https://www.w3.org/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=AbassetW3C Wiki - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T17:13:54ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.41.0https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106145PWE/201708 TPAC2018-03-02T01:21:37Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''Does anyone know if there is an IRC record of this breakout? [___<insert IRC link here>____] ''<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------------<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mace<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peintner<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diniz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whalen<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first? Amy's notes are first, then Ann's notes are inserted in the form: W = what's working; N = what's not working; F = what we should focus on first]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' wording<br /><br />
'''F:''' improving wording<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Working Groups and W3C are welcoming<br /><br />
'''N:''' people who are not at F2F meetings need better introduction & engagement, else we have attrition<br /><br />
'''F:''' think more about how to engage people digitally<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Rachel (a new participant):''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Ivan Herman has been very helpful with joining W3C, & Tzviya and Dave Cramer helpful buddies in the WG (Publishing)<br /><br />
'''N:''' Overwhelming amount of info <br /><br />
'''F:''' Intro to terminology / tools / processes<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br /><br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br /><br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' have a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''N:''' didn't know about it<br /><br />
'''F:''' have better introduction to WG members<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:'''<br /><br />
when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br /><br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers <br /><br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time <br /><br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night <br /><br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath <br /><br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive <br /><br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Takuki:'''<br />
<br />
'''W:''' good we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' hard to know what to do<br /><br />
'''F:''' focus on common-sense rules on how to handle situations <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' IRC queue management; Best Practices document<br /><br />
'''N:''' email that's sent upon arrival<br /><br />
'''F:''' improve introductory info<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings <br /><br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people, what's most important, good to know, and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference <br /><br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Welcome letter from Chair<br /><br />
'''N:''' I didn't know (yet assumed) there is a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''F:''' may need variations of Code of Conduct for F2F versus offlinek<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity <br /><br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals? <br /><br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br /><br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room <br /><br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity <br /><br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree <br /><br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal <br /><br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Code of Conduct is fine<br /><br />
'''N:''' definition of "respect" in glossary is too narrow<br /><br />
'''F:''' could add concepts of timezone, language barriers, differences in situations. Be more overt in our goals for diversity.<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <Ann: sorry, I missed this><br /><br />
'''N:''' W3C tools don't necessarily work for Chinese<br /><br />
'''F:''' say that people can use a few other tools that are comfortable for them<br /><br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br /><br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved? <br /><br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br /><br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page] <br /><br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat? <br /><br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together <br /><br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?] <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Jeff:'''<br /><br />
I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh <br /><br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important <br /><br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann? <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying <br /><br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br /><br />
'''W:'''<Ann: sorry, I missed this> <br /><br />
'''N:''' speakers going down 'rabbit holes' <br /><br />
'''F:''' Chairs need help<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum <br /><br />
'''W:''' a lot of people here, in this session; CEPC comes up in search; <br /><br />
'''N:''' better tools, e.g., GitHub issues instead of email<br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''David:''' <br /><br />
you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br /><br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group. <br /><br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106106PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-27T05:44:13Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------------<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diniz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first? Amy's notes are first, then Ann's notes are inserted in the form: W = what's working; N = what's not working; F = what we should focus on first]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' wording<br /><br />
'''F:''' improving wording<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Working Groups and W3C are welcoming<br /><br />
'''N:''' people who are not at F2F meetings need better introduction & engagement, else we have attrition<br /><br />
'''F:''' think more about how to engage people digitally<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Rachel (a new participant):''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Ivan Herman has been very helpful with joining W3C, & Tzviya and Dave Cramer helpful buddies in the WG (Publishing)<br /><br />
'''N:''' Overwhelming amount of info <br /><br />
'''F:''' Intro to terminology / tools / processes<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br /><br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br /><br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' have a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''N:''' didn't know about it<br /><br />
'''F:''' have better introduction to WG members<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:'''<br /><br />
when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br /><br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers <br /><br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time <br /><br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night <br /><br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath <br /><br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive <br /><br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Takuki:'''<br />
<br />
'''W:''' good we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' hard to know what to do<br /><br />
'''F:''' focus on common-sense rules on how to handle situations <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' IRC queue management; Best Practices document<br /><br />
'''N:''' email that's sent upon arrival<br /><br />
'''F:''' improve introductory info<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings <br /><br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people, what's most important, good to know, and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference <br /><br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Welcome letter from Chair<br /><br />
'''N:''' I didn't know (yet assumed) there is a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''F:''' may need variations of Code of Conduct for F2F versus offlinek<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity <br /><br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals? <br /><br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br /><br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room <br /><br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity <br /><br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree <br /><br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal <br /><br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Code of Conduct is fine<br /><br />
'''N:''' definition of "respect" in glossary is too narrow<br /><br />
'''F:''' could add concepts of timezone, language barriers, differences in situations. Be more overt in our goals for diversity.<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <Ann: sorry, I missed this><br /><br />
'''N:''' W3C tools don't necessarily work for Chinese<br /><br />
'''F:''' say that people can use a few other tools that are comfortable for them<br /><br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br /><br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved? <br /><br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br /><br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page] <br /><br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat? <br /><br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together <br /><br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?] <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Jeff:'''<br /><br />
I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh <br /><br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important <br /><br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann? <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying <br /><br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br /><br />
'''W:'''<Ann: sorry, I missed this> <br /><br />
'''N:''' speakers going down 'rabbit holes' <br /><br />
'''F:''' Chairs need help<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum <br /><br />
'''W:''' a lot of people here, in this session; CEPC comes up in search; <br /><br />
'''N:''' better tools, e.g., GitHub issues instead of email<br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''David:''' <br /><br />
you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br /><br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group. <br /><br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106071PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-24T09:19:29Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------------<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diaz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first? Amy's notes are first, then Ann's notes are inserted in the form: W = what's working; N = what's not working; F = what we should focus on first]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' wording<br /><br />
'''F:''' improving wording<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Working Groups and W3C are welcoming<br /><br />
'''N:''' people who are not at F2F meetings need better introduction & engagement, else we have attrition<br /><br />
'''F:''' think more about how to engage people digitally<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Rachel (a new participant):''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Ivan Herman has been very helpful with joining W3C, & Tzviya and Dave Cramer helpful buddies in the WG (Publishing)<br /><br />
'''N:''' Overwhelming amount of info <br /><br />
'''F:''' Intro to terminology / tools / processes<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br /><br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br /><br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' have a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''N:''' didn't know about it<br /><br />
'''F:''' have better introduction to WG members<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:'''<br /><br />
when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br /><br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers <br /><br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time <br /><br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night <br /><br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath <br /><br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive <br /><br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Takuki:'''<br />
<br />
'''W:''' good we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' hard to know what to do<br /><br />
'''F:''' focus on common-sense rules on how to handle situations <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' IRC queue management; Best Practices document<br /><br />
'''N:''' email that's sent upon arrival<br /><br />
'''F:''' improve introductory info<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings <br /><br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people, what's most important, good to know, and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference <br /><br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Welcome letter from Chair<br /><br />
'''N:''' I didn't know (yet assumed) there is a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''F:''' may need variations of Code of Conduct for F2F versus offlinek<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity <br /><br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals? <br /><br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br /><br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room <br /><br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity <br /><br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree <br /><br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal <br /><br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Code of Conduct is fine<br /><br />
'''N:''' definition of "respect" in glossary is too narrow<br /><br />
'''F:''' could add concepts of timezone, language barriers, differences in situations. Be more overt in our goals for diversity.<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <Ann: sorry, I missed this><br /><br />
'''N:''' W3C tools don't necessarily work for Chinese<br /><br />
'''F:''' say that people can use a few other tools that are comfortable for them<br /><br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br /><br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved? <br /><br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br /><br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page] <br /><br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat? <br /><br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together <br /><br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?] <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Jeff:'''<br /><br />
I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh <br /><br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important <br /><br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann? <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying <br /><br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br /><br />
'''W:'''<Ann: sorry, I missed this> <br /><br />
'''N:''' speakers going down 'rabbit holes' <br /><br />
'''F:''' Chairs need help<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum <br /><br />
'''W:''' a lot of people here, in this session; CEPC comes up in search; <br /><br />
'''N:''' better tools, e.g., GitHub issues instead of email<br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''David:''' <br /><br />
you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br /><br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group. <br /><br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106070PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-24T09:18:49Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
*** DRAFT -- not yet finished by Ann Bassetti ***<br />
<br />
The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------------<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diaz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first? Amy's notes are first, then Ann's notes are inserted in the form: W = what's working; N = what's not working; F = what we should focus on first]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' wording<br /><br />
'''F:''' improving wording<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Working Groups and W3C are welcoming<br /><br />
'''N:''' people who are not at F2F meetings need better introduction & engagement, else we have attrition<br /><br />
'''F:''' think more about how to engage people digitally<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Rachel (a new participant):''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Ivan Herman has been very helpful with joining W3C, & Tzviya and Dave Cramer helpful buddies in the WG (Publishing)<br /><br />
'''N:''' Overwhelming amount of info <br /><br />
'''F:''' Intro to terminology / tools / processes<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br /><br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br /><br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' have a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''N:''' didn't know about it<br /><br />
'''F:''' have better introduction to WG members<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:'''<br /><br />
when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br /><br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers <br /><br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time <br /><br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night <br /><br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath <br /><br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive <br /><br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Takuki:'''<br />
<br />
'''W:''' good we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' hard to know what to do<br /><br />
'''F:''' focus on common-sense rules on how to handle situations <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' IRC queue management; Best Practices document<br /><br />
'''N:''' email that's sent upon arrival<br /><br />
'''F:''' improve introductory info<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings <br /><br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people, what's most important, good to know, and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference <br /><br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Welcome letter from Chair<br /><br />
'''N:''' I didn't know (yet assumed) there is a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''F:''' may need variations of Code of Conduct for F2F versus offlinek<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity <br /><br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals? <br /><br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br /><br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room <br /><br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity <br /><br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree <br /><br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal <br /><br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Code of Conduct is fine<br /><br />
'''N:''' definition of "respect" in glossary is too narrow<br /><br />
'''F:''' could add concepts of timezone, language barriers, differences in situations. Be more overt in our goals for diversity.<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <Ann: sorry, I missed this><br /><br />
'''N:''' W3C tools don't necessarily work for Chinese<br /><br />
'''F:''' say that people can use a few other tools that are comfortable for them<br /><br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br /><br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved? <br /><br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br /><br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page] <br /><br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat? <br /><br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together <br /><br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?] <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Jeff:'''<br /><br />
I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh <br /><br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important <br /><br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann? <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying <br /><br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br /><br />
'''W:'''<Ann: sorry, I missed this> <br /><br />
'''N:''' speakers going down 'rabbit holes' <br /><br />
'''F:''' Chairs need help<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum <br /><br />
'''W:''' a lot of people here, in this session; CEPC comes up in search; <br /><br />
'''N:''' better tools, e.g., GitHub issues instead of email<br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''David:''' <br /><br />
you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br /><br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group. <br /><br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106069PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-24T09:14:54Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
*** DRAFT -- not yet finished by Ann Bassetti ***<br />
<br />
The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------------<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diaz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first? Amy's notes are first, then Ann's notes are inserted in the form: W = what's working; N = what's not working; F = what we should focus on first]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' wording<br /><br />
'''F:''' improving wording<br /><br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Working Groups and W3C are welcoming<br /><br />
'''N:''' people who are not at F2F meetings need better introduction & engagement, else we have attrition<br /><br />
'''F:''' think more about how to engage people digitally<br /><br />
<br />
'''Rachel (a new participant):''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Ivan Herman has been very helpful with joining W3C, & Tzviya and Dave Cramer helpful buddies in the WG (Publishing)<br /><br />
'''N:''' Overwhelming amount of info <br /><br />
'''F:''' Intro to terminology / tools / processes<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br /><br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br /><br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' have a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''N:''' didn't know about it<br /><br />
'''F:''' have better introduction to WG members<br /><br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:'''<br /><br />
when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br /><br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers <br /><br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time <br /><br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night <br /><br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath <br /><br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive <br /><br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan <br /><br />
<br />
'''Takuki:'''<br />
<br />
'''W:''' good we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' hard to know what to do<br /><br />
'''F:''' focus on common-sense rules on how to handle situations <br /><br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' IRC queue management; Best Practices document<br /><br />
'''N:''' email that's sent upon arrival<br /><br />
'''F:''' improve introductory info<br /><br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings <br /><br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people, what's most important, good to know, and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference <br /><br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone <br /><br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital <br /><br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Welcome letter from Chair<br /><br />
'''N:''' I didn't know (yet assumed) there is a Code of Conduct <br /><br />
'''F:''' may need variations of Code of Conduct for F2F versus offlinek<br /><br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity <br /><br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals? <br /><br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br /><br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room <br /><br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity <br /><br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree <br /><br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal <br /><br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Code of Conduct is fine<br /><br />
'''N:''' definition of "respect" in glossary is too narrow<br /><br />
'''F:''' could add concepts of timezone, language barriers, differences in situations. Be more overt in our goals for diversity.<br /><br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <Ann: sorry, I missed this><br /><br />
'''N:''' W3C tools don't necessarily work for Chinese<br /><br />
'''F:''' say that people can use a few other tools that are comfortable for them<br /><br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br /><br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved? <br /><br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br /><br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page] <br /><br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat? <br /><br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together <br /><br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?] <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Jeff:'''<br /><br />
I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh <br /><br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important <br /><br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann? <br /><br /><br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture <br /><br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying <br /><br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br /><br />
'''W:'''<Ann: sorry, I missed this> <br /><br />
'''N:''' speakers going down 'rabbit holes' <br /><br />
'''F:''' Chairs need help<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum <br /><br />
'''W:''' a lot of people here, in this session; CEPC comes up in search; <br /><br />
'''N:''' better tools, e.g., GitHub issues instead of email<br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br />
<br />
'''David:''' <br /><br />
you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br /><br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group. <br /><br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106068PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-24T08:56:04Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
*** DRAFT -- not yet finished by Ann Bassetti ***<br />
<br />
The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------------<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diaz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first? Amy's notes are first, then Ann's notes are inserted in the form: W = what's working; N = what's not working; F = what we should focus on first]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' wording<br /><br />
'''F:''' improving wording<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Working Groups and W3C are welcoming<br /><br />
'''N:''' people who are not at F2F meetings need better introduction & engagement, else we have attrition<br /><br />
'''F:''' think more about how to engage people digitally<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Rachel (a new participant):''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br /><br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br /><br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:'''<br /><br />
when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br /><br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers <br /><br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time <br /><br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night <br /><br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath <br /><br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive <br /><br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan <br /><br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings <br /><br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people. what's most important, good to know and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference <br /><br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity <br /><br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals? <br /><br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br /><br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room <br /><br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity <br /><br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree <br /><br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal <br /><br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools <br /><br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br /><br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved? <br /><br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br /><br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page] <br /><br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat? <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together <br /><br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?] <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Jeff:'''<br /><br />
I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh <br /><br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Amy:'''<br /><br />
escalation process and training are very important <br /><br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann? <br /><br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture <br /><br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying <br /><br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br /><br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum <br /><br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''David:''' <br /><br />
you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br /><br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group. <br /><br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106067PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-24T08:50:55Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
*** DRAFT -- not yet finished by Ann Bassetti ***<br />
<br />
The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------------<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diaz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first? Amy's notes are first, then Ann's notes are inserted in the form: W = what's working; N = what's not working; F = what we should focus on first]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' we have a Code of Conduct<br /><br />
'''N:''' wording<br /><br />
'''F:''' improving wording<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' Working Groups and W3C are welcoming<br /><br />
'''N:''' people who are not at F2F meetings need better introduction & engagement, else we have attrition<br /><br />
'''F:''' think more about how to engage people digitally<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Rachel:''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br /><br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br /><br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br /><br />
<br />
'''W:''' <br /><br />
'''N:''' <br /><br />
'''F:''' <br /><br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:'''<br /><br />
when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br /><br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers <br /><br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time <br /><br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night <br /><br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath <br /><br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive <br /><br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan <br /><br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings <br /><br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people. what's most important, good to know and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference <br /><br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity <br /><br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals? <br /><br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br /><br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room <br /><br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity <br /><br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree <br /><br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal <br /><br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools <br /><br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br /><br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved? <br /><br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br /><br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page] <br /><br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat? <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?] <br /><br />
<br />
'''Jeff:'''<br /><br />
I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh <br /><br />
<br />
'''Amy:'''<br /><br />
escalation process and training are very important <br /><br />
<br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann? <br /><br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception <br /><br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying <br /><br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br />
<br />
'''David:''' <br /><br />
you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group. <br /><br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106066PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-23T09:33:25Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
*** DRAFT -- not yet finished by Ann Bassetti ***<br />
<br />
The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br />
<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diaz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first?]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br />
<br />
'''Rachel:''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br />
<br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br />
<br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br />
<br />
Tzviya: when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br />
<br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers<br />
<br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time<br />
<br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night<br />
<br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath<br />
<br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive<br />
<br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings<br />
<br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people. what's most important, good to know and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference<br />
<br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone<br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital<br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f<br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity<br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals?<br />
<br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br />
<br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room<br />
<br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity<br />
<br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree<br />
<br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal<br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments<br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools<br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br />
<br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved?<br />
<br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br />
<br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page]<br />
<br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat?<br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together<br />
<br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?]<br />
<br />
Jeff: I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh<br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important<br />
<br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann?<br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception<br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying<br />
<br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br />
<br />
David: you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group.<br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106065PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-23T09:16:52Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br />
<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br /><br />
Ann Bassetti<br /><br />
Amy van der Hiel<br /><br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br /><br />
Vivienne Conway<br /><br />
Paul Belfanti<br /><br />
Rachel Comerford<br /><br />
Amanda Mate<br /><br />
Tzviya Siegman<br /><br />
Daniel Peinter<br /><br />
Takuki Kamiya<br /><br />
Angel Li<br /><br />
Vagner Diaz<br /><br />
Jeff Jaffe<br /><br />
Coralie Mercier<br /><br />
Tara Whelan<br /><br />
Mike Champion<br /><br />
Tantek Çelik<br /><br />
Ralph Swick<br /><br />
Natasha Rooney<br /><br />
David Singer<br /><br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br /><br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first?]]<br />
<br />
'''Vlad:'''<br /> <br />
the CoC (Code of Conduct) should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respectful. give examples<br />
<br />
'''Vivienne:'''<br /><br />
what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br />
<br />
'''Rachel:''' <br /><br />
one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br /><br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br /><br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br /><br />
<br />
<br />
'''Daniel:'''<br /><br />
It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br />
<br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br />
<br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br />
<br />
Tzviya: when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br />
<br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers<br />
<br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time<br />
<br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night<br />
<br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath<br />
<br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive<br />
<br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan<br />
<br />
'''Tzviya:''' I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unanimity. we do give guidance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the Best Practices are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in Chairs breakfast (at TPAC)<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings<br />
<br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people. what's most important, good to know and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference<br />
<br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forward your welcome message and i'll ask other Chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the Chairs' breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpful that's a win for everyone<br />
<br />
'''Mike:''' <br /><br />
the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital<br />
<br />
'''Amanda:''' <br /><br />
you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f<br />
<br />
'''Vagner:''' <br /><br />
I'm ok w/ the CoC. it's short enough. the only thing I suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
I would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. We are here. so this is a given environment. This is the CoC<br />
the environment can be changed. We can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity<br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals?<br />
<br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br />
<br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room<br />
<br />
Vlad: I find it counter productive to encourage diversity<br />
<br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree<br />
<br />
Vagner: I try to make things equal<br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments<br />
<br />
'''Angel:'''<br /><br />
what's working: w3c is an org that's well-tooled and well-infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (WeChat) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools<br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br />
<br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved?<br />
<br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br />
<br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page]<br />
<br />
Ann: privacy? if we have conversation on FB or twitter or WeChat?<br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. I would not want to do that. it would be difficult for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to <??> I'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together<br />
<br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?]<br />
<br />
Jeff: I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a PWET issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases I never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh<br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important<br />
<br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann?<br />
<br />
'''Tara:'''<br /><br />
I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about disseminating info<br />
I want to make sure we're maintaining culture<br />
<br />
'''Paul:'''<br /><br />
I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception<br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying<br />
<br />
Ann: I was just struggling w/ that <br />
<br />
'''Tantek:''' <br /><br />
working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum<br />
<br />
'''Natasha:'''<br /><br />
working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br />
<br />
David: you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group.<br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=106064PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-23T08:59:37Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>The notes below were scribed by Amy van der Hiel at the Positive Working Environment (PWE) breakout session at TPAC 2017. She sent these notes to the PWE Task Force (PWETF) mailing list on November 11, 2017 [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-pwetf/2017OctDec/0038.html]<br />
<br />
Ann Bassetti took handwritten notes during the meeting. She merged her notes in here, to amplify Amy's notes (but not change them substantively). Please refer to the link above, for Amy's original notes.<br />
<br />
''The IRC record is at: [___<insert IRC link here>____] (Or are Amy's notes the IRC record?)''<br />
<br />
I know Ann has paper notes with the names of the attendees and other points from the 8 November PWET breakout at the TPAC but here are my typed notes. If we can clean them up and integrate, we can add the attendees who are not on the pwet list and send. <br />
<br />
attending: <br />
Ann Bassetti<br />
Amy van der Hiel<br />
Vladimir Levantovsky<br />
Vivienne Conway<br />
Paul Belfanti<br />
Rachel Comerford<br />
Amanda Mate<br />
Tzviya Siegman<br />
Daniel Peinter<br />
Takuki Kamiya<br />
Angel Li<br />
Vagner Diaz<br />
Jeff Jaffe<br />
Coralie Mercier<br />
Tara Whelan<br />
Mike Champion<br />
Tantek Çelik<br />
Ralph Swick<br />
Natasha Rooeny<br />
David Singer<br />
Dave Cramer (remote on IRC as dauwhe)<br />
<br />
[[The focus of the questions was: what’s working; what could be better; and what’s the most important thing to do first?]]<br />
<br />
Vlad: <br />
the CoC should be less prescriptive. not what not to do<br />
this is about higher behavior. not how low it is permissible to go<br />
a high standard approach is positive and would better<br />
cultural difference. not only do we not define. what falls into this category. <br />
example: someone from Europe, hugged and kissed me. this is the kind of cultural differences some are not aware of. <br />
she was equally offended by my response<br />
we can make it all positive. be respsecful. give examples<br />
<br />
Vivienne: what's working is the welcoming. what doesn't work as well. <br />
for those who don't attend in person, there's some missing info. how to get and keep involved. too large of an attrition rate. <br />
not feeling they belong in a group <br />
.. anyone can join WG when they do so, if they've not come to TPAC, how do we get them acclimatized and get them in WG and keep them involved?there can be 100s emails, purpose, whether or not part of things<br />
focus: improve how we integrate people who aren't f2f<br />
<br />
Rachel: one thing that was difficult was a lot of resources were thrown at me at once, quite detailed, it was overwhelming. <br />
even as someone who juggles other groups/wikis<br />
I've been happy to have Tzviya and Dave Cramer who are my "w3c parents". it's an overwhelming experience<br />
a dummies guide would be necessary<br />
what works: the w3c coordinators, representative. Ivan. has been so welcoming and has really embraced bringing in all people who are so unfamiliar and understand proceses, and to answer any question. a massive help<br />
solution: cloning Ivan. <br />
these issues of a 'buddy' are being repeated, <br />
<br />
Ann: if you'd have us do one thing?<br />
<br />
Rachel: really short intro. <br />
<br />
Tzviya: here is the newbie guide for Publishing WG that Ivan wrote <br />
https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/WorkMode/#information-for-newbies--new-group-members <br />
<br />
Daniel: It wasn't clear that the CoC existed<br />
suggestion: to advertise it more<br />
I think wrt to Vivienne the code of conduct should be the same re: f2f or phone<br />
<br />
Vivienne: most people aren't aware<br />
<br />
Vlad: if you're here in person, it's very different experience. <br />
<br />
Ann: do you have ideas of what's working and what is difficult?<br />
<br />
Tzviya: when we joined W3C it was not as big. <br />
<br />
Ann: more commonsense rules?<br />
teleconference times<br />
choosing the right time, Australia, Japan, china<br />
in the AB we had people around the world. <br />
<br />
Mike; now the west coast always suffers<br />
<br />
Ann: we'd get up at 5am, so it gave someone in Japan a reasonable time<br />
<br />
Vivienne: it's always in the middle of the night<br />
<br />
Amanda: timezone decision can impact my sabbath<br />
<br />
Ann: we can develop techniques to be more sensitive<br />
<br />
dauwhe: CSSWG does a call once a month at a different time, which is better for Australia and Japan<br />
<br />
Tzviya: I think what works: IRC, it looks like 1996 but it helps queue management <br />
... the best practices document that Ann sent around. I didn't know it existed<br />
(Ann clarifies it didn’t until recently)<br />
One thing that helps to remember is consensus does not mean unamity. we do give gudiance for these problems<br />
we have people who feel really strongly and the BP are very helpful. one suggestion that came up over and over in chairs<br />
we have tools, no one knows they exist. you get an automatic email. here are some useful tools. <br />
<br />
Vagner: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings<br />
<br />
Vlad: I support this idea. when you throw info at new people. what's most important, good to know and reference. prioritize it. 1. you need to know this. 2. good to know, and 3. for reference<br />
<br />
Coralie: Tzviya could you forwrad your welcome message and i'll ask other chairs for a practice to do the same?<br />
that new member mail, I probably saw it 19 years ago. could you resend? in the wake of the chairs breakfast we have to provide key info <br />
if in that communication you can be more helpfufl that's a win for eveyrone<br />
<br />
Mike: the IP issue that’s mentioned is vital<br />
<br />
Amanda: you could reference, not useless, things you need to know. and expand. <br />
Chairs are sending out info on what you need to know<br />
what's not working: I didn't know there was a CoC. we should point out, when we have f2f, that's different than phone. social media has different one from f2f<br />
you can't read tone. there is a reason to have two different code of conducts. or include stuff re: email and f2f<br />
<br />
Vagner: i'm ok w/ the Coc. it's short enough. the only thing i suggest to change is regarding respect<br />
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/<br />
respect can include timezone, language barriers. it's more than the wording here<br />
i would improve the description. <br />
respect the difference in environment <br />
regarding the whole idea of a code of conduct is a given environment. we are here. so this is a given environment. this is the Coc<br />
the environment can be changed. we can try to change it for the better. I would like to see promote diversity in W3C<br />
there's no encouragement of diversity<br />
<br />
Ann: you suggest we more overtly state our goals<br />
<br />
Vagner: I note this is one group where where women are more represented<br />
I am not sure why most of women are interested <br />
<br />
Coralie: there is an equal number of women in the room<br />
<br />
Vlad: i find it counter productive to encourage diversity<br />
<br />
Amy: I respectfully disagree<br />
<br />
Vagner: i try to make things equal<br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to Vagner's general comments<br />
<br />
Angel: what's working: w3c is an org that well tooled and well infrastructured. people say w3c is a trendsetter, we take care of attendees<br />
what’s not working: it is related what is good. gives a mindset. how to do w3c things. new ideas, go and set up a CG. the Chinese, it takes 10 minutes to do a CG and another (We) group works for Chinese. <br />
to give more options, CG too hard. for others for other practices. to make standards happen is a goal but more openness for more tools<br />
<br />
Coralie: you're not obligated to use that for CG. <br />
<br />
Ann: what if you have a big discussion in WeChat. is that archived or preserved?<br />
<br />
Angel: it can be kept. <br />
we can't give a specific URI, it's a closed system. <br />
<br />
Ralph: [do we make it easy to add pointers to other social media channels that a CG has chosen to use? e.g. add WeChat to a CG home page]<br />
<br />
Ann: privacy. if we have conversation on FB or twitter<br />
<br />
Angel: there is a way to share<br />
2nd thing not working. good to have but it's only the surface. in my early days, I had bad behaviors opposed to CoC. I dealt w/ in my own way. I was not aware, of the ombudsperson. i would not want to do that. it would be difficutl for many people. <br />
wording. very clear and strict working. do not give power to? i'm ombudsperson<br />
it took me a while to realize the misbehavior was caused by culture difference. <br />
some behavior common but unexpected. it's not bad intention but showing affection.<br />
necessary for people to know ombuds to have the right training. to trust to go to them<br />
we never talked to each other, used our knowledge together<br />
<br />
Tantek: [Ralph, is there any difference in privacy policy / etc. between using different silos like that? E.g. WeChat or Facebook Messenger or AIM chat groups?]<br />
<br />
Jeff: I'm also an ombudsperson. issues have come to my attention. I've had more than one occasion where an advocate comes to me and says "I know of a person in a community who has a pwet issue and is trying to figure what to do. whether to approach you."<br />
.. they are not sure to bring in ombudsperson. in some cases i never hear what happens. there are known issues where not comfortable w/ vh<br />
<br />
Amy: escalation process and training are very important<br />
<br />
Jeff: sometimes people approach as an intermediary<br />
... how could I coach Ann, if I can't talk to the person who is aggrieved w/ Ann?<br />
<br />
Tara: I came in as a chair to get a sense of what wasn't working<br />
I also want to know as a responsible person, about dissemniating info<br />
I want to make sure we're mainting culture<br />
<br />
Paul: I think from my perspective. leadership not contributor. follow trends. point to who has expertise. <br />
what's working and not are intertwined. there's complexity that has to be sorted through. there's a lot of care and steps and filters. the flip side is that there are regularly rabbit holes in discussion<br />
it's less about the specific issue and more about a philosophical position and polemic<br />
… but it’s an interesting conversation, the chair doesn't want to cut off, need to be balanced w/ what's going on. can create misperception<br />
<br />
Tantek: +1 to what Paul is saying<br />
<br />
Ann: i was just struggling w/ that <br />
<br />
Tantek: working: impressed by the participation in this session. reflects good demographics<br />
if you search for w3c CoC it's the first result<br />
so it’s findable. there's a growing awareness. more people aware<br />
W3C is picking up tools, shift to tools, respectful behavior. transferred everything to email to GitHub. focusing. nearly eliminated long polemics and essays that don't end<br />
what’s not working: email. can't believe AC forum. 4 members of AB. we care about topic<br />
we need to set and encourage good examples. encourage better behavior. <br />
some bad behavior comes from some members of the AB<br />
on AC Forum<br />
<br />
Natasha: working group effectiveness TF. <br />
information is what we're focusing on. it's split and everywhere. hard to find. now try to gather info and divide chairs etc. new mmebers, new chairs, existing ones<br />
cheat sheets for what is searched for. the info architecture is being designed. work w/ PWET and Commm<br />
culture issues are a problem<br />
Judy Zhu did a great presentation<br />
promotion is really important. everyone hates promoting stuff. we are going to have to do this. . we should promote properly <br />
I want to get this done way before next TP. if you're interested in helping. please let me know<br />
<br />
we want to promote properly. when we talk about it<br />
<br />
David: you'll get this when I talk about the process session in a different org. we couldn't have abusive person ejected<br />
the only thing our W3C said is Director could ask TAG member to resign. normative link to CoC and Director can remove<br />
so now there's a chain. <br />
<br />
dauwhe: chairs are so important in setting the tone & boundaries of a group.<br />
<br />
[END]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=105907PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-19T09:28:25Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><darn! I was creating this page, when some sort of glitch happened and lost all of it. aargh. I was putting in Amy's and my notes from PWE breakout session at TPAC 2017<br />
<br />
Too late to start over tonight ... I'll be back another day ><br />
<br />
-- Ann Bassetti</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201708_TPAC&diff=105906PWE/201708 TPAC2018-02-19T09:28:01Z<p>Abasset: Created page with "<darn! I was creating this page, when some sort of glitch happened and lost all of it. aargh. I was putting in Amy's and my notes from PWE breakout session at TPAC 2017 Too l..."</p>
<hr />
<div><darn! I was creating this page, when some sort of glitch happened and lost all of it. aargh. I was putting in Amy's and my notes from PWE breakout session at TPAC 2017<br />
<br />
Too late to start over tonight ... I'll be back another day ></div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE&diff=105905PWE2018-02-19T09:07:50Z<p>Abasset: /* PWETF discussion(s) notes */ added link to page for TPAC 2017 notes</p>
<hr />
<div>== Positive Work Environment ==<br />
Public wiki regarding Positive Work Environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
== W3C Codes of Conduct ==<br />
The [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/ Positive Work Environment Task Force] owns:<br />
<br />
* the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (CEPC)]<br />
<br />
* the draft [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/Conf-code Conference code]<br />
<br />
* the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#Procedures Procedures] for implementing these codes<br />
<br />
== Best Practices ==<br />
<br />
A collection of Best Practices pages for meetings, speakers and public events<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#Speakers_Guidelines Speaker Guidelines from Coralie]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Thoughts about making W3C more global developed by an Advisory Board task force (Judy Zhu, Jay Kishigami, others?)]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Moderating_Meetings Moderating Meetings] by AB (by Chaals)<br />
<br />
* [[Meetings Best Practices document]] for meetings <br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/WG_Best_Practices WG Best Practices] (to be edited and adjusted for TPAC 2017<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/2002/09/discipline Guidelines for Disciplinary Action]<br />
<br />
== PWETF discussion(s) notes ==<br />
This section will be for collecting PWETF notes and discussions<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201603_AC notes from BOF session at AC meeting, MIT, March 2016]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201603_badges ideas for name badges March 2016]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201609_TPAC Breakout Session from TPAC 2016]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201708_TPAC Breakout Session from TPAC 2017]<br />
<br />
== Outline for renewing Task Force, reviewing goals, vision, documents, and next steps ==<br />
<br />
From May 2016: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201604_outline ideas for renewing Task Force, reviewing goals, vision, documents, and next steps ]<br />
<br />
== Upcoming ==<br />
* [[PWE/Upcoming]]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/Upcoming&diff=104605PWE/Upcoming2017-10-04T19:20:04Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>Amy and Ann discussion 10/4/2017:<br />
<br />
* look at Best Practices with fresh eyes, identify updates (e.g., best practices for remote meetings, in addition to F2F)<br />
* create a few talking points for Chairs and Team Contacts to explain to WGs<br />
** get feedback & buy-in from: Coralie/Comm Team, other Team, Chairs, Team Contacts<br />
* send mail to Chairs and Team Contacts to:<br />
** put link to Code of Conduct into Working Group GitHub repositories<br />
** explain to their groups about this topic<br />
** solicit any additional feedback<br />
** identify 1-3 goals for behavior in upcoming meetings, especially TPAC<br />
* Ann will talk with her Seattle contact (John H), re: suggestions to help community 'heal' from EME divisions<br />
** Note that we feel W3C was unfairly maligned with attacks on reputation (fairness, openness, purity of intention, etc)<br />
NEXT MEETING: Ann and Amy, Monday Oct 9, 2017 at 10:30am PT / 1:30 ET via Hangouts</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE&diff=104604PWE2017-10-04T18:50:28Z<p>Abasset: /* To Dos */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Positive Work Environment ==<br />
Public wiki regarding Positive Work Environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
== W3C Codes of Conduct ==<br />
The [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/ Positive Work Environment Task Force] owns:<br />
<br />
* the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (CEPC)]<br />
<br />
* the draft [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/Conf-code Conference code]<br />
<br />
* the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#Procedures Procedures] for implementing these codes<br />
<br />
== Best Practices ==<br />
<br />
A collection of Best Practices pages for meetings, speakers and public events<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#Speakers_Guidelines Speaker Guidelines from Coralie]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Thoughts about making W3C more global developed by an Advisory Board task force (Judy Zhu, Jay Kishigami, others?)]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Moderating_Meetings Moderating Meetings] by AB (by Chaals)<br />
<br />
* Draft [[Meetings Best Practices document]] for meetings (to be prepared by TPAC 2016)<br />
<br />
== PWETF discussion(s) notes ==<br />
This section will be for collecting PWETF notes and discussions<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201603_AC notes from BOF session at AC meeting, MIT, March 2016]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201603_badges ideas for name badges March 2016]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201609_TPAC Breakout Session from TPAC 2016]<br />
<br />
== Outline for renewing Task Force, reviewing goals, vision, documents, and next steps ==<br />
<br />
From May 2016: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201604_outline ideas for renewing Task Force, reviewing goals, vision, documents, and next steps ]<br />
<br />
== Upcoming ==<br />
* {https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/Upcoming]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/Upcoming&diff=104603PWE/Upcoming2017-10-04T18:50:02Z<p>Abasset: Created page with "Amy and Ann discussion 10/4/2017: * look at Best Practices with fresh eyes, identify updates (e.g., best practices for remote meetings, in addition to F2F) * create a few tal..."</p>
<hr />
<div>Amy and Ann discussion 10/4/2017:<br />
<br />
* look at Best Practices with fresh eyes, identify updates (e.g., best practices for remote meetings, in addition to F2F)<br />
* create a few talking points for Chairs and Team Contacts to explain to WGs<br />
* send mail to Chairs and Team Contacts to put link to Code of Conduct into GitHub repositories, and to explain to their groups</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE&diff=104602PWE2017-10-04T18:35:34Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Positive Work Environment ==<br />
Public wiki regarding Positive Work Environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
== W3C Codes of Conduct ==<br />
The [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/ Positive Work Environment Task Force] owns:<br />
<br />
* the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (CEPC)]<br />
<br />
* the draft [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/Conf-code Conference code]<br />
<br />
* the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#Procedures Procedures] for implementing these codes<br />
<br />
== Best Practices ==<br />
<br />
A collection of Best Practices pages for meetings, speakers and public events<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#Speakers_Guidelines Speaker Guidelines from Coralie]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Thoughts about making W3C more global developed by an Advisory Board task force (Judy Zhu, Jay Kishigami, others?)]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Moderating_Meetings Moderating Meetings] by AB (by Chaals)<br />
<br />
* Draft [[Meetings Best Practices document]] for meetings (to be prepared by TPAC 2016)<br />
<br />
== PWETF discussion(s) notes ==<br />
This section will be for collecting PWETF notes and discussions<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201603_AC notes from BOF session at AC meeting, MIT, March 2016]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201603_badges ideas for name badges March 2016]<br />
<br />
* [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201609_TPAC Breakout Session from TPAC 2016]<br />
<br />
== Outline for renewing Task Force, reviewing goals, vision, documents, and next steps ==<br />
<br />
From May 2016: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/201604_outline ideas for renewing Task Force, reviewing goals, vision, documents, and next steps ]<br />
<br />
== To Dos ==<br />
* {https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/Upcoming]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialwg/2017-02-28&diff=101642Socialwg/2017-02-282017-02-28T09:22:38Z<p>Abasset: /* Telcon info */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Telcon info ==<br />
New telcon time! (pending no objections)<br />
* 08:00 PST / 11:00 EST / 16:00 UTC<br />
* Dialing / Webex details: https://www.w3.org/2015/10/social-wg-telecon.html<br />
* IRC: https://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2017-02-28<br />
* <kbd>trackbot, start meeting</kbd><br />
* Chair: Tantek, backup: Evan<br />
* Scribe: <br />
* Minutes: [[Socialwg/2017-02-28-minutes]]<br />
* Regrets:<br />
** rhiaro (in transit)<br />
** Ann Bassetti<br />
<br />
== Topics ==<br />
Discussion topics:<br />
* Reconfirm March telcon date/time<br />
* Review/approve past telcon minutes: <br />
** https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-02-14-minutes<br />
* FYI: For CR to PR items below, ask these questions:<br />
** test suite and implementation coverage ETA? (2+ publishers/consumers, clients/servers)<br />
** any new issues needing group discussion or changes?<br />
** editorial or normative changes?<br />
** publish updated CRs?<br />
* AS2 CR to PR - Evan<br />
** Settle https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/392 by approving one of these two proposals - Sandro<br />
*** '''PROPOSAL-1''': In considering the CR Exit Criteria for AS2, to meet the threshhold of two implementations per feature, we need two systems which PRODUCE the feature AND two systems which CONSUME the data (which might only be two systems, total, if they each do both)<br />
*** '''PROPOSAL-2''': In considering the CR Exit Criteria for AS2, to meet the threshhold of sufficient implementations, we need a total of two systems, where a system which only produces data using the feature (without consuming it) still counts as an implementation<br />
* Micropub CR to PR - Aaron<br />
* WebSub WD to CR (or straight to PR?) - Aaron, Julien<br />
** [https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/86 #86]<br />
** [https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/84 #84]<br />
** [https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/73 #73]<br />
** [https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/16 #16]<br />
* [https://tantek.github.io/post-type-discovery/index-src.html Post Type Discovery] new WD request (resolves GH 13, 16, 18) - Tantek<br />
* ActivityPub CR to PR - Chris<br />
* LDN CR to PR - Amy, Sarven<br />
* Any other [[Socialwg/DocumentStatus]]<br />
* f2f discussion - determine whether or not, and what dates/location possible April dates<br />
** Doodle links? (sandro?)<br />
* ... add new items one by one immediately before this one, and leave this here.<br />
* AOB<br />
* <kbd>trackbot, end meeting</kbd><br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* Previously: [[Socialwg/2017-02-14]]<br />
* Next: [[Socialwg/2017-03-14]]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialwg/2016-11-17&diff=100743Socialwg/2016-11-172016-11-17T08:16:59Z<p>Abasset: /* Regrets */</p>
<hr />
<div><div class="h-event"><br />
<!-- Uncomment when 2016-11-17-socialwg-group-animated.gif photo taken, posted<br />
<div style="border:medium solid; float:right; max-width:100%"><br />
[[Image:2016-11-17-socialwg-group-animated.gif|right|500px]]<br />
<div style="max-width:500px"><br />
<div style="text-align:center">Photo of the W3C Social Web Working Group taken at Face to Face Meeting, 2016-11-17 in Cambridge, Massachussetts.</div><br />
</div><br />
</div><br />
--><br />
<br />
= <span class="p-name">Social Web WG Face to Face Meeting at MIT (F2F8)</span> =<br />
<div class="p-summary"><br />
The Social Web Working Group's eighth face-to-face meeting is in <span class="p-location h-card"><abbr class="p-name p-org" title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr>, <span class="p-locality">Cambridge</span>, <abbr class="p-region" title="Massachusetts">MA</abbr>, <abbr class="p-country-name" title="United States of America">USA</abbr></span> on <time class="dt-start">2016-11-17</time> and <time class="dt-end">2016-11-18</time>. Permalink: <span class="u-url">https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-11-17</span><br />
</div><br />
<br />
<div class="e-description"><br />
== Venue ==<br />
The meeting will be held at <br />
<br />
[http://www.csail.mit.edu/news/stata Ray and Maria Stata Center], MIT<br /><br />
Building 32<br /><br />
[http://whereis.mit.edu/map-jpg?mapterms=32&mapsearch=go 32 Vassar Street]<br /><br />
Cambridge, MA 02139<br />
* Both days will be in room 32-G449 (Kiva).<br />
<br />
== Participation ==<br />
Participation is limited to [[Socialwg#Members|Working Group Members]] (including invited experts), and registered TPAC2016 Observers.<br />
<br />
If you wish to attend please join the [[socialwg|Social Web WG]] (per '''[[Socialwg#How_to_participate|How to participate]]'''), or contact a chair on IRC #social for observer consideration.<br />
<br />
== Participants ==<br />
{| border="1" id="attendees"<br />
|+<br />
! Name (org)<br />
! Food prefs<br />
! Arrive date<br />
! Depart date<br />
! Hotel<br />
! Flight info<br />
! Notes<br />
<br />
|- class="p-attendee h-card"<br />
| <span class="p-name">[[Tantek Çelik]]</span> (<span class="p-org h-card">[http://mozilla.org/ Mozilla]</span>)<br />
| pescetarian<br />
| 2016-11-15<br />
| 2016-11-19<br />
| Hyatt Regency Cambridge<br />
| UA1010 / UA1572<br />
| <span class="u-url">http://tantek.com/</span>, <span class="u-url">https://twitter.com/t</span>, <span class="u-url">https://github.com/tantek</span><br />
|-<br />
<br />
|- class="p-attendee h-card"<br />
| <span class="p-name">[[User:Benthatmustbeme|Ben Roberts]]</span> (<span class="p-org h-card">Invited Expert</span>)<br />
| I eat all the things<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| Local Commuter Rail<br />
| <span class="u-url">http://ben.thatmustbe.me/</span>, <span class="u-url">https://twitter.com/dissolve333</span>, <span class="u-url">https://github.com/dissolve</span><br />
|-<br />
|- class="p-attendee h-card"<br />
| <span class="p-name">[[User:Aaronpk|Aaron Parecki]]</span><br />
| vegetarian<br />
| Wed<br />
| Sat<br />
| <br />
| [https://aaronparecki.com/2016/11/16/1/ Arriving] / [https://aaronparecki.com/2016/11/19/1/ Departing]<br />
| <span class="u-url">http://aaronpk.com/</span>, [[https://twitter.com/aaronpk tw]], [[https://github.com/aaronpk gh]]<br />
|-<br />
<br />
|- class="p-attendee h-card"<br />
| <span class="p-name">[https://www.w3.org/People/Sandro Sandro Hawke]</span><br />
| omnivore<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|<br />
| <span class="u-url">http://hawke.org/sandro</span><br />
|-<br />
|- class="p-attendee h-card"<br />
| <span class="p-name">[http://www.ouvre-boite.com/ Julien Genestoux]</span><br />
| omnivore<br />
| Wed<br />
| Fri<br />
| <br />
|<br />
| <span class="u-url">http://www.ouvre-boite.com/</span><br />
|-<br />
|- <br />
| [https://rhiaro.co.uk/ Amy Guy]<br />
| vegan<br />
| Tue 14<br />
| Mon 28<br />
| <br />
|<br />
| https://rhiaro.co.uk<br />
|-<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| [http://dustycloud.org Christopher Allan Webber]<br />
| vegetarian<br />
| Wed<br />
| Sat<br />
| <br />
|<br />
| http://dustycloud.org<br />
|-<br />
<br />
|}<br />
<br />
=== Remote Participation ===<br />
People who cannot attend the meeting should be able to participate via phone. The meeting room will have a phone and we will be using IRC like on any weekly calls (#social).<br />
<br />
It would be useful to have a list of people who plan to participate in such a way so we can request an appropriate amount of telephone ports. Please, add your name to this list:<br />
* <span class="p-attendee h-card">[http://bengo.is Benjamin Goering (bengo)]</span><br />
* <span class="p-attendee h-card">[http://csarven.ca/#i Sarven Capadisli]</span> (Attendance (only?) on 2016-11-18 works for me. It'd be great if LDN can be on that day)<br />
<br />
<!--<br />
* <span class="p-attendee h-card">[[User:Dmitriz|Dmitri Zagidulin]]</span><br />
* <span class="p-attendee h-card">[[User:Benthatmustbeme|Ben Roberts]]</span> - as much as possible given time difference.<br />
--><br />
<br />
We use: <span class="u-url">https://hangouts.google.com/call/pza7kb5zqnginhh43223mtdjiae</span><br />
* and we will try screen sharing with http://www.screenleap.com/ (no installation required to view)<br />
<br />
=== Regrets ===<br />
Group members who don't plan to participate may note their regrets here:<br />
* Ann Bassetti (so sorry, cannot participate at all; moving my mom into home care)<br />
<br />
== Required Reading ==<br />
* ...<br />
<br />
== Agenda ==<br />
Agenda items for the meeting. The chairs will determine a schedule for each day.<br />
<br />
In addition to the below agenda times, we will have 15 minute mid-morning & mid-afternoon breaks that the chairs will call at a good stopping point (rather than being prescheduled).<br />
<br />
=== November 17 ===<br />
Chairs: Evan, Tantek<br />
* 08:30-09:00 Coffee, snacks, network setup, introductions<br />
* 09:00 Agenda item scheduling <br />
* ...<br />
* 10:30-10:45 morning break<br />
* 10:45-12:00 ...<br />
* 12:00 PHOTO and LUNCH<br />
* 13:30 ...<br />
* 15:30-16:00 afternoon break<br />
* 18:00 End of day 1<br />
<br />
=== November 18 ===<br />
Chairs: Evan, Tantek<br />
* 08:30-09:00 Coffee, snacks, network setup, introductions<br />
* 09:00 Agenda item scheduling <br />
* ...<br />
* 10:30-10:45 morning break<br />
* 10:45-12:00 ...<br />
* 12:00 PHOTO and LUNCH<br />
* 13:30 ...<br />
* 15:30-16:00 afternoon break<br />
* 18:00 End of day 2<br />
<br />
=== Topics ===<br />
* PR transitions (ActivityPub, AS2, LDN, Micropub, Webmention and hopefully Post Type Discovery, PubSub), for each:<br />
** Test suite status (is complete, i.e. each feature has test(s)? if not, by when?)<br />
** Implementation report status (how many? more than just editors? interop on all tests/features?)<br />
** Outstanding non-editorial CR issues?<br />
* CR transitions (hopefully all done by now! but possibly: Post Type Discovery, PubSub)<br />
* WD updates / NOTE transitions (Social Web Protocols, JF2, ...)<br />
* Group continuity / transition to SWICG<br />
** SWICG to incubate specs that need more / broader prototyping/implementing/interop<br />
** Recharter? (challenge with low W3C member participation)<br />
** Charter extension? (necessary for IPR reasons for PubSub)<br />
* ...<br />
<br />
== Resources ==<br />
* ...<br />
<br />
<!--<br />
The meeting room has the following resources available<br />
<br />
* dedicated computer<br />
* two dedicated screens (can be used with the computer there, or can connect an external computer to each)<br />
* separate projector<br />
* whiteboards<br />
* polycom conference phone with external microphones<br />
--><br />
<br />
=== Wishlist ===<br />
* Free code? World peace?<br />
* LDN on 2016-11-18 agenda.<br />
<br />
== Photos ==<br />
...<br />
<br />
== Related Events ==<br />
...<br />
<br />
</div> <!-- h-event --><br />
<br />
== Premeeting Logistics ==<br />
=== Flights ===<br />
Book a flight (if needed) ASAP!<br />
* Airport: Boston Logan (BOS)<br />
<br />
=== Hotels ===<br />
Book a hotel ASAP!<br />
<br />
=== Transportation ===<br />
* Transit: Boston T - MIT/Kendall stop<br />
* Or Taxi</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100604PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-24T06:44:43Z<p>Abasset: /* How to Make W3C Great Again (by Ann Bassetti) */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C/Beijing, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C/Beijing <br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C/MIT <br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub & WCAG<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation, HTML & WebApps<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C/Sophia Antipolis, Communications<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br, Brazil office<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C/MIT, WAI<br />
<br />
== Minutes (by Amy van der Hiel) ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, from nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native English speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. Certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR: to Dave, in terms of being loud. I might be loud, but I think there are two ways of being scary: by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner, for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when I left. Adam (my replacement) is a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal, but not sure it's always realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the positive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. onboarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB: i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no, social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to AirBnB and rent an apartment. including newcomers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my observations. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C-wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Romain, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)<br />
<br />
== Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
This TPAC16 break-out session was a combined focus of "global participation" and "positive work environment". Overall, it was not a complaining session. Rather, there were good observations about issues, with some positive suggestions. Amy's minutes (above) were scribed more directly than these notes which are more random and summarized. We covered 3 general topics: A. Ways people dominate in a meeting; B. Diversity; C. Onboarding and Training.<br />
<br />
'''A. People dominate in meetings by:'''<br />
* Being loud<br />
* Tone of voice<br />
* Corporate dominance<br />
* Talking excessively <br />
* Being dismissive of others' questions, ideas, or opinions<br />
* Having (or claiming) more experience, hence new people are shy to ask questions, or are told to 'go read the manual'<br />
* ... all of the above are exacerbated if not face-to-face<br />
* Using a time zone advantage (Either makes the meeting difficult to attend for some, or discussion / decisions have occurred before later time zones come online. Note also that people sometimes won't join a group if the current meeting time is in the middle of the night for them; and they are shy to ask the whole meeting to change.)<br />
<br />
Amy van der Hiel: When a conversation 'goes sideways', it's helpful for the Chair or someone else to remind the group that politeness is important and expected<br />
<br />
Romain Deltour: Valuable when, at the end of a meeting or topic, the Chair asks '''each''' person for his/her opinion. Quiet people will usually speak if called upon.<br />
<br />
'''B. Diversity''' (e.g., gender, racial, ...)<br />
Tzviya Siegman: IETF gives grants to enable additional participation<br />
Vagner Diniz: We need to do more to help females participate, e.g., have a greater percentage of women on panels<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': set guidelines to encourage all panels to emphasize gender and international balance of participants''<br />
<br />
Judy Brewer: We have a stronger diversity balance among Invited Experts, less among group participants, Chairs, AC reps, W3C Team and management.<br />
<br />
Antonio Olmo Titos: curious about our diversity statistics, where are we now? <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': encourage conscious consideration of diverse candidates. If there is not a concerted effort, it generally won't happen.''<br />
<br />
'''C. Onboarding and Training'''<br />
<br />
General agreement that we could improve on Chair Training, AC Rep Training, Team Training and Onboarding, regarding issues and ideas to improve global participation and help create a more positive work environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': identify new members, to help them get involved''<br />
<br />
CSS takes care of it's Invited Experts ... (e.g., people will pick up their dinner bill (since IEs usually pay their own way and are not on expense accounts), or invite them to share a hotel room or house)<br />
<br />
Dave Cramer: Onboarding should include social activities such as Werewolf training<br />
<br />
Chunming Hu: Baidu submitted a member submission. It was confusing and frustrating when it was turned down. <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': need Best Practices on how to participate''<br />
<br />
== How to Make W3C Great Again (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
This was a separate breakout session, chaired by Dominique Hazaël-Massiuex. But many of the points raised seemed pertinent to Positive Work Environment and Global Participation. Hence, I'm including my notes here.<br />
<br />
* Great that all W3C work is archived. But, there is now so much information, it can be daunting.<br />
* How many people attend any particular TPAC for the first time? <br />
** Noting that TPACs do not have "buddies", nor New Participant Intro, nor badges indicating newbie status (all strategies that have been used with success at AC meetings)<br />
* Would be helpful to have a Welcome to W3C Primer, with links to key info<br />
** Open Geospatial has similar problems. They have a 2-hour intro for new members. Plus this [https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=68511 Guide to the OGC]<br />
** Alternatives would be to identify people who've been at W3C for a long time. OR people who volunteer to be helpful to newbies.<br />
* Someone suggested rating Chairs -- widespread distaste for that idea. Suggest instead rating the meeting as a whole.<br />
* W3C has gotten much better since using GitHub</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100596PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-22T07:58:11Z<p>Abasset: /* How to Make W3C Great Again (notes by Ann Bassetti) */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C/Beijing, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C/Beijing <br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C/MIT <br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub & WCAG<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation, HTML & WebApps<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C/Sophia Antipolis, Communications<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br, Brazil office<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C/MIT, WAI<br />
<br />
== Minutes (by Amy van der Hiel) ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, from nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native English speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. Certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR: to Dave, in terms of being loud. I might be loud, but I think there are two ways of being scary: by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner, for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when I left. Adam (my replacement) is a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal, but not sure it's always realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the positive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. onboarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB: i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no, social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to AirBnB and rent an apartment. including newcomers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my observations. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C-wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Romain, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)<br />
<br />
== Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
This TPAC16 break-out session was a combined focus of "global participation" and "positive work environment". Overall, it was not a complaining session. Rather, there were good observations about issues, with some positive suggestions. Amy's minutes (above) were scribed more directly than these notes which are more random and summarized. We covered 3 general topics: A. Ways people dominate in a meeting; B. Diversity; C. Onboarding and Training.<br />
<br />
'''A. People dominate in meetings by:'''<br />
* Being loud<br />
* Tone of voice<br />
* Corporate dominance<br />
* Talking excessively <br />
* Being dismissive of others' questions, ideas, or opinions<br />
* Having (or claiming) more experience, hence new people are shy to ask questions, or are told to 'go read the manual'<br />
* ... all of the above are exacerbated if not face-to-face<br />
* Using a time zone advantage (Either makes the meeting difficult to attend for some, or discussion / decisions have occurred before later time zones come online. Note also that people sometimes won't join a group if the current meeting time is in the middle of the night for them; and they are shy to ask the whole meeting to change.)<br />
<br />
Amy van der Hiel: When a conversation 'goes sideways', it's helpful for the Chair or someone else to remind the group that politeness is important and expected<br />
<br />
Romain Deltour: Valuable when, at the end of a meeting or topic, the Chair asks '''each''' person for his/her opinion. Quiet people will usually speak if called upon.<br />
<br />
'''B. Diversity''' (e.g., gender, racial, ...)<br />
Tzviya Siegman: IETF gives grants to enable additional participation<br />
Vagner Diniz: We need to do more to help females participate, e.g., have a greater percentage of women on panels<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': set guidelines to encourage all panels to emphasize gender and international balance of participants''<br />
<br />
Judy Brewer: We have a stronger diversity balance among Invited Experts, less among group participants, Chairs, AC reps, W3C Team and management.<br />
<br />
Antonio Olmo Titos: curious about our diversity statistics, where are we now? <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': encourage conscious consideration of diverse candidates. If there is not a concerted effort, it generally won't happen.''<br />
<br />
'''C. Onboarding and Training'''<br />
<br />
General agreement that we could improve on Chair Training, AC Rep Training, Team Training and Onboarding, regarding issues and ideas to improve global participation and help create a more positive work environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': identify new members, to help them get involved''<br />
<br />
CSS takes care of it's Invited Experts ... (e.g., people will pick up their dinner bill (since IEs usually pay their own way and are not on expense accounts), or invite them to share a hotel room or house)<br />
<br />
Dave Cramer: Onboarding should include social activities such as Werewolf training<br />
<br />
Chunming Hu: Baidu submitted a member submission. It was confusing and frustrating when it was turned down. <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': need Best Practices on how to participate''<br />
<br />
== How to Make W3C Great Again (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
Some of the points raised in this breakout session, chaired by Dominique Hazaël-Massiuex, seemed pertinent to Positive Work Environment and Global Participation. Hence, I'm including my notes here.<br />
<br />
* Great that all W3C work is archived. But, there is now so much information, it can be daunting.<br />
* How many people attend any particular TPAC for the first time? <br />
** Noting that TPACs do not have "buddies", nor New Participant Intro, nor badges indicating newbie status (all strategies that have been used with success at AC meetings)<br />
* Would be helpful to have a Welcome to W3C Primer, with links to key info<br />
** Open Geospatial has similar problems. They have a 2-hour intro for new members. Plus this [https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=68511 Guide to the OGC]<br />
** Alternatives would be to identify people who've been at W3C for a long time. OR people who volunteer to be helpful to newbies.<br />
* Someone suggested rating Chairs -- widespread distaste for that idea. Suggest instead rating the meeting as a whole.<br />
* W3C has gotten much better since using GitHub</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100595PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-22T07:56:45Z<p>Abasset: added section with notes on "How to make W3C great again"</p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C/Beijing, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C/Beijing <br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C/MIT <br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub & WCAG<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation, HTML & WebApps<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C/Sophia Antipolis, Communications<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br, Brazil office<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C/MIT, WAI<br />
<br />
== Minutes (by Amy van der Hiel) ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, from nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native English speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. Certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR: to Dave, in terms of being loud. I might be loud, but I think there are two ways of being scary: by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner, for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when I left. Adam (my replacement) is a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal, but not sure it's always realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the positive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. onboarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB: i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no, social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to AirBnB and rent an apartment. including newcomers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my observations. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C-wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Romain, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)<br />
<br />
== Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
This TPAC16 break-out session was a combined focus of "global participation" and "positive work environment". Overall, it was not a complaining session. Rather, there were good observations about issues, with some positive suggestions. Amy's minutes (above) were scribed more directly than these notes which are more random and summarized. We covered 3 general topics: A. Ways people dominate in a meeting; B. Diversity; C. Onboarding and Training.<br />
<br />
'''A. People dominate in meetings by:'''<br />
* Being loud<br />
* Tone of voice<br />
* Corporate dominance<br />
* Talking excessively <br />
* Being dismissive of others' questions, ideas, or opinions<br />
* Having (or claiming) more experience, hence new people are shy to ask questions, or are told to 'go read the manual'<br />
* ... all of the above are exacerbated if not face-to-face<br />
* Using a time zone advantage (Either makes the meeting difficult to attend for some, or discussion / decisions have occurred before later time zones come online. Note also that people sometimes won't join a group if the current meeting time is in the middle of the night for them; and they are shy to ask the whole meeting to change.)<br />
<br />
Amy van der Hiel: When a conversation 'goes sideways', it's helpful for the Chair or someone else to remind the group that politeness is important and expected<br />
<br />
Romain Deltour: Valuable when, at the end of a meeting or topic, the Chair asks '''each''' person for his/her opinion. Quiet people will usually speak if called upon.<br />
<br />
'''B. Diversity''' (e.g., gender, racial, ...)<br />
Tzviya Siegman: IETF gives grants to enable additional participation<br />
Vagner Diniz: We need to do more to help females participate, e.g., have a greater percentage of women on panels<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': set guidelines to encourage all panels to emphasize gender and international balance of participants''<br />
<br />
Judy Brewer: We have a stronger diversity balance among Invited Experts, less among group participants, Chairs, AC reps, W3C Team and management.<br />
<br />
Antonio Olmo Titos: curious about our diversity statistics, where are we now? <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': encourage conscious consideration of diverse candidates. If there is not a concerted effort, it generally won't happen.''<br />
<br />
'''C. Onboarding and Training'''<br />
<br />
General agreement that we could improve on Chair Training, AC Rep Training, Team Training and Onboarding, regarding issues and ideas to improve global participation and help create a more positive work environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': identify new members, to help them get involved''<br />
<br />
CSS takes care of it's Invited Experts ... (e.g., people will pick up their dinner bill (since IEs usually pay their own way and are not on expense accounts), or invite them to share a hotel room or house)<br />
<br />
Dave Cramer: Onboarding should include social activities such as Werewolf training<br />
<br />
Chunming Hu: Baidu submitted a member submission. It was confusing and frustrating when it was turned down. <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': need Best Practices on how to participate''<br />
<br />
== How to Make W3C Great Again (notes by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
Some of the points raised in this breakout session, chaired by Dominique Hazaël-Massiuex, seemed pertinent to Positive Work Environment and Global Participation. Hence, I'm including my notes here.<br />
<br />
* Great that all W3C work is archived. But, there is now so much, it can be daunting.<br />
* How many people attend any particular TPAC for the first time? <br />
** Noting that TPACs do not have "buddies", nor New Participant Intro, nor badges indicating newbie status (all strategies that have been used with success at AC meetings)<br />
* Would be helpful to have a Welcome to W3C Primer, with links to key info<br />
** Open Geospatial has similar problems. They have a 2-hour intro for new members. Plus this [https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=68511 Guide to the OGC]<br />
** Alternatives would be to identify people who've been at W3C for a long time. OR people who volunteer to be helpful to newbies.<br />
* Someone suggested rating Chairs -- widespread distaste for that idea. Suggest instead rating the meeting as a whole.<br />
* W3C has gotten much better since using GitHub</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100594PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-22T07:14:56Z<p>Abasset: /* Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C/Beijing, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C/Beijing <br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C/MIT <br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub & WCAG<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation, HTML & WebApps<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C/Sophia Antipolis, Communications<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br, Brazil office<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C/MIT, WAI<br />
<br />
== Minutes (by Amy van der Hiel) ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, from nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native English speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. Certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR: to Dave, in terms of being loud. I might be loud, but I think there are two ways of being scary: by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner, for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when I left. Adam (my replacement) is a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal, but not sure it's always realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the positive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. onboarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB: i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no, social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to AirBnB and rent an apartment. including newcomers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my observations. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C-wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Romain, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)<br />
<br />
== Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
This TPAC16 break-out session was a combined focus of "global participation" and "positive work environment". Overall, it was not a complaining session. Rather, there were good observations about issues, with some positive suggestions. Amy's minutes (above) were scribed more directly than these notes which are more random and summarized. We covered 3 general topics: A. Ways people dominate in a meeting; B. Diversity; C. Onboarding and Training.<br />
<br />
'''A. People dominate in meetings by:'''<br />
* Being loud<br />
* Tone of voice<br />
* Corporate dominance<br />
* Talking excessively <br />
* Being dismissive of others' questions, ideas, or opinions<br />
* Having (or claiming) more experience, hence new people are shy to ask questions, or are told to 'go read the manual'<br />
* ... all of the above are exacerbated if not face-to-face<br />
* Using a time zone advantage (Either makes the meeting difficult to attend for some, or discussion / decisions have occurred before later time zones come online. Note also that people sometimes won't join a group if the current meeting time is in the middle of the night for them; and they are shy to ask the whole meeting to change.)<br />
<br />
Amy van der Hiel: When a conversation 'goes sideways', it's helpful for the Chair or someone else to remind the group that politeness is important and expected<br />
<br />
Romain Deltour: Valuable when, at the end of a meeting or topic, the Chair asks '''each''' person for his/her opinion. Quiet people will usually speak if called upon.<br />
<br />
'''B. Diversity''' (e.g., gender, racial, ...)<br />
Tzviya Siegman: IETF gives grants to enable additional participation<br />
Vagner Diniz: We need to do more to help females participate, e.g., have a greater percentage of women on panels<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': set guidelines to encourage all panels to emphasize gender and international balance of participants''<br />
<br />
Judy Brewer: We have a stronger diversity balance among Invited Experts, less among group participants, Chairs, AC reps, W3C Team and management.<br />
<br />
Antonio Olmo Titos: curious about our diversity statistics, where are we now? <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': encourage conscious consideration of diverse candidates. If there is not a concerted effort, it generally won't happen.''<br />
<br />
'''C. Onboarding and Training'''<br />
<br />
General agreement that we could improve on Chair Training, AC Rep Training, Team Training and Onboarding, regarding issues and ideas to improve global participation and help create a more positive work environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': identify new members, to help them get involved''<br />
<br />
CSS takes care of it's Invited Experts ... (e.g., people will pick up their dinner bill (since IEs usually pay their own way and are not on expense accounts), or invite them to share a hotel room or house)<br />
<br />
Dave Cramer: Onboarding should include social activities such as Werewolf training<br />
<br />
Chunming Hu: Baidu submitted a member submission. It was confusing and frustrating when it was turned down. <br />
<br />
'''''Proposal''': need Best Practices on how to participate''</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100593PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-22T07:11:15Z<p>Abasset: small edits on Amy's notes (spelling, punctuation); added attendee's affiliations</p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C/Beijing, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C/Beijing <br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C/MIT <br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub & WCAG<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation, HTML & WebApps<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C/Sophia Antipolis, Communications<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br, Brazil office<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C/MIT, WAI<br />
<br />
== Minutes (by Amy van der Hiel) ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, from nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native English speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. Certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR: to Dave, in terms of being loud. I might be loud, but I think there are two ways of being scary: by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner, for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when I left. Adam (my replacement) is a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal, but not sure it's always realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the positive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. onboarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB: i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no, social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to AirBnB and rent an apartment. including newcomers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my observations. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C-wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Romain, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)<br />
<br />
== Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
This TPAC16 break-out session was a combined focus of "global participation" and "positive work environment". Overall, it was not a complaining session. Rather, there were good observations about issues, with some positive suggestions. Amy's minutes (above) were scribed more directly than these notes which are more random and summarized. We covered 3 general topics: Ways people dominate in a meeting; Diversity; Onboarding and Training.<br />
<br />
'''People dominate in meetings by:'''<br />
* Being loud<br />
* Tone of voice<br />
* Corporate dominance<br />
* Talking excessively <br />
* Being dismissive of others' questions, ideas, or opinions<br />
* Having (or claiming) more experience, hence new people are shy to ask questions, or are told to 'go read the manual'<br />
* ... all of the above are exacerbated if not face-to-face<br />
* Using a time zone advantage (Either makes the meeting difficult to attend for some, or discussion / decisions have occurred before later time zones come online. Note also that people sometimes won't join a group if the current meeting time is in the middle of the night for them; and they are shy to ask the whole meeting to change.)<br />
<br />
Amy van der Hiel: When a conversation 'goes sideways', it's helpful for the Chair or someone else to remind the group that politeness is important and expected<br />
<br />
Romain Deltour: Valuable when, at the end of a meeting or topic, the Chair asks '''each''' person for his/her opinion. Quiet people will usually speak if called upon.<br />
<br />
'''Diversity''' (e.g., gender, racial, ...)<br />
Tzviya Siegman: IETF gives grants to enable additional participation<br />
Vagner Diniz: We need to do more to help females participate, e.g., have a greater percentage of women on panels<br />
<br />
''Proposal: set guidelines to encourage all panels to emphasize gender and international balance of participants''<br />
<br />
Judy Brewer: We have a stronger diversity balance among Invited Experts, less among group participants, Chairs, AC reps, W3C Team and management.<br />
<br />
Antonio Olmo Titos: curious about our diversity statistics, where are we now? <br />
<br />
''Proposal: encourage conscious consideration of diverse candidates. If there is not a concerted effort, it generally won't happen.''<br />
<br />
'''Onboarding and Training'''<br />
<br />
General agreement that we could improve on Chair Training, AC Rep Training, Team Training and Onboarding, regarding issues and ideas to improve global participation and help create a more positive work environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
''Proposal: identify new members, to help them get involved''<br />
<br />
CSS takes care of it's Invited Experts ... (e.g., people will pick up their dinner bill (since IEs usually pay their own way and are not on expense accounts), or invite them to share a hotel room or house)<br />
<br />
Dave Cramer: Onboarding should include social activities such as Werewolf training<br />
<br />
Chunming Hu: Baidu submitted a member submission. It was confusing and frustrating when it was turned down. <br />
<br />
''Proposal: need Best Practices on how to participate''</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100592PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-22T01:58:02Z<p>Abasset: /* Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) */ added this section</p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C<br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C<br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, Inc., CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C<br />
<br />
== Minutes (by Amy van der Hiel) ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, fro nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native english speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR:: to Dave, in terms of being loud. i might be loud. but I think there are two ways of being scary. by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner. for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when i left. Adam was a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal. not sure that's realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the postive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I was said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. on boarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB; i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no but social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to Air BnB and rent an apartment. including new comers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my oveserveraions. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu they did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Roman, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)<br />
<br />
== Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
This TPAC16 break-out session was a combined focus of "global participation" and "positive work environment". Overall, it was not a complaining session. Rather, there were good observations about issues, with some positive suggestions. Amy's minutes (above) were scribed more directly than these notes which are more random and summarized. We covered 3 general topics: Ways people dominate in a meeting; Diversity; Onboarding and Training.<br />
<br />
'''People dominate in meetings by:'''<br />
* Being loud<br />
* Tone of voice<br />
* Corporate dominance<br />
* Talking excessively <br />
* Being dismissive of others' questions, ideas, or opinions<br />
* Having (or claiming) more experience, hence new people are shy to ask questions, or are told to 'go read the manual'<br />
* ... all of the above are exacerbated if not face-to-face<br />
* Using a time zone advantage (Either makes the meeting difficult to attend for some, or discussion / decisions have occurred before later time zones come online. Note also that people sometimes won't join a group if the current meeting time is in the middle of the night for them; and they are shy to ask the whole meeting to change.)<br />
<br />
Amy van der Hiel: When a conversation 'goes sideways', it's helpful for the Chair or someone else to remind the group that politeness is important and expected<br />
<br />
Romain Deltour: Valuable when, at the end of a meeting or topic, the Chair asks '''each''' person for his/her opinion. Quiet people will usually speak if called upon.<br />
<br />
'''Diversity''' (e.g., gender, racial, ...)<br />
Tzviya Siegman: IETF gives grants to enable additional participation<br />
Vagner Diniz: We need to do more to help females participate, e.g., have a greater percentage of women on panels<br />
<br />
''Proposal: set guidelines to encourage all panels to emphasize gender and international balance of participants''<br />
<br />
Judy Brewer: We have a stronger diversity balance among Invited Experts, less among group participants, Chairs, AC reps, W3C Team and management.<br />
<br />
Antonio Olmo Titos: curious about our diversity statistics, where are we now? <br />
<br />
''Proposal: encourage conscious consideration of diverse candidates. If there is not a concerted effort, it generally won't happen.''<br />
<br />
'''Onboarding and Training'''<br />
<br />
General agreement that we could improve on Chair Training, AC Rep Training, Team Training and Onboarding, regarding issues and ideas to improve global participation and help create a more positive work environment at W3C.<br />
<br />
''Proposal: identify new members, to help them get involved''<br />
<br />
CSS takes care of it's Invited Experts ... (e.g., people will pick up their dinner bill (since IEs usually pay their own way and are not on expense accounts), or invite them to share a hotel room or house)<br />
<br />
Dave Cramer: Onboarding should include social activities such as Werewolf training<br />
<br />
Chunming Hu: Baidu submitted a member submission. It was confusing and frustrating when it was turned down. <br />
<br />
''Proposal: need Best Practices on how to participate''</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100591PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-22T01:11:02Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C<br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C<br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, Inc., CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C<br />
<br />
== Minutes (by Amy van der Hiel) ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, fro nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native english speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR:: to Dave, in terms of being loud. i might be loud. but I think there are two ways of being scary. by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner. for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when i left. Adam was a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal. not sure that's realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the postive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I was said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. on boarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB; i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no but social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to Air BnB and rent an apartment. including new comers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my oveserveraions. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu they did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Roman, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)<br />
<br />
== Meeting notes (by Ann Bassetti) ==<br />
bla bla bla</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=User:Abasset&diff=100590User:Abasset2016-10-22T01:01:03Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div>I am Ann Bassetti, now an Invited Expert and co-chair of Positive Work Environment Task Force. I previously participated in the W3C for many years as the Boeing Advisory Committee representative and as an elected member of the Advisory Board. I am also currently in the Social Web Working Group.<br />
<br />
The best way to contact me is via email: ann.bassetti@yahoo.com</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201609_TPAC&diff=100589PWE/201609 TPAC2016-10-22T00:58:21Z<p>Abasset: /* Attending */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''TPAC session on Positive Work environment + Global Participation Enhancement'''<br />
<br />
21 September 2016<br />
<br />
== Attending ==<br />
<br />
* Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, Digital Pub<br />
* An Qi LI, W3C, Global Participation<br />
* Chunming Hu, W3C<br />
* Amy van der Hiel, W3C<br />
* Florian Rivoal, Vivliostyle, Inc., CSS<br />
* Romain Deltour, DAISY Consortium, Digital Pub<br />
* Frank Olivier, Microsoft Corporation<br />
* [[User:abasset | Ann Bassetti]], independent, Social Web<br />
* [[User:Antonio | Antonio Olmo Titos]], W3C<br />
* Dave Cramer, Hachette Livre, CSS / Digital Pub<br />
* Coralie Mercier, W3C<br />
* Vagner Diniz, Nic.br<br />
* Judy Brewer, W3C<br />
<br />
== Minutes ==<br />
<br />
* TS: I am working at Wiley<br />
* AL: New area from new re-org, international, business<br />
* CH: support AL<br />
* FR: The topic is interesting personally. I volunteered to help make connections for BusDev, recruiting people. I saw how people can run into barriers in trying to join<br />
* RD: I am in Digital publishing and WCAG. I am here because of personal interest. I think an inclusive work environment is important<br />
* FO: I work in HMTL and WebApps<br />
* AB: I have been w/ PWET since its start. I have long been concerned about global participation. If you've been in a meeting with me you've likely heard me ask people to speak more slowly. I am interested to have pwet, be that - positive work environment. Something cultural. not about punishment and process. The code of conduct is not the issue. what other things are the issue?<br />
* FR: things shouldn't have to get to the reporting place<br />
* AT: I am interested to hear more about it. having lived in Japan I've seen the Asian side of things, It can be difficult to integrate<br />
* DC: I am in digital publishing. I am interested in the dynamics of discussions. I notice some people dominate discussions and others can be afraid to speak. Even groups that do wonderful work, have welcoming environments still have concerns about everybody's voice being heard.<br />
* CM: I can understand the CoC being interpreted as punishment. I am still interested in topic since the group started in 2008. I have been staff since 99. I used to be the co chair of PWE. I am now the head of Comm but stepped down because I am focusing in other areas<br />
* VD: I'm from Brazil, fro nic.br<br />
* AB: I'm interested in how to organize this. I have heard different issues around organizing. it's a human issue. Some people dominate the talking more. It can be especially a global issue, it comes in more. 1/3 of our people here are not native english speakers. I know I'd be very quiet in a meeting held in French. certain cultures are also more quiet.<br />
* FR:: to Dave, in terms of being loud. i might be loud. but I think there are two ways of being scary. by decibel or you hear the % of market share behind (magnitude of the company they represent)<br />
* TS: I think tone is an issue more than volume. Tone is much more felt than volume. more than browser presence. For example. the other day [someone] gave a presentation. she had put in hours of work, no applause, she was just picked apart. <br />
* FR: There was no applause?<br />
* TS: no<br />
* DC: sound volume and <br />
* AL: another issue is recognition for contributions<br />
* TS: yes, acknowledgement<br />
* RD: on mailing lists, too. Sometimes the sheer volume. it may have doubled. <br />
* AL: I have heard from shy Chinese members. They are maybe not used to all email. So when they ask stupid questions. someone says "go read web page" this really hurts<br />
* FR: As a counter example - an exception not a rule. The LG from Korea joined the WG. They had a valid use case. not mature enough. Both sides showed good will. They wanted to learn and work w/ us. We showed they are not there yet. would need hand holding. luckily they got hand holding. When that happens it works brilliantly<br />
* TS: everyone needs hand holding<br />
* DC: they did everything perfectly from the start. well developed approach, they took it to the WG rather than doing it on they own. so many things self<br />
* FR: to tie to the Asian difficultly. calls are aways 1 or 2 am. sometimes it may seem there's no human to do contact.<br />
* AB: when I was on the AB, we had Asian members. there is no time zone that works when geographically set up. So we did alternating times during the year. Half the time the west coast got up 5 am or 6pm. that was convenient for Aisa. then other times it was afternoon for me but midnight for them. I can say it was very aggravating when Asian counterpart didn't show up for meeting. we didn't change month by month. that was too confusing. <br />
* TS: one other issue. maybe for AL, we have an issue attracting a large percentage of population - we don't have a lot of women. we have a diversity issue. Things not just to encourage women and people of color to join but actual outreach. at IETF they do outreach to join. they have a method to fund people. then the challenge becomes maintaining membership. Both how to make people comfortable to join and keep them comfortable to stay.<br />
* Ann: is travel covered?<br />
* Av: some of this might fall under general good behavior, politeness. a sense of openness and respect to others. there are drives to commit to not be on panels of all men<br />
* VD. a big issue is gender equality. at meeting like this one or a workshop. we should make an effort to ensure we will have always women in panels. <br />
* FR: I am a feminist, and I made this promise. and even so, I forgot about it for this panel happening tomorrow<br />
* TS: Dave and I have signed a pledge. 50% women speakers <br />
* VD:. There are procedure and process. We can go further. at the next w3c conference in Brazil. more than 1/2 women speakers. we just have to put effort in this <br />
* Av: is there an action we can have here to put this idea in front of w3c?<br />
* AB: it's a great vision to have. the difficulty is to find someone appropriately skilled. Vagner. for a conference can seek. I had to find someone at Boeing when i left. Adam was a man. the work would not appropriate for a women who doesn't know the role. working toward that goal. not sure that's realistic<br />
* AL: I wanted to ask a question. In the history of W3C. its there a document with the principle for diversity, participation, etc? For the postive work environment, for basic human things like teleconferences at tolerable working times. <br />
* CM: there is the code of ethics and conduct. you have to be decent. <br />
* AB: maybe we should review this for the revitalization<br />
* Av: there are now more best practices documents<br />
* AB: Judy Zhu worked on one, we've linked to. if we're trying to aim for diversity of male and female. international as well<br />
* FR: Ann, it does depends on who members send. In the gender composition of working group, I noticed between members and invited experts. invited experts were more balanced<br />
* JB; years ago I was invited to participate in a panel at Grace Hopper conference. it is massive now. centered around the theme of women in Tech. There were 4 standards organizations who spoke on gender balance. years ago we had done it. but it's frightening how predictable the ratio was. invited expert #s was stronger. For WG participant it was not as good. Chairs were less. at the AC level there was just Ann. and at the AB. For a long time there only one woman on w3c management. This is one reason we have PWETF. Things came out of that. I was said when looking at a new WG, we should look more broadly for chair candidates. team and international side. they weren't even considering women. It was like an automatic screen out. it was really helpful to get a reminder. comparably qualified<br />
* FR: There was something like this in a search i was recently involved in. It didn't play out well<br />
* TS: chair training might really help. <br />
* AB: chairs are crucial. <br />
* JB: it is mandatory<br />
* TZ: since I've been a chair for two years it's not been done<br />
* AB: I think we can add this back to the thinking<br />
* AL: to be sure everyone is included I'd like to the keep queue locally<br />
* TS: there needs to be chair training. didn't know this for two years.<br />
* JB: staff needs to be trained too<br />
* AQ: we might put in a team day<br />
* DC: all this is pointing to one place we don't see to have untying. on boarding. huge problem. 3 years ago at a workshop Markus said to me: your company joined you're going to be in China next month. i'm dumped into TPAC. it's like what the hell is this? i'm in this 20 year old strong culture of the CSS WG. W3C has a defined culture. cultures, even. i survived because other members took care of me. <br />
* AB: team buddy. <br />
* TS: buddies are variable. we also are lucky because we have Ivan <br />
* FR: we've touched on gender. diversity. there are women around this table. few people of color. age we seem to do ok<br />
* Av: true diversity is important. We may, as TS suggested, look at better outreach<br />
* AB: we have very little representation from south america, africa, etc<br />
* JB: at a meeting in Tunisa. we meet wonderful people. <br />
* Av: Jeff gave us not just task to update documents, he asked us to think about our aspirational goals. what kind of place we want this to be to work at. This is an area where W3C could truly lead. Diversity is a very valuable goal<br />
* AL: From the hosts. we encourage warm up calls. fresh attendance to AC and TPAC. we do this for Chinese members. to help anticipate more culture shock when join. We can guide through tools rss agent. etc. We can introduce highlights in agenda. at the end we provide tips. culturally strong WG. sometimes we talk about werewolves. they feel it helps a lot.<br />
* AB: can we reuse these materials for everyone? <br />
* AL: we do it in China. <br />
* AB: could it be generalized?<br />
* AL: we could clone practice in all hosts. talk to locals. in own their own language. every season we come up w/ script to share. the feedback from members is pretty good. it's not so daunting. they got tips. trips, travel info. weather. it makes them feel "i'm welcome". to do globally<br />
* AB; i was a third grade teacher. helping people prepare for making materials<br />
* TS: I do something similar. I was copied in early email to Rob Sanders when I joined the WG, I used the same text. Now every time someone joins I send a list of things to know: email archive, links to irc. next meeting i'll send it you. You should be able to generate it automatically. the same way I get a note when someone joins the group. <br />
* AL: yes, some templates you can customize<br />
* FR: template gets sent. <br />
* AB: we could use a modernized version of guidebook. consulted and review. could be translated into local languages. at least it would be consistent. a werewolf introduction [laughter]. no but social stuff is huge. <br />
* TS: it's how you meet people. <br />
* AB: right now we've got a group who does art. maybe next will be music. <br />
* FR: another social thing they do in css. not intentionally but since a lot of us are friends. we go to Air BnB and rent an apartment. including new comers helps<br />
* AB: though that could be to the detriment of w3c. we can't get rooms<br />
* FR: We do it at TPAC less. just individual group meetings<br />
* AL: it works for a f2f<br />
* DC: to follow up. going back to issues of invited experts. what CSS has done, we try to take care of invited experts during the meetings. if 7 go out and 5 are on expense. we it split 5 ways. Florian slept in my hotel room last time<br />
* FR: this time I am sponsored. <br />
* AL: it's good to be nice to the IEs. it's the small things.<br />
* TS: this is not so small<br />
* DC: it is evidence of the culture <br />
* AB: it's great to be supportive and friendly thought we've got a long way to go<br />
* TS: it's largely a friendly group<br />
* FR: for the chairs training and training for picking chairs. now we have to address AC. telling AC reps, don't forget to nominate women. <br />
* AL: we can put into on on-boarding. starting into next year. <br />
* CH: one of my oveserveraions. i can remember one or two years ago. Baidu they did their first member submission. they didn't know who to participate. before they joined the WG there was lots of the job done by WG. They didn't know how to show their value, how to contribute. They came up w/ a member submission. They wanted to give solutions. They also asked the local team to help them contact the WG people to help to explain what happened. the idea in this case, after that they showed they proposal face to face. They debated, is it ok? Finally since this accepted for the people who proposed. they might think their ideas were ignored. they were not sure how to change situation. now they have a lot of do and they won't put more time on it. i think in this case, what can we learn? personally. 1. i'm not sure if we can work out best practice. how to participate on WG discussions. <br />
* FR: that might be hard right now. it would have been easier a few years ago. even the people who are used to this. others think incubation. first fight in w3c. <br />
* AB: all these things are true. maybe could have a W3C wide TF on how to participate. <br />
* CH: they may get debate. we can alert them. if there are some good stories for them that might help. look at best practice. <br />
* AB: I also wanted to hear from people who have been quiet. Roman, Frank, Antonio?<br />
* RD: i agree w/ all these ideas. another possible idea. I am in a group, and when we have a F2F of the TF. where the chair has the habit at end of the meeting, to make a round. to ask for final thoughts. to appeal who those who haven't spoken to be sure they have chance to talk. Sometimes they feel compelled. some people may prefer not to talk to but this encourages them. <br />
* AB: we lose value if they don't speak, or aren't called on<br />
* DC: i did that on a call for ePub. especially in the phone context, the barrier can be high. <br />
* RD: it could be difficult depending on the size of the group.<br />
* DC: this was not for a small technical point. but the larger vision so it was worth it<br />
* AT: this feels very inclusive for me. Are there statistics? i don't think people think things are broken. they just want to know how to make things better <br />
* Av: industry standard. 25% women. we are below that in W3C Team etc. <br />
* FO: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc do yearly diversity reports (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html). W3C might consider this.<br />
<br />
end: who might join, participate in PWET (Roman, Tzviya, Florian, Antonio?)</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialwg/2016-10-18&diff=100515Socialwg/2016-10-182016-10-18T15:41:32Z<p>Abasset: /* Agenda */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''[[socialwg]] Teleconf 2016-10-18'''<br />
<br />
Tuesdays at 10am US/Pacific, 1pm US/Eastern time for 60 minutes <br />
* '''Please plan 90 minutes for this week! We'll try to keep it to 60.'''<br />
* Check [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Social+Web+WG+meeting&iso=2015-04-19T13:00:00&p1=43 your timezone] <br />
<br />
https://www.w3.org/2015/10/social-wg-telecon<br />
<br />
== Previous Meeting ==<br />
* [[socialwg/2016-10-11|2016-10-11]]<br />
<br />
== Minutes ==<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-10-18-minutes]]<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2016/10/18-social-irc IRC log]<br />
** [http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2016-10-18 IRC log with permalinks]<br />
<br />
== Agenda ==<br />
* Chair: Tantek<br />
<br />
* Regrets<br />
** Ann Bassetti<br />
{{agenda-preamble}}<br />
<br />
=== Admin ===<br />
==== Participation ====<br />
* Participation is limited to [http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=72531&public=1|WG members]<br />
* [[socialwg/2016-11-17|F2F8: November 17-18 face-to-face meeting]] - please sign-up by adding yourself to Participants!<br />
<br />
==== Approval of Minutes ====<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-10-04-minutes|2016-10-04-minutes]]<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-10-11-minutes|2016-10-11-minutes]]<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-09-22-minutes|F2F7 day 1]]<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-09-23-minutes|F2F7 day 2]]<br />
<br />
=== Discussion Items ===<br />
* Webmention CR->PR status - aaronpk<br />
** Anything new since last week?<br />
** Implementation Report Summary update (any SHOULDS/MUSTS left with < 2 implementations?)<br />
** Errata process (see below for detail)<br />
<br />
* Micropub CR->PR - aaronpk<br />
** State of the test suite - feature coverage? (expected today)<br />
** Implementation reports?<br />
** Implementation report summary? (by feature, to determine state of CR exit)<br />
** How many implementations from non-editors of the spec?<br />
** How many implementations from people outside WG?<br />
** Errata process<br />
<br />
* AS2 CR->PR status Evan & James (see CR to PR next steps below for details)<br />
<br />
* ActivityPub WD->CR status - cwebber<br />
* LDN WD->CR - Amy / Sarven<br />
** 9 implementations not by the editors<br />
** Since coming to W3C, 46 issues on github have been opened by (or on behalf of) or commented on by 21 different people outside of the WG.<br />
** Other public feedback listed at https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/LDN_CR_Transition_Request<br />
** 1 new issue since last week [https://github.com/w3c/ldn/issues/52 52] - "inbox" term might be confusing in certain applications. We argue it's a technical term that shouldn't be presented to end users, and there's nothing better we could change it to anyway. PROPOSAL: close without change.<br />
** PROPOSAL: Go to CR<br />
<br />
* PubSub FPWD status - Tantek / Sandro / Amy<br />
<br />
* ...<br />
<br />
=== Tracking Document Status ===<br />
Explicit check for updates on all our documents - if not covered by individual Discussion Items above.<br />
* [[Socialwg/DocumentStatus|Document Status]]<br />
<br />
==== CR to PR next steps ====<br />
CR to PR status and next steps (for any CRs not explicitly discussed above, let's ask these questions as we did at F2F7)<br />
* Any open normative issues? If so, review them<br />
** Any changes expected that will change conformance of existing implementations?<br />
* Disposition of comments?<br />
* State of the test suite - feature coverage? If not, when? If not, when plan?<br />
* Implementation reports?<br />
* Implementation report summary? (by feature, to determine state of CR exit)<br />
** How many implementations from non-editors of the spec?<br />
** How many implementations from people outside WG?<br />
* Errata process - how you will accept, process, and document errata once your spec is a REC. E.g. "github issues, processed in SWICG, documented ... github wiki or w3c wiki or another page on your one-off .net domain etc."<br />
* What else for CR to PR?<br />
<br />
=== Next Meeting ===<br />
* [[socialwg/2016-10-25|2016-10-25]] with chair Evan<br />
<br />
{{agenda-adjourn}}<br />
<br />
----<br />
back to [[socialwg]]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialig&diff=100197Socialig2016-09-22T15:21:44Z<p>Abasset: /* Social Interest Group */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
<div style="float:right">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
Welcome to the '''<dfn class="p-name fn p-org org">Social Interest Group</dfn>''' (<span class="p-nickname nickname">SocialIG</span>) home page!<br />
<br />
== Social Interest Group ==<br />
<br />
''NOTE on September 22, 2016: Ann Bassetti (chair) sent a note to Wendy Seltzer (W3C management sponsor), asking her to formally close this group. For the last year, there was very little interest from the community to continue, and the bulk of the work had migrated to the Social Working Group. <br />
<br />
''It is possible, but not yet decided, that some group of interested people will start a new Social Web Community Group (CG) to explore additional technical ideas in this space. Benefits of moving to a CG are a) they are easy to start, and more relaxed to run; b) one does not need to be a W3C Member nor Invited Expert to participate. Once the Working Group finishes its current work, and the charter expires at the end of 2016, a CG may be a useful way in which to explore potential "Next Steps".''<br />
<br />
''All of the work in this wiki will be preserved for future reference. Thanks so much to all participants for your contributions! -- Ann Bassetti''''<br />
<br />
=== Charter ===<br />
http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-ig-charter.html<br />
<br />
Deliverables (from Charter)<br /><br />
<br />
:'''Mandatory Deliverables'''<br />
:<br />
:The group will deliver the following to fulfill its goals as an Interest Group Note, subject to discussion in the Interest Group:<br />
:<br />
:: * '''Use-case and Requirements Report'''<br />
:<br />
::: This report will document the use cases to drive social standards for both businesses and consumers. These use-cases can include personalization based on context, including location, activities, and connected devices.<br />
:<br />
:'''Possible Deliverables'''<br />
:<br />
:The group may propose additional standards work to the W3C, and may publish Interest Group Notes as needed. Examples of possible Interest Group Notes are:<br />
:<br />
:: * '''Social Architecture Report:''' <br />
::: This document takes a broad look at all the social technologies and specifications under development, including summarizing their contribution and tracking their adoption. The document will then demonstrate how a subset of these can be used as a unified architecture. An [http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/XGR-socialweb-20101206/ overview report] has been produced by the [http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/ Social Web XG] in 2010.<br />
:<br />
:: * '''Social Vocabularies:''' <br />
::: Various standards such as [http://activitystrea.ms/ ActivityStreams] and [http://www.w3.org/RDF/ RDF] allow various items of shared interest, such as products and actions ("likes"), to be named with a URI for reasons of interoperability. Vocabularies are sets of these related URIs around particular activities (business processes, sharing, shopping). The Interest Group may maintain a list of shared URIs relevant for the use of social standards.<br />
:<br />
:The production of any Interest Group deliverables depends upon the resources available, and will change as new information, adoption, and implementation experience is reported to the group. As the deliverables are in general non-normative, they can be changed and maintained throughout the lifetime of the Interest Group to reflect the current landscape of social technologies. The group should work with other groups of experts to make sure issues of security, privacy, accessibility, and data protection are taken into consideration.<br />
:<br />
<br />
=== Announcement ===<br />
http://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/3958<br />
<br />
=== Chairs ===<br />
Ann Bassetti (Boeing) -- new chair, with help from teammates<br />
<br />
Mark Crawford (SAP) -- former chair<br /><br />
<br />
We are looking for at least one additional chair. If interested, please contact Ann Bassetti or Sandro Hawke.<br />
=== Staff Contact ===<br />
Sandro Hawke (W3C/MIT)<br /><br />
Harry Halpin (W3C/MIT)<br />
<br />
== Participation ==<br />
=== Members ===<br />
<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=72532&public=1 list of current participants] (or [http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=72532 with contact info])<br />
<br />
=== How to participate ===<br />
To join this group, if you are affiliated with a [http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List W3C member organization]:<br />
<br />
# Use the [http://cgi.w3.org/MemberAccess/AccessRequest form for getting a W3C account] or [http://www.w3.org/Help/Account/MailPassword/ recovering an old one]<br />
<br />
# Have your [http://www.w3.org/Member/ACList AC representative] nominate you using the [http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/72532/join form for joining this group]<br />
<br />
The chairs and staff may permit people to join as "invited experts"; to pursue this option, fill out the [http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/ieapp/ Invited Expert Application] and the chairs will contact you in about a week. Send any questions about this process to [mailto:hhalpin@w3.org Harry Halpin]. <br />
<br />
If you are officially in the group, you will automatically receive group email and your w3.org login and password will work on this wiki. <br />
<br />
== Discussion ==<br />
We currently use IRC, a mailing list, telecons, and face-to-face meetings for discussion.<br />
<br />
=== IRC ===<br />
* irc://irc.w3.org:6665/social<br />
** Or use web interface: http://irc.w3.org/?channels=social<br />
<br />
''NOTE June 2015: This group used to use the #socialig IRC channel. We decided to stop using the IG channel, and all use the WG channel (#social).''<br />
<br />
=== Logs ===<br />
''NOTE June 2015: Now that we are merging the "social" and "socialig" IRC channels, I presume we will have only one log:'' http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/today<br />
<br />
Link for historical logs: http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/socialig/today<br />
<br />
The IRC channel is logged on the publicly-visible URL above. You can bookmark the URL and it will redirect to the current day.<br />
<br />
You can get your photo to appear next to your name in the logs by adding yourself to the [[IRC-people]] page.<br />
<br />
=== Email ===<br />
;<tt>public-social-interest@w3.org</tt> : Dedicated to Social Interest Group discussions. See [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-social-interest/ public-social-interest archive]. Please preface the subject of any emails with either #Admin, #(name of the TF), or #(Relevant topic keyword(s)) to help manage us manage the discussions. <br />
<br />
=== Telecons ===<br />
All Interest Group meetings are at 15:00 UTC on Wednesdays. The meetings alternate between an all-group telecon one week and a Task Force meeting (Use Case TF or Vocabulary TF) the next week.<br />
<br />
(That is equivalent to 17:00 Central Europe, 11:00 US/Eastern, 8:00 AM US/Pacific. See [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converted.html?iso=20150415T11&p1=43&p2=224&p3=0&p4=195 time converter for more options]. Not sure about daylight savings and other variations.)<br />
<br />
''NOTE: If someone located in Asia or Australia (time zones for which the current time is too late) wants to participate, we will work out a new meeting time. We want your participation! Please contact the Chair or Staff Contact.''<br />
<br />
==== Dial-in and Conference Code ====<br />
''(NOTE June 2015: Henceforth, the W3C will use MIT's WebEx implementation for the audio portion of all telecons. We will continue to use IRC for chat and real-time scribing of minutes.)''<br />
<br />
* '''Join IRC''' (#social) before dialing in <br />
* [https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=m1c9b9d40b3433e56aa40be2d6d7800aa '''Join WebEx meeting'''] <br />
** Meeting number: 641 665 287 <br />
** Meeting password: social <br />
** ''(In case you need to actually see the WebEx meeting URI, it is: <br />
https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=m1c9b9d40b3433e56aa40be2d6d7800aa )''<br />
<br /><br />
<br />
Once you are connected to WebEx, '''select "Call Using Computer"''' (large 'button' on left), to have WebEx make the audio connection to you<br />
* Choices: WebEx can call you, or you can call in. <br />
* (Note: when using "Test Audio Connection", you will be muted).<br />
<br /><br />
If you cannot use WebEx, '''the host can initiate a call to you'''. If anyone other than Sandro or Ann is chairing the meeting, s/he needs to get the "host key" from one of us. Process:<br />
# Get host key<br />
# In "Participant" menu (top left), choose "Reclaim host role"<br />
# Once you are the host, the "Invite and Remind" button becomes available (in middle of WebEx session screen)<br />
# In the "Invite and Remind" window, select the tab for "Phone"<br />
# Enter the person's name and phone number, and click "Call"<br />
# That person will be called, and need to follow the prompt ("press 1") to enter the meeting<br />
<br /><br />
<br />
==== Next Meeting ====<br />
<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-09-02|2015-09-02]] - regularly scheduled bi-weekly Social IG call<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-09-09|2015-09-09]] - Use Case Task Force<br />
<br />
If this is your first W3C telecon, please join the IRC channel at [[http://www.w3.org/wiki/Social#IRC|#IRC]]. We can help talk you through how to dial in.<br />
<br />
==== Face to Face Meetings ====<br />
Next F2F meeting will with the Social WG at W3C Technical Plenary in Sapporo, Japan on 29-30 October 2015.<br />
<br />
==== Past Telecons & Meetings ====<br />
<br />
* ... lots of gaps in meetings due to summer and other problems ...<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-07-08|2015-07-08]], [http://www.w3.org/2015/07/08-social-minutes.html Minutes]<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-06-24|2015-06-24]] --only Lynn Foster and Ann Bassetti showed up. We discussed Lynn's work on vocabularies for Open Value Networks.<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-06-10|2015-06-10]], [http://www.w3.org/2015/06/10-social-minutes.html Minutes]<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-05-27|2015-05-27 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* <Note: there was a gap in meetings while people were out><br />
* [[Socialig/2015-05-06|2015-05-06]] - [[Socialig/Use Case TF|Use Case TF]] call<br />
* [[Socialwg/2015-05-04]] face to face in Paris<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-04-29|2015-04-29]] - regularly scheduled bi-weekly Social IG call<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-04-22|2015-04-22]] - [[Socialig/Vocabulary TF|Vocabulary TF]] call<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-04-15|2015-04-15 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-04-08|2015-04-08 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-04-01|2015-04-01 Meeting Notes and Minutes]] <br />
* [[Socialig/2015-03-25|2015-03-25]] - [[Socialig/Use Case TF|Use Case TF]] call<br />
* [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] - Social WG face 2 face meeting<br />
* [[Socialig/2015-03-11|2015-03-11]] - [[Socialig/Vocabulary TF|Vocabulary TF]] call<br />
* [[socialig/2015-03-04|2015-03-04 Meeting Notes and Minutes]] (minutes not yet approved)<br />
* [[socialig/2015-02-25|2015-02-25 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2015-02-18|2015-02-18 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2015-02-11|2015-02-11 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2015-02-04|2015-02-04 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2015-01-21|2015-01-21 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* NOTE: there is a big gap here. We held multiple meetings whose notes and minutes are not linked here<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2014/05/14-social-minutes.html 2014-05-14] - chairs meeting<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2014/07/09-social-minutes.html 2014-07-09] - chairs meeting<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2014/08/06-socialig-minutes.html 2014-08-06] - first semi-official; [https://www.w3.org/wiki/File:SocialIG_20140806.pdf Meeting Slides]<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2014/08/20-socialig-minutes.html 2014-08-20] - first official (forthcoming)<br />
* [[socialig/2014-09-03|2014-09-03 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2014-09-17|2014-09-17 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2014-10-01|2014-10-01 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2014-10-22|2014-10-22 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2014-11-12|2014-11-12 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2014-12-03|2014-12-03 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
* [[socialig/2014-12-17|2014-12-17 Meeting Notes and Minutes]]<br />
<br />
==== Scribes ====<br />
<br />
* [[Socialig/Scribes|Scribes]] list - who's next? If it's you, you may want to check [http://www.w3.org/2008/04/scribe.html Scribe 101] and [http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/manual.html Common Scribe Manual]<br />
<br />
== Process ==<br />
Process will be in accordance with [http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/ W3C Process].<br />
<br />
=== Workmode ===<br />
The Social Interest Group will meet bi-weekly for coordination amongst the various Task Forces. Individual Task Forces will meet at the discretion of the TF as necessary to progress their work.<br />
<br />
=== Tracker ===<br />
Issues and Actions related to this IG are managed using issue trackers in repositories on Github:<br />
* General tracker - https://github.com/w3c-social/social-interest<br />
* Vocabulary - https://github.com/w3c-social/social-vocab<br />
* Use Cases - https://github.com/w3c-social/social-ucr<br />
* Social Web Architecture - https://github.com/w3c-social/social-arch<br />
* Social Web Glossary - https://github.com/w3c-social/social-glossary<br />
<br />
== Task Forces ==<br />
Four task forces have been established to focus on various aspects of the IG responsibilities. these are:<br />
<br />
* [[Socialig/Use Case TF]] - Chair: Larry Hawes. Will define technical and business driven use cases around social<br />
* [[Socialig/Vocabulary TF]] Chair: elf Pavlik. Will identify social syntax/vocabularies and determine missing components.<br />
<br />
Please visit their respective pages to track their efforts and to provide relevant input (see Documentation)<br />
<br />
We experimented with two other task forces and archived them after long time of little to no activity [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-social-interest/2015Apr/0005.html] [[Socialig/Liaison TF]] & [[Socialig/Architecture TF]]<br />
<br />
=== Documentation ===<br />
To document proposals, ideas, even specifications that are social web related, please create pages for them from the relevant Task Force wiki if so related, otherwise create and link to them from here. <br />
<br />
[http://www.w3.org/wiki/File:Social_IG_TPAC_Update.pdf Social IG TPAC Update Presentation (PDF)]<br />
<br />
==== Naming ====<br />
You may preface your page names with "socialig/" if you pick a particularly generic name and/or wish to indicate the scope in the name.<br />
<br />
== Related Organizations ==<br />
<br />
The following organizations are also working on Social Web technologies:<br />
* [https://indiewebcamp.com/ IndieWebCamp]<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/community/socialbiz/ Social Business CG]<br />
* [http://opensocial.org/ OpenSocial Foundation]<br />
* [http://technical.openmobilealliance.org/Technical/technical-information/release-program/current-releases/snew-v1-0 Open Mobile Alliance]<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/community/fedsocweb/ Federated Social Web CG] - technical work has moved to Social Web WG and Social IG, but it promotes the theme "decentralized social networks" and can issue statements<br />
* [http://redecentralize.org/ Redecentralize]<br />
* [http://dcentproject.eu/ D-CENT]<br />
<br />
Longer list available at [[Socialwg#Related_Organizations]]<br />
<br />
== Patent Policy ==<br />
<br />
This Working Group operates under the [http://www.w3.org//Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/ W3C Patent Policy] (5 February 2004 Version). To promote the widest adoption of Web standards, W3C seeks to issue Recommendations that can be implemented, according to this policy, on a Royalty-Free basis.<br />
<br />
For more information about disclosure obligations for this group, please see the [http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/72532/status W3C Patent Policy Status Page].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[socialwg]]<br />
* [[Socialwg/Use cases]]<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2014/06/w3c-highlights/#social W3C Highlights - June 2014 - Social Web]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=MeetingTaxis&diff=100189MeetingTaxis2016-09-22T12:29:57Z<p>Abasset: /* Meeting: TPAC 2016, Lisbon */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Category:EswMeetings]]<br />
<br />
Use this '''Public''' page to help coordinate the sharing of taxis, shuttles, etc. for meetings.<br />
<br />
==Meeting: TPAC 2016, Lisbon == <br />
''Make sure the taxi meter is in use.''<br/><br />
''REMINDER: Please, put entries in chronological order.''<br />
<br />
'''ARRIVALS'''<br />
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="background-color:#E0F4FF;" border="1" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0"<br />
! Date <br />
! Time <br />
! Airport Info <br />
! Flight Info <br />
! Hotel <br />
! Name <br />
! Email <br />
! Notes <br />
|-<br />
| 17 Sep || 08:20 || LIS || UA 064 from EWR || Hotel Vila Galé Ópera || Janina Sajka || janina@rednote.net || ;<br />
|-<br />
| 18 Sep || 18:05 || LIS || TP 1025 from MAD || Rua São Bento 306 || Rebeca Ruiz || rebeca@cornac.es || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''DEPARTURES'''<br />
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="background-color:#E0F4FF;" border="1" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0"<br />
! Date <br />
! Time <br />
! Airport Info <br />
! Flight Info <br />
! Hotel <br />
! Name <br />
! Email <br />
! Notes <br />
|-<br />
| 24 Sept || 07:40 || LIS || UA 6863 to LHR || Hotel Vila Galé Ópera || Janina Sajka || janina@rednote.net || ; <br />
|-<br />
| 24 Sept || 11:25 lv hotel || LIS || TAP 217 to BOS || Hotel Vila Galé Ópera || Ann Bassetti || ann.bassetti@yahoo.com || I will take an Uber. Happy to share;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ; <br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|-<br />
| || || || || || || || ;<br />
|- <br />
|}</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialwg/2016-09-13&diff=99760Socialwg/2016-09-132016-09-13T16:32:28Z<p>Abasset: /* Agenda */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''[[socialwg]] Teleconf 2016-09-13'''<br />
<br />
Tuesdays at 10am US/Pacific, 1pm US/Eastern time for 60 minutes<br />
* Check [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Social+Web+WG+meeting&iso=2015-04-19T13:00:00&p1=43 your timezone] <br />
<br />
https://www.w3.org/2015/10/social-wg-telecon<br />
<br />
== Previous Meeting ==<br />
* [[socialwg/2016-09-06|2016-09-06]]<br />
<br />
== Minutes ==<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-09-13-minutes]]<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2016/09/13-social-irc IRC log]<br />
** [http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2016-09-13 IRC log with permalinks]<br />
<br />
== Agenda ==<br />
* Chair: Tantek (backup: Arnaud)<br />
* Regrets: <br />
** Evan Prodromou<br />
** Sandro (first 20-40 min)<br />
** Amy Guy (first 20-40 min)<br />
** Ann Bassetti <br />
** ...<br />
{{agenda-preamble}}<br />
<br />
=== Admin ===<br />
==== Participation ====<br />
* Participation is limited to [http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=72531&public=1|WG members]<br />
* '''[[Socialwg/2016-09-22#Registration|Register for 2016-09-22 Lisbon TPAC f2f]]''' **ASAP** 2016-09-21…23<br />
<br />
==== Approval of Minutes of 2016-09-06 ====<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-09-06-minutes|2016-09-06-minutes]]<br />
<br />
=== Discussion Items ===<br />
* PubSubHubbub - what's needed before we can go to FPWD? (Tantek, Julien)<br />
** [https://github.com/w3c/pubsubhubbub/issues open issues]<br />
* [https://linkedresearch.org/ldn/ LDN]: Please read, and if necessary file CR-blocking issues before TPAC! We'd like to vote to go to CR at TPAC. -- (Amy & Sarven)<br />
** We've had a number of [https://github.com/csarven/ldn/issues issues] opened over the past few weeks and all are now closed.<br />
** Added exit and conformance criteria<br />
** [https://github.com/csarven/ldn-tests Test suite] is in progress (maybe done by TPAC)<br />
** Implementation report template is started and will be done by TPAC<br />
* [https://w3c-social.github.io/activitypub/ Activitypub]: Please read, and if necessary file CR-blocking issues before TPAC! We'd like to vote to go to CR at TPAC. -- (Chris & Jessica)<br />
** All substantive issues addressed and closed.<br />
** Added exit and conformance criteria<br />
** Test suite and implementation report pending<br />
** Namespace and json-ld context are written but needs to be put in place<br />
<br />
=== Tracking Document Status ===<br />
Explicit check for updates on all our documents - if not covered by individual Discussion Items above.<br />
* [[Socialwg/DocumentStatus|Document Status]]<br />
<br />
=== Next Meeting ===<br />
* [[socialwg/2016-09-22|2016-09-22]] f2f at Lisbon (as part of TPAC)<br />
<br />
{{agenda-adjourn}}<br />
<br />
----<br />
back to [[socialwg]]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99686Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-11T01:52:30Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
Note: These notes will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. This document was created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming. We have given some special attention to meetings with non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
<br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
<big><br />
'''Best practices for meetings with international participation:'''</big><br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
When presenting, '''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
All '''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Observe the Code of Conduct below, including about differing technical opinions. You are not necessarily the only one who knows "the truth". Be "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others",<br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== After the Meeting ==<br />
* The '''Chair''' or '''Scribe''' (or whomever is designated) should promptly prepare the minutes and send out a link<br />
* '''All attendees''' should read the minutes and send corrections, if there are any<br />
* '''All attendees''' should fulfill their assignments and agreed-upon tasks, as appropriate<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants ==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
All '''presenters''' should follow techniques that support these goals, such as:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, especially those who are not native speakers of your language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Avoids a dismissive attitude and behavior about others' technical opinions with which one does not agree. This can be a form of bullying which is unacceptable.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional, unfair, or unwelcome behavior or advances. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Is, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99685Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-11T01:41:37Z<p>Abasset: /* Considerations for meetings with multinational participants */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
When presenting, '''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
All '''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Observe the Code of Conduct below, including about differing technical opinions. You are not necessarily the only one who knows "the truth". Be "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others",<br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
All '''presenters''' should follow techniques that support these goals, such as:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, especially those who are not native speakers of your language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Avoids a dismissive attitude and behavior about others' technical opinions with which one does not agree. This can be a form of bullying which is unacceptable.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional, unfair, or unwelcome behavior or advances. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Is, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99589Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T20:20:53Z<p>Abasset: /* Code of Conduct */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
When presenting, '''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
All '''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Observe the Code of Conduct below, including about differing technical opinions. You are not necessarily the only one who knows "the truth". Be "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others",<br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
All '''presenters''' should follow techniques that support these goals, such as:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Avoids a dismissive attitude and behavior about others' technical opinions with which one does not agree. This can be a form of bullying which is unacceptable.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional, unfair, or unwelcome behavior or advances. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Is, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99588Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T20:16:37Z<p>Abasset: /* During Meeting */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
When presenting, '''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
All '''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Observe the Code of Conduct below, including about differing technical opinions. You are not necessarily the only one who knows "the truth". Be "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others",<br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
All '''presenters''' should follow techniques that support these goals, such as:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional, unfair, or unwelcome behavior or advances. <br />
* Is, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99587Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T20:12:02Z<p>Abasset: /* Code of Conduct */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
When presenting, '''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
All '''presenters''' should follow techniques that support these goals, such as:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional, unfair, or unwelcome behavior or advances. <br />
* Is, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99586Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T20:09:31Z<p>Abasset: /* Considerations for meetings with multinational participants */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
When presenting, '''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
All '''presenters''' should follow techniques that support these goals, such as:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99585Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T20:07:32Z<p>Abasset: /* During Meeting */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
When presenting, '''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. Some techniques that support these goals are:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99584Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T20:01:34Z<p>Abasset: /* Preparing for Meeting: */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Follow these [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#About_Slides_Specifically.E2.80.A6 guidelines on slide preparation]<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Best Practices for Speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. Some techniques that support these goals are:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99583Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T19:56:43Z<p>Abasset: /* Preparing for Meeting: */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' should:<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. Some techniques that support these goals are:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99580Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T19:49:42Z<p>Abasset: /* During Meeting */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* If the meeting is really long, schedule adequate breaks. It is often helpful to just stand up briefly between topics.<br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. Some techniques that support these goals are:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99579Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T19:47:57Z<p>Abasset: /* Considerations with multinational attendees */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations for meetings with multinational participants==<br />
W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and nationalities. In the tech world, including at the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. However, to function well as a global community, we must work to be aware of and sensitive to differences. <br />
<br />
We strive to be inclusive of those with different work and communication styles. We encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. Some techniques that support these goals are:<br />
* SPEAK SLOWLY! Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language. Use pacing to give the audience time to process what you're saying.<br />
* Speak clearly. Take particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g., use simple language; expand acronyms; minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms).<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* Allow people to speak other languages in case some difficult words or concepts need clarification.<br />
* Be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-native English speakers, make. Encourage people to express themselves. Be patient and supportive.<br />
* Try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting one's own ideas. <br />
* Treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99577Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T19:27:24Z<p>Abasset: /* During Meeting */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations with multinational attendees ==<br />
As an international community, W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and countries. However, to function well as a truly global community, we must also work to be aware of and sensitive to any differences and inclusive of different work styles and needs. <br />
<br />
In the tech world, including groups like the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. At W3C we strive to be inclusive and want to have the benefit of feedback from all our many participants including those who are non-native English speakers, and/or with non-Western backgrounds as well as to encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
* Speak clearly, taking particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g.: use simple language; expand acronyms, and minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms.).<br />
* Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language (for most people, this means "Speak Slowly") and use pacing to give one's audience time to process information<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* allow people to speak other languages in case of some difficult words, e.g. in Chinese or Japanese.<br />
* try to be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-English native speakers, make in speaking and patient in encouraging people to express themselves.<br />
* try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting ones own ideas and when responding to others. <br />
* treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99574Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T19:22:45Z<p>Abasset: /* During Meeting */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Also be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Arrive early, in order to be ready when the meeting starts (set up computer, get water, prepare notes on points to discuss, etc.)<br />
* Make quality (not quantity!) statements.<br />
* Listen to others with an open attitude, especially if you disagree. Give others the benefit of doubt. Novel ideas often come from unexpected sources, or result from compromise.<br />
* Maintain an atmosphere of respect. Help the Chair / Facilitator / Presenter smooth over rough spots. <br />
* Encourage quiet people to speak.<br />
* Give feedback about the running of the meeting at the end. Help the Chair figure out how to run the best meeting.<br />
<br />
== Considerations with multinational attendees ==<br />
As an international community, W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and countries. However, to function well as a truly global community, we must also work to be aware of and sensitive to any differences and inclusive of different work styles and needs. <br />
<br />
In the tech world, including groups like the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. At W3C we strive to be inclusive and want to have the benefit of feedback from all our many participants including those who are non-native English speakers, and/or with non-Western backgrounds as well as to encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
* Speak clearly, taking particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g.: use simple language; expand acronyms, and minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms.).<br />
* Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language (for most people, this means "Speak Slowly") and use pacing to give one's audience time to process information<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* allow people to speak other languages in case of some difficult words, e.g. in Chinese or Japanese.<br />
* try to be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-English native speakers, make in speaking and patient in encouraging people to express themselves.<br />
* try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting ones own ideas and when responding to others. <br />
* treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99570Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T19:14:05Z<p>Abasset: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
Best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meeting: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Meeting == <br />
'''Chairs''' and '''Facilitators''' should seek participation from all attendees, and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak]. Techniques to mitigate this are: <br />
* Start on time<br />
* Review agenda and objectives at start of meeting.<br />
* Stick to the allotted time frames per topic. If a discussion is particularly active, ask the group if they'd like to modify the remaining agenda to extend the time on that topic. (And hence, which subsequent topic should be shortened.)<br />
* Repeat questions and comments, to ensure all have heard.<br />
* Recognize commenters who have not been heard from, or who are most likely to move the conversation forward. Encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* Also be alert for those commenters who may (by their style, tone, or length of speech), derail or negatively escalate a discussion. Respectfully, but firmly, steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* Collect off-topic issues, topics, ideas in a "parking lot" (e.g, start a list on paper, or on whiteboard, that all can see). Keep this list for future reference, when the group schedules time to consider them. <br />
* At the end of each discussion, summarize what was said and decided. Ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
* Near the end of the meeting, give an brief summary of what occurred and what are the next steps.<br />
* Near the end of the meeting, seek feedback regarding the organization and running of the meeting. (Adjust subsequent meetings accordingly.)<br />
* End on time.<br />
<br />
'''Presenters''' and '''Chairs''' should:<br />
* Make their objectives clear. Clarify whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* Present a brief outline or overview of the topic, before proceeding to the full discussion.<br />
<br />
== Considerations with multinational attendees ==<br />
As an international community, W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and countries. However, to function well as a truly global community, we must also work to be aware of and sensitive to any differences and inclusive of different work styles and needs. <br />
<br />
In the tech world, including groups like the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. At W3C we strive to be inclusive and want to have the benefit of feedback from all our many participants including those who are non-native English speakers, and/or with non-Western backgrounds as well as to encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
* Speak clearly, taking particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g.: use simple language; expand acronyms, and minimize slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms.).<br />
* Speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language (for most people, this means "Speak Slowly") and use pacing to give one's audience time to process information<br />
* Be **very** careful using jokes and humor, as people's sense of humor can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* Succinctly describe pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals if some people cannot see your visuals (e.g., remote attendees, visual impairments). <br />
* Be sure the screen and the spoken content reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All meeting '''participants''' should: <br />
* allow people to speak other languages in case of some difficult words, e.g. in Chinese or Japanese.<br />
* try to be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-English native speakers, make in speaking and patient in encouraging people to express themselves.<br />
* try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting ones own ideas and when responding to others. <br />
* treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99568Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T18:41:16Z<p>Abasset: /* During Presentations and Discussion */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
As an international community, W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and countries. However, to function well as a truly global community, we must also work to be aware of and sensitive to any differences and inclusive of different work styles and needs. <br />
<br />
In the tech world, including groups like the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. At W3C we strive to be inclusive and want to have the benefit of feedback from all our many participants including those who are non-native English speakers, and/or with non-Western backgrounds as well as to encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
<br />
Below are some best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meetings: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== Meeting Logistics ==<br />
* Have a big screen (or blank wall) on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions<br />
* Establish agreement among attendees on which tool(s) will be used (IRC, Slack, etc) during the meeting to get input from participants. Ensure that all attendees can use the selected tool(s).<br />
* For remote participants, be sure to share screens where possible and that the discussion is minuted in IRC. <br />
<br />
== During Presentations and Discussion == <br />
For group presentations, Chairs and Facilitators should consider the value of wide group participation and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak] and understand they can mitigate this by: <br />
<br />
* helping to repeat any questions or comments.<br />
* recognizing commenters who have not been heard from or who are most likely to move the conversation forward and encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* also recognizing those commenters who may, by their style, tone or length of speech, derail or negatively escalate a discussion, and respectfully but firmly steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* summarizing what was said and decided at the end of each discussion and to ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
<br />
Presenters/Chairs should:<br />
* make their objectives clear: by clarifying whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* show any open issues lists and discuss the issues one by one, to get people involved and allow them to follow along.<br />
* speak clearly, taking particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g.: use simple language; expand acronyms, and minimise slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms.).<br />
* speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language (for most people, this means "Speak Slowly") and use pacing to give one's audience time to process information<br />
* be **very** careful using jokes and humour as people's sense of humour can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* describe succinctly pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals as some people may not be able to see your visuals as it is normal in W3C for people to attend meetings remotely with only audio and the IRC text "transcript". Also be sure the screen and the spoken content should reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All Meeting participants should: <br />
* allow people to speak other languages in case of some difficult words, e.g. in Chinese or Japanese.<br />
* try to be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-English native speakers, make in speaking and patient in encouraging people to express themselves.<br />
* try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting ones own ideas and when responding to others. <br />
* treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Best_Practices_for_Effective_Meetings&diff=99567Best Practices for Effective Meetings2016-09-06T18:37:14Z<p>Abasset: /* Preparing for Meetings: */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
@@Note: a meetings best practices document will be linked from meeting pages and be given out in printed form at the TPAC 2016 meeting in Lisbon. The best practices document and the below pages were created in response to asking W3C meeting attendees about how to make meetings more welcoming (with some special attention given to those non-native speakers or from non-Western countries). <br />
This document is partially based on: [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic Global Topic] and [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources Speaker Resources ]. Information that all W3C meetings operate under the Code of Conduct is also to be included. <br />
@@<br />
<br />
As an international community, W3C benefits greatly from the many unique strengths, perspectives and ideas that can be gained from collaboration across cultures and countries. However, to function well as a truly global community, we must also work to be aware of and sensitive to any differences and inclusive of different work styles and needs. <br />
<br />
In the tech world, including groups like the W3C, meetings can often seem heavily biased with US-centric or Western communication styles and meeting habits. At W3C we strive to be inclusive and want to have the benefit of feedback from all our many participants including those who are non-native English speakers, and/or with non-Western backgrounds as well as to encourage open collaboration in a professional and respectful manner. <br />
<br />
<br />
Below are some best practices for meetings with international participation.<br />
<br />
== Preparing for Meetings: ==<br />
'''Chairs''' and meeting '''Facilitators''' should:<br />
* Send agenda and expectations in advance. (For a face-to-face meeting, send the agenda at least 1 week in advance, so people can receive it before they travel.) <br />
* A good agenda:<br />
** States the goal(s) of the meeting<br />
** Lists the topics of discussion<br />
** Gives a time frame for each topic<br />
** States the anticipated outcome per topic (e.g., information transfer, discussion for understanding, seek consensus, problem resolution, brainstorming, ...)<br />
* Seek feedback on the proposed agenda. Make adjustments as appropriate.<br />
* Supply supporting materials ahead of time to give the audience a chance to get familiar with the subject. (If people are traveling, provide materials at least 1 week in advance!)<br />
* Ensure that handouts, slides, and other material are in accessible formats.<br />
<br />
'''Attendees''' should:<br />
* Read the agenda. Provide feedback as needed.<br />
* Read the supporting materials. <br />
* Come prepared with notes on your questions, ideas, reactions.<br />
<br />
For large group presentations, see specific [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources best practices for speakers]<br />
<br />
== During Presentations and Discussion == <br />
For group presentations, Chairs and Facilitators should consider the value of wide group participation and understand why individual participants might be [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic#Motivate_people_to_speak_up hesitant to speak] and understand they can mitigate this by: <br />
* having a big screen on which to project the IRC channel, so people can see the live discussions from the screen.<br />
* helping to repeat any questions or comments.<br />
* using modern tools (IRC, Slack, etc) to get input from participants.<br />
* for remote participants, being sure to share screens where possible and being sure the discussion is being minuted in IRC.<br />
* recognizing commenters who have not been heard from or who are most likely to move the conversation forward and encourage their thoughts and participation.<br />
* also recognizing those commenters who may, by their style, tone or length of speech, derail or negatively escalate a discussion, and respectfully but firmly steer the discussion to a more neutral or courteous direction. <br />
* summarizing what was said and decided at the end of each discussion and to ask for further questions and clarifications. <br />
<br />
Presenters/Chairs should:<br />
* make their objectives clear: by clarifying whether the subject is for information, for discussion, or for decision.<br />
* show any open issues lists and discuss the issues one by one, to get people involved and allow them to follow along.<br />
* speak clearly, taking particular care with names, words, and phrases that the audience may not know (e.g.: use simple language; expand acronyms, and minimise slang, jargon, colloquialisms and idioms.).<br />
* speak at a rate that people can follow easily, including people who are not native speakers of one's language (for most people, this means "Speak Slowly") and use pacing to give one's audience time to process information<br />
* be **very** careful using jokes and humour as people's sense of humour can be very different. In addition, most jokes are very hard to understand for non-native speakers, and will distract them from your content.<br />
* describe succinctly pertinent parts of graphics, videos, and other visuals as some people may not be able to see your visuals as it is normal in W3C for people to attend meetings remotely with only audio and the IRC text "transcript". Also be sure the screen and the spoken content should reinforce each other. This reinforcement is particularly helpful for those having difficulty following the presentation.<br />
<br />
All Meeting participants should: <br />
* allow people to speak other languages in case of some difficult words, e.g. in Chinese or Japanese.<br />
* try to be gentle about any mistakes that people, especially non-English native speakers, make in speaking and patient in encouraging people to express themselves.<br />
* try to speak factually, succinctly, helpfully, and respectfully when presenting ones own ideas and when responding to others. <br />
* treat each other with respect, professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and strengths.<br />
<br />
== Code of Conduct ==<br />
All W3C Meetings are run under the rules of the [https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]. <br />
<br />
Doing so means that our community: <br />
* Forbids harassing or bullying anyone verbally, physically or sexually - and encourages respectful and appropriate communication. <br />
* Forbids discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics or group membership - and encourages courtesy, consideration and openness to difference.<br />
* Avoids demeaning or insulting behavior or language - and encourages communicating constructively. <br />
* Seeks, accepts, and offers objective criticism, and acknowledges properly the work contributions of others.<br />
* Forbids disrespectful, unprofessional or unfair or unwelcome behavior or advances while being, in terms of respecting cultural differences, "conservative in what you do and liberal in what you accept from others".<br />
* Accepts (especially those in a leadership position) their responsibility to take action whenever disrespectful or inappropriate behaviors are observed to bring a discussion back to a more civil level .</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialwg/2016-08-23&diff=99267Socialwg/2016-08-232016-08-23T06:28:16Z<p>Abasset: /* Agenda */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''[[socialwg]] Teleconf 2016-08-23'''<br />
<br />
Tuesdays at 10am US/Pacific, 1pm US/Eastern time for 60 minutes<br />
* Check [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Social+Web+WG+meeting&iso=2015-04-19T13:00:00&p1=43 your timezone] <br />
<br />
WebEx phone number: +1-617-324-0000<br />
There is a meeting number: 642 112 960<br />
<br />
Sometimes you need the [https://www.w3.org/2015/10/social-wg-telecon webex password] Click on that link to see it. Or email sandro@w3.org if that link doesn't work for you.'''<br />
<br />
[[https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=m60d8f99fc911f2b6fdbb0650665f22b4 WebEx]]<br />
<br />
If you're new, please get on IRC 15 minutes ahead of time and try to dial into WebEx to see if you have any issues. <br />
<br />
== Previous Meeting ==<br />
* [[socialwg/2016-08-16|2016-08-16]]<br />
<br />
== Minutes ==<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-08-23-minutes]]<br />
* [http://www.w3.org/2016/08/23-social-irc IRC log]<br />
** [http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2016-08-23 IRC log with permalinks]<br />
<br />
== Agenda ==<br />
* Chair: Arnaud<br />
** Backup: Evan<br />
* Regrets: <br />
** Ann Bassetti<br />
** ...<br />
{{agenda-preamble}}<br />
<br />
=== Admin ===<br />
==== Participation ====<br />
* Participation is limited to [http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=72531&public=1|WG members]<br />
* '''[[Socialwg/2016-09-22#Registration|Register for 2016-09-22 Lisbon TPAC f2f]]''' **ASAP** 2016-09-21…23<br />
<br />
==== Approval of Minutes of 2016-08-02 ====<br />
* [[Socialwg/2016-08-02-minutes|2016-08-02-minutes]]<br />
<br />
=== Discussion Items ===<br />
* Update from ActivityPub and LDN about last 2 weeks progress<br />
* Proposal: publish new WD of LDN<br />
* Proposal: publish new WD of AP<br />
* Proposal: publish new WD of SWP<br />
<br />
=== Tracking Document Status ===<br />
Explicit check for updates on all our documents - if not covered by individual Discussion Items above.<br />
* [[Socialwg/DocumentStatus|Document Status]]<br />
<br />
=== Next Meeting ===<br />
<br />
* [[socialwg/2016-09-06|2016-09-02]] Telecon with Evan?<br />
<br />
{{agenda-adjourn}}<br />
<br />
----<br />
back to [[socialwg]]</div>Abassethttps://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=PWE/201604_outline&diff=99196PWE/201604 outline2016-08-16T08:03:17Z<p>Abasset: /* Proposed actions re: Task Force membership and participation */ added "completed" to first bullet</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
= W3C POSITIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT (PWE) =<br />
<br />
Ideas for PWE next steps, proposed by co-chairs Amy van der Hiel and Ann Bassetti, for consideration and comments. We are grateful for early feedback from the former chair, Coralie Mercier.<br />
<br />
== OVERVIEW ==<br />
<br />
Outline for renewing Task Force, reviewing goals, vision, documents, and next steps<br />
<br />
A. Renew the Task Force membership. Start meeting again.<br /><br />
<br />
B. Review current objectives, Code of Conduct, related documents and policies for gaps or 'needs work'. Develop new strategies and materials with training and tips on how to facilitate meetings and best practices for handling problematic situations.<br /><br />
<br />
C. Consider what is our aspirational work environment? Seek to ascertain what people do or don't like about working within W3C, and what would make the W3C *the best* organization to work with.<br /><br />
<br />
D. Communicate widely about this work. Develop strategies for ongoing communications and training.<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== A) TASK FORCE ==<br />
<br />
The current members of the Positive Work Environment Task Force are listed at [[#Ref 1]]. We need to determine who now wants to be on the Task Force.<br />
<br />
=== Proposed actions re: Task Force membership and participation ===<br />
<br />
A.1) Send email to list (public-pwe@w3.org), asking if current members want to continue or not. ''[Completed; July 2016, by AnnB]''<br />
<br />
A.2) When there is a general announcement to W3C community, ask for new members.<br />
<br />
A.3) Once the list of participants is updated, work with newly re-formed Task Force to determine work mode (e.g., meeting schedule, email list, priorities, etc.)<br />
<br />
A.4) Clarify if this work will be done entirely within "member" space, or in public, or a combination of the two. We propose the new TF continue to work in a member space but have a public page and possibly a mailing list, but are open to alternatives.<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== B) CODE OF CONDUCT, related policies and documents ==<br />
<br />
The current published set of statements and policies are:<br />
<br />
-- Code of Conduct: [[#Ref 2]]<br />
<br />
-- Glossary: [[#Ref 3]]<br />
<br />
-- Procedures to follow: [[#Ref 4]]<br />
<br />
-- Ombudsman process: [[#Ref 5]]<br />
<br />
-- Education and Training resources: [[#Ref 6]]<br />
<br />
-- Draft subset Code of Conduct for Conferences [[#Ref 7]]<br />
<br />
This content is collected on the public Positive Work Environment home page: [[#Ref 8]] , and there is a member-only PWE Task Force site: [[#Ref 9]]<br />
<br />
=== Proposed actions re: policies, documents and web sites === <br />
<br />
B.1) Review current objectives, documents, open issues, etc. for gaps or segments which need editing<br />
<br />
B.2) Proposal: add a section on facilitation and best practices, addressing topics such as:<br />
-- How does one recognize a problem?<br />
-- What to do "in the moment", when you perceive difficult behavior occurring?<br />
-- What responsibilities do participants have, according to their role<br />
(e.g., Chair, Team Contact, team member)?<br />
-- How does one recognize when one is "out of one's depth"? <br />
-- What should you do in a situation that feels like you do not have<br />
the skill, knowledge, or experience to manage?<br />
-- How to distinguish between a mistake versus a recurrent pattern?<br />
-- Note that over-reacting can be as bad as under-reacting.<br />
<br />
Note: work on a Best Practices for Meetings document was proposed to be done by the TPAC in Lisbon.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== C) WHAT IS OUR “ASPIRATIONAL WORK ENVIRONMENT (AWE)? ==<br />
<br />
Besides the basic requirements and efforts to ensure a Positive Work Environment, what else could we add to make W3C the *best* place to do standards work?<br />
<br />
=== Proposed actions toward achieving an AWEsome Work Environment ===<br />
<br />
C.1) Conduct Information Interviews with current participants, in assorted roles, asking questions such as:<br />
<br />
-- What do you like or not like about working within W3C?<br />
-- What would make this a better environment for you?<br />
-- What are the kinds of problems you've encountered?<br />
-- How should we handle participants who are <bullies / obstructive / rude / ignorant / ...>?<br />
-- How should we handle technical disagreements?<br />
-- What could we do to encourage more diverse participation?<br />
-- What do you envision when you think of "more diverse"?<br />
-- Have you seen any particularly good techniques or resources in other places you've worked?<br />
-- ...<br />
-- <what other questions might be good?><br />
<br />
C.2. Compile the results of those interviews, and determine next steps based on what's collected.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== D) COMMUNICATIONS ==<br />
<br />
This effort is only valuable if people learn and modify their behavior(s). Many don't know the Code of Conduct exists. Even more participants don't know how to apply these ideas in their day-to-day Working Groups. Some well-intentioned individuals don't recognize that their own behavior is at issue.<br />
<br />
=== Proposed actions for communications: ===<br />
<br />
D.1) Issue "basic" W3C communications -- to the public, members, and Working Group participants -- announcing (or reminding people about) the Code of Conduct, related content, and PWE Task Force.<br />
<br />
D.2) Invite new participation in the Task Force.<br />
<br />
D.3) Working groups that function efficiently are foundational to having a good working environment. To that end, encourage renewed Working Group training about how to use existing tools and techniques (e.g., rotating scribe list, speakers' queue in IRC, speaking slowly, ...), as well as ongoing chair support and education. Are there additional tip sheets, tools or supporting materials we could add?<br />
<br />
D.4) Changing people's perceptions and behavior can take a long time. For this reason, we should map out a long-term communications and training strategy regarding these ideas. Examples:<br />
-- How frequently should we issue a communication (in any form) on these topics?<br />
-- What's the most effective way to communicate to participants in Working Groups?<br />
-- Should there be a basic set of introductory materials given to all new participants?<br />
-- Could there be a set of "reminder" materials given periodically to all participants?<br />
-- Although Community Groups exist with minimal support from the W3C,<br />
should we communicate these concepts to the CGs?<br />
-- Would it be useful to have a PWE “Tip of the Week”?<br />
-- Could we publish anonymized examples of good and bad behaviors?<br />
-- ...<br />
<br />
D.5) Seek examples of similar communications and training from Members' companies, from which we might learn.<br />
<br />
D.6) Consider adding new materials (in what form?), about visions for making the W3C an "AWEsome" work place (i.e., this effort is not only about how to deal with problems)<br />
-- proposals include developing a Best Practices for Meetings document (see [https://www.w3.org/wiki/Speaker_Resources#Speakers_Guidelines Speakers Guidelines]) -- proposed to be done by the TPAC<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== ACTIONS ==<br />
* 1. Amy reviews (done)<br />
* 2. Amy and Ann make final adjustments and edits per Amy's review (done)<br />
* 3. We send to Coralie for initial feedback (because she's got so much experience with the topic, and is seeking some specific inputs from us as Comm Director) (done)<br />
(update: to send to Jeff first, before bringing to TF, since we had an earlier discussion with him). <br />
* 4. Review with current Task Force<br />
* 5. Edit as appropriate<br />
* 6. Submit to W3M / Comm Team / Jeff Jaffe / etc ... in whatever sequence makes sense<br />
* 7. Announced by Comm Team<br />
* 8. Reactions & feedback from W3C Community<br />
* 9. Add new Task Force team members<br />
* 10. Make changes per considerations of feedback received<br />
* 11. Produce a "Chair Training" session<br />
* 11. ... what <br />
* 12. ... iterate ...<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== REFERENCES ==<br />
<br />
<div id="Ref 1">[1]</div>[https://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=42205 Current members of Positive Work Environment Task Force ]<br />
<div id="Ref 2">[2]</div>[https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ Code of Conduct]<br />
<div id="Ref 3">[3]</div>[https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/#Glossary Glossary]<br />
<div id="Ref 4">[4]</div>[https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#Procedures Procedures to follow]<br />
<div id="Ref 5">[5]</div>[https://www.w3.org/2013/10/ombuds.html Ombudsman procedures ]<br />
<div id="Ref 6">[6]</div>[https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#Education Education and Training resources]<br />
<div id="Ref 7">[7]</div>[https://www.w3.org/wiki/PWE/Conf-code Draft subset Code of Conduct for conferences]<br />
<div id="Ref 8">[8]</div>[https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/ Public Positive Work Environment home page]<br />
<div id="Ref 9">[9]</div>[https://www.w3.org/2011/07/Positive-Work-Environment-TF.html Member-only PWE Task Force site]</div>Abasset