PM
I'm confused... what is meant by consideration of public space? How much in land, in prims, in design?
Rosie Gray
5:27 PM
yes
Gaius
5:28 PM
Yes, I believe according to Trebor's variables.
Leslie
5:28 PM
The analysis is all about that balance.
Widget
5:28 PM
Allocation of resources, look and feel?
Rosie Gray
5:28 PM
tier fees
Patroklus
5:28 PM
i think the issue is widget that tremor's calculation, used on its own, leads to a sim with pubilic/private balance like LA
Leslie
5:28 PM
No, the finances is about private tier paying for public prims
Rosie Gray
5:28 PM
yes, what Pat said
Leslie
5:29 PM
So it is asking that it not be mandated to be a certain percentage
but to use that balance as a guide
Patroklus
5:29 PM
if we want something with more public land, like NFS, you need to make the private parcels more expensive to pay for all the public land that's not being paid for by other means
Rosie Gray
5:29 PM
which doesn't allow for much in the way of public space other than roads
Widget
5:29 PM
I want this recommendation to be easy to understand by people who are not steeped in CDS lore
like me
Patroklus
5:29 PM
*trebor. damn autocorrect
Rosie Gray
5:30 PM
good comment, Widget
brb
Leslie
5:30 PM
So his analysis is adopted, but not necessarily his percentages?
Widget
5:31 PM
the language of this recommendation is too short-handy for my comfort
Leslie
5:31 PM
How would you change it in the next 5 minutes, Widget?
Patroklus
5:31 PM
yes leslie. the RA should be free to commission a region like NFS if they want to and if they think the parcels will sell at that rate
Leslie
5:32 PM
So how do we get past this, and adopt wording.
Patroklus
5:32 PM
i'm afraid the drafting fairy has deserted me... finding it difficult to think of a clearer way to write this
Widget
5:32 PM
i'm going to try
Leslie
5:33 PM
We want to follow trebor's format, but not necessarily his assumptions
Gaius
5:33 PM
Folks, I must be going.
Leslie
5:33 PM
Aww.
Gaius
5:33 PM
But I approve of the report.
Patroklus
5:33 PM
bye gaius take care
Leslie
5:33 PM
What a guy
cu
Widget
5:34 PM
Leslie, say more about assumption
Rosie Gray
5:34 PM
back... by Gaius
Gaius left group chat.
Rosie Gray
5:34 PM
bye*
Widget
5:34 PM
Rosie I'm trying another version of this last recommendation
Rosie Gray
5:34 PM
yes!
Leslie
5:35 PM
He has provided a formula, inserted assumptions, or variables into itle i
into it
Rosie Gray
5:35 PM
and the variables can be adjusted to account for fewer private parcels to cover the tier
Leslie
5:35 PM
We want to use his formula, but insert our own varibes
Rosie Gray
5:35 PM
right!
Leslie
5:35 PM
exactly
Rosie Gray
5:35 PM
where necessary
Widget
5:35 PM
does this work?
recommendation: Adopt Trebor's general format and analysis as the primary guide in determining the finances of these new regions. Allow for flexibility regarding assumptions about variables and in consideration of public space vis allocation of resources.
See: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=5259
Rosie Gray
5:36 PM
well, I understand it
Leslie
5:36 PM
I like that fine, widget
Rosie Gray
5:36 PM
Pat?
Widget
5:36 PM
Pat?
Leslie
5:36 PM
that is a good start, Rosie
Patroklus
5:36 PM
yes, i like that
Rosie Gray
5:36 PM
yay!
Widget
5:36 PM
yay!
Leslie
5:37 PM
I would like to adopt that and move on
tg for Widget
Patroklus
5:37 PM
ty widget
Rosie Gray
5:37 PM
looks good
Widget
5:37 PM
glad to help
Rosie Gray
5:37 PM
so.. back to the question of the legistlation
Patroklus
5:38 PM
yes
Rosie Gray
5:38 PM
legislation*
Widget
5:38 PM
is a bill called for?
Patroklus
5:38 PM
here the question is: what process do we use? rather than 'what legislation?'
Rosie Gray
5:38 PM
okay
Widget
5:38 PM
right
Rosie Gray
5:38 PM
Pat I think you are the expert on this
Leslie
5:38 PM
"The RA should consider redrafting Pat suggested:NL 8-2 to bring it up to date or launch a different process if it believes this will lead to a quicker and more satisfactory outcome"
Patroklus
5:38 PM
do we use something like NL 8-2 which needs amendment? or do we make up a new process? similar to a previous region expansion?
Leslie
5:38 PM
Sorry Pat, but there you have it
Patroklus
5:39 PM
probably not for us to decide but we should recommend the RA does something. it needs to make a choice.
Leslie
5:39 PM
I think this is beyond the purview of this commission, and we should send the question back to the RA
Patroklus
5:39 PM
"The RA should consider redrafting NL 8-2 to bring it up to date or launch a different process if it believes this will lead to a quicker and more satisfactory outcome"
Widget
5:39 PM
Law Review will be making a recommendation regarding NL 8-2 ... my guess is within 2 months
Leslie
5:40 PM
agreed
that is too long
Patroklus
5:40 PM
i don't think we should wait widget
Widget
5:40 PM
how soon do you need it?
Leslie
5:40 PM
move it faster Widget
by the new RA
Patroklus
5:40 PM
if the RA wants to use NL 8-2 then it should do so as a priortiy
Widget takes a deep breath
Patroklus
5:40 PM
the whole point of the law was to speed things up
Leslie
5:40 PM
Well, for the LUC, which should meet soon
Patroklus
5:40 PM
by having pre-agreed process
Leslie
5:41 PM
Do it tomorrow, Widget
Widget
5:41 PM
how soon do you need a revised NL 8-2?
Rosie Gray
5:41 PM
the whole reason for including something in this document is to hasten the process
Widget
5:41 PM
pffft
Patroklus
5:41 PM
for the other expansions we made it up as we went along and it took ages and was very very painful
Widget
5:41 PM
we have just just set up Law Review and brought people ito it
Leslie
5:41 PM
did Widget just stick her tongue out at me?
Rosie Gray
5:41 PM
hahhaha
Patroklus
5:41 PM
LOL! not sure what that was
Rosie Gray
5:42 PM
my guess is a Law Review will move like a glacier
out of necessity
Leslie
5:42 PM
I could have said yesterday
Widget
5:42 PM
put money on that, Rosie?
Leslie
5:42 PM
How soon can you push it through, Widget.
Rosie Gray
5:42 PM
hahhaha, I never bet, Widget!
Widget
5:42 PM
I can talk with Delia tonight or tomorrow
marking it urgent now
Leslie
5:42 PM
It needs to get to RA before LUC can proceed
Rosie Gray
5:42 PM
if that law could be dealt with as a priority
Leslie
5:43 PM
absolutely
Widget
5:43 PM
When will LUC be populated?
Rosie Gray
5:43 PM
good question since nobody has officially been assigned the job of convening it
Leslie
5:44 PM
I have asked appropriate peeps to nominate, but I think Rosie can facilitate that
We need RA to approve nominations
Rosie Gray
5:44 PM
right
and the guild
Leslie
5:44 PM
Which they could do next meeting
Widget
5:44 PM
ok, so you work on the people and I'll work on NL 8-2
Leslie
5:44 PM
We need nominations from guild and RA
Rosie Gray
5:44 PM
next meeting is tomorrow to redo the last meeting
Leslie
5:44 PM
so?
lets get nominees
Rosie Gray
5:44 PM
just not sure we will get to it
the guild needs to meet
Leslie
5:45 PM
two from guild and two from RA
then by the following meeting/
Widget
5:45 PM
Has the guild reconstituted itself?
Leslie
5:45 PM
?
Rosie Gray
5:45 PM
we still have a guild Widget
the CDS Artisan Guild
Widget
5:45 PM
and what about executive paricipation in the LUC
Leslie
5:45 PM
So send two names to the RA
asap
Rosie Gray
5:46 PM
right... have to consult with the rest of the guild on that
Leslie
5:46 PM
let's fire up our LUC
Patroklus
5:46 PM
good point widget. i guess there will be no exec participation until a new chancellor is elected
Rosie Gray
5:46 PM
and we have no 'executive' riht now!
Leslie
5:46 PM
we don't need it for a quorum
We can seat all but the admin chair
Rosie Gray
5:46 PM
I'll see if I can get the RA to agree on recommendations, via email, so we can get that part done
(hopefully) at the meeting tomorrow
Leslie
5:46 PM
sweet, ty Rosie
Rosie Gray
5:47 PM
I'll try anyway, and with the guild too
guild will be more difficult I think
because there are a lot more people
Leslie
5:47 PM
That is three, we only need four to convene.
Widget
5:47 PM
Les, with who as Chair?
Rosie Gray
5:48 PM
supposed to be decided upon by the members of the commission
Leslie
5:48 PM
The law says the commission will vote for a chair and vice
Widget
5:48 PM
nods
Rosie Gray
5:48 PM
so... for our purposes right now with this document
Leslie
5:48 PM
I think 5 good people will be able to figure it all out
Rosie Gray
5:48 PM
what do we want to say for 'e'?
Leslie
5:48 PM
I will, sigh, accept, if nominated
Patroklus
5:48 PM
do we have agreement on text for e? i propose: "The RA should consider redrafting NL 8-2 to bring it up to date or launch a different process if it believes this will lead to a quicker and more satisfactory outcome"
Leslie
5:49 PM
Yes
Rosie Gray
5:49 PM
yes
Leslie
5:49 PM
I am good with that
Widget
5:49 PM
no 'consider'
should either
Patroklus
5:49 PM
ok, 'should either redraft... or launch...."
Leslie
5:49 PM
Awesome
Widget
5:49 PM
Actually
Rosie Gray
5:50 PM
that's good widget
Widget
5:50 PM
I believe the RA will ask Law Review for an opinion
Leslie
5:50 PM
Can this be our land use commission?
Widget
5:50 PM
Law Review exists as a Citizen's Initiative
Rosie Gray
5:51 PM
yes I was surprised to see it (but glad)
and good choice of participants
Widget
5:51 PM
Commissions lapse and we needed to get going.
Rosie Gray
5:51 PM
absolutely
Patroklus
5:52 PM
are we pretty much done then?
Rosie Gray
5:52 PM
so we are done with this document and I can post it on the forum for public comment?
Widget
5:52 PM
wait
Leslie
5:52 PM
Yes
Widget
5:52 PM
I'd remove 'quicker'
Patroklus
5:52 PM
i think speed is a consideration widget
Leslie
5:52 PM
satisfactory includes quicker
Rosie Gray
5:52 PM
agreed
Leslie
5:53 PM
Hard to tell the RA to be quick, imho
Rosie Gray
5:54 PM
it is, lol
Leslie
5:54 PM
*heh
Patroklus
5:54 PM
you can tell them. whether they take notice though...
Leslie
5:54 PM
Wait. I have declared!
Widget
5:54 PM
yay!
Leslie
5:54 PM
Widget
5:54 PM
awww
Rosie Gray
5:55 PM
hahaha
okay... so all agreed that it's ready for public comments?
Widget
5:55 PM
Rosie, I believe the lege rec goes last
Rosie Gray
5:55 PM
I need to post it now
Leslie
5:55 PM
I so move
Patroklus
5:55 PM
agreed
rosie. do you want me to send you a transcript for posting in the forum?
Rosie Gray
5:55 PM
yes you're right...
Leslie
5:55 PM
remember, perfect is the enemy of good.
Patroklus
5:56 PM
or i can post it if you prefer
Widget
5:56 PM
I've change recommendations to singular
Rosie Gray
5:56 PM
okay I think we are done
let's vote, just for clarity
Widget
5:57 PM
good luck with the formatting
Rosie Gray
5:57 PM
to adopt this document and send it to RA
I moved to Chrome because Firefox was screwing up the formatting for me
Widget
5:57 PM
wait please
Les is editing
Rosie Gray
5:57 PM
hmmm... okay
Leslie
5:57 PM
Is that okay?
Rosie Gray
5:58 PM
now it is
Widget
5:58 PM
and IMO, 'in order to' is much better language than 'if it would'
Rosie Gray
5:58 PM
either way is fine IMO
Leslie
5:58 PM
it is not grammatical
but if you want, widget
Widget
5:58 PM
how about
Leslie
6:00 PM
In order to provide a satisfactory out come,....... etc
the RA should either a or b
exactly
Widget
6:00 PM
what goes in to < >?
Leslie
6:00 PM
nothing
it could be left out
Rosie Gray
6:00 PM
?
Leslie
6:01 PM
reccommend a or b
Rosie Gray
6:01 PM
oh I see where you are going with it
Patroklus
6:01 PM
"whichever will produce the most satisfactory outcome"
Leslie
6:02 PM
fine
or consider?
a new process
rather that devise
Widget
6:03 PM
We recommend the RA either revise NL 8-2 to bring it up to date or consider a new process, whichever will produce the most satisfactory process and outcome.
Leslie
6:03 PM
It could ask LUC to devise
Patroklus
6:03 PM
needs to be 'devise'. consider is too weak
Widget
6:03 PM
Law Review will be knocking on the door of LUC
Leslie
6:03 PM
fine, Pat. they could use the commission to recommend the device
Widget
6:04 PM
hah
Leslie
6:04 PM
good, let's wrap
Widget
6:04 PM
We recommend the RA either revise NL 8-2 to bring it up to date or devise a new process, whichever will produce the most satisfactory process and outcome.
Patroklus
6:05 PM
let's conclude our session
Rosie Gray
6:05 PM
whew... yes
Leslie
6:05 PM
Yes
Patroklus
6:05 PM
i move we adjourn
Rosie Gray
6:05 PM
all agreed to adjourn?
Leslie
6:05 PM
yes
Rosie Gray
6:05 PM
yes
Leslie
6:06 PM
we are adjorned
Rosie Gray
6:06 PM
okay we are adjourned