The meeting was at first facilitated by Sati. Patrick was the initial minutes taker.
At a certain point Patrick became the facilitator and I reluctantly agreed to record the decisions.
Patrick seems to have kept good notes throughout the meeting.
As I recall, the proposed agenda (not in order of consesned sequence) was:
1. A proposal by Itzhak (I) listing five options for how to proceed.
2. A proposal by Sati about presenting our statement in segments to the GA.
3. A proposal by Leia (in absentia) about posting alternative vision statements.
4. A proposal by Lisa (in absentia) about the use a workstream process for online collaboration.
5 A proposal by Mark (in absentia) about something to do with Values.
#2 received 7 votes. Two others received 6 votes each. No runoff was conducted. The plurality choice (#2) was declared the winner. I did not protest this decision.
We seem to have consensed on the following:
1. The Vision statement will be brought to the GA in parts.
2. The bulletted elements will be presented in a sequence to be determined by the group.
3. The preamble and postamble will be presented for ratification later.
4. Once a segment of the vision statement is adopted by the GA, it cannot be changed by the GA until after the whole statement is ratified — unless the V&Gs group asked the GA to do so for editorial reasons.
The above consensus made proposal #1 moot. However, one related element came up. There was no decision about the manner in which amendments will be handled and I was asked to better formulate and present my proposal on this matter at a later meeting.
I left after 3:00 PM (past the meeting’s scheduled time) to participate in another working group, assuming that nothing very consequential will be handled.
Somebody else probably continued to record the decisions.
If anybody has corrections to the above record, please post them here.
Somebody will have to post the minutes. Not me.