When we eventually have a referendum on a budget all discussion about it won't matter. Including any email or any chat log. The only thing that is relevant is the text in the referendum itself. That needs to explain.
Maybe next time you try to take an active part in the actual conversation instead of backseat-moderating things after the fact. </rant>
If you're suggesting that we have a process where the only way to contribute or criticize it is to attend a synchronous video call it is a discriminatory one. I hope that's not what you're suggesting.
It is important that we argue about these things. It probably doesn't translate well for what I want to express, but "arguing" is meant in a positive way, as in "the best solution doesn't just present itself by itself, we have to work for it". So please, be there the next time.
I agree that there is lots of room for discussion and I'm excited about new ideas being brought forward. I think that discussion needs to be inclusive.
Also, something doesn't need to be in the budget for us to do it. The budget is quite simply guidance and a way to track our spending. It should be representative of what we have reasonable plans to do. I hope that we're able to do more projects than we budget for.
Ted