<cgueret> Hi there! Zakim tells me I'm the first one on the phone, is that normal ?

<jeff> yes, Christophe, most people will dial in a minute before the hour, until 5 minutes after.

<cgueret> ok! :)

<cgueret> ^_^

<veronica> audio is good for me

<veronica> scribenick: veronica

jeff: history of this project...
... about 9 months ago, based on input from Alex Russell at TPAC meeting
... Tim asked we design a program for the broader world
... presented to recent AC meeting in June
... but the specific program we designed did not meet approval
... some on AC thought we were offering too few, too much, not right benefits
... so here we are, working on a new program

[kimberly west just joined]

jeff: so that was the background
... we had some brainstorming on email list
... this is the first call
... intent to meet half a dozen times
... agenda - we should agree on goals of the program
... this is important to get lined up in the beginning
... success criteria; we need to know what that means
... hopefully first 3 agenda items can be accomplished quickly
... any questions before we start?

[no responses]

jeff: hearing no questions or comments
... start with goals of program
... in email discussion prior to this call
... one of the challenges [TV Raman], what is the goal?

<jeff> A. W3C wants to establish itself as the primary steward of the Web, and toward that goal wants to have individuals participate.

<jeff> B. Countries grant citizenships -- W3C wants to create Webizens a la Citizens

<jeff> C. W3C wants to involve the wider community -- rather than be seen as a place where only companies play

<jeff> D. W3C wants to create an additional revenue stream

<jeff> E. Degrading further: W3C wants to sell t-shirts and coffee-mugs that are "branded".

jeff: on email chain, we want to involve a wider community

<jeff> The idea of the program is to allow individuals to affiliate with the Web standards community ... we seek to make available a new means to congregate as a community.

jeff: allow individuals to engage
... so I'm interested on POV from those on call

<LJWatson> +1 for C

jeff: from T.V.'s list, what I've mentioned or something else

Christophe: I really like this idea for wider community to join
... not fond of B

<MarkCrawford> Several member companies run ecosystems. These ecosystems consist of customers, partners, etc and provide a forum for discussing issues around using products, sharing solutions, providing feedback to the host company, and for the host company to share information out. Was this type of approach considered in the original group

jeff: thanks for that input
... I like Mark' comments
... in my view, probably a broader and more complete; gives it more meat
... conceptually, we were thinking of something like C
... but I like Mark's language
... goes beyond high level goal

<MarkCrawford> SAP for example offers recognition for top participants

jeff: more into the expected activities

<Julian-Nominet> Q

<Zakim> cgueret, you wanted to comment

<Kimberly> It seems to me that A and C are related

julian: I think what Mark put down is interesting
... do we need to look at this from a specific mission?
... for instance, there are lots of profit organizations that concentrate on professionalism
... are we trying to educate?

jeff: I think that's a great comment
... initially the mission defined was weak
... enhancing affiliation less defined than what you described

Julian: greater creativity

jeff: that's a good add; we should have a mission
... let's take more comments on mission

<MarkCrawford> Not to get too pedantic, but if we have a mission, then we should have a vision of where we want to be

<jeff> Mission candidates: Affiliation, Professionalism, Education, Creativity

jeff: affiliation, professionalism, education and creativity
... so let's get comments on Mission

<cgueret> MarkCrawford: wouldn't that be what was listed as goal A ?

Leonie: our mission is to create a more inclusive standards community

<MarkCrawford> In answer to Christophe - I would say that A is the vision

jeff: I would identify that as similar to a stronger affiliation; let's replace with Inclusion
... we don't have to decide everything on today's call

<cgueret> MarkCrawford: +1

jeff: criteria next
... 1. we shouldn't lose money
... 2. should be a sizable number of people in program
... don't have a number in mind
... let's have input on Criteria for Program
... should relate to eventual Mission

<MarkCrawford> There is a dichotomy between wanting to increase participation to traditionally unengaged folks and charging for the privilege

jeff: what should be other criteria?
... or +1 to what Chaals provided
... ok, let's accept Chaals

<bkardell_> There are other ways to increase participation which don't involve membership

Christophe: getting more people to participate is good
... @@@ privilege

<bkardell_> The benefit of membership is a voice in an and tag and more generally because that is how w3c is structured

Christophe: if webizens could help us @@@ in other groups @@

jeff: i think Christophe said that one key point is to have some expectation that most IEs chose to be a webizen

Christophe: also get new people

<cgueret> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/json-ld-origins-2/

<jeff> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webizen

jeff: let's move to Target Market
... there was a lot of confusion about the marketing study
... when we presented the previous version of the webizen proposal
... some of the feedback from AC was 'you invented something; don't know who would sign up'

<inserted> scribenick: cgueret

veronica: some key points, number of "invited expert -> webizen" as criteria but also number of webizen who would not have otherwise been invited expert or members. As pointed out by Manu Sporny in his blog, the work on JSON-LD benefited from such participation

<inserted> scribenick: veronica

veronica: so you should know who might be joining
... decided not to go back to AC without marketing info
... in email thread, begging some of our organizations to perform marketing study
... but it was not successful
... Ian from Communications team suggested this task force design a survey
... to send out to everyone what the new program is
... as ask what they think
... this isn't a formal study unfortunately

<Julian-Nominet> q

veronica: we can create the survey, create the questions
... do we as task force think this would be sufficient [no input received from emails]

julian: I have a very good relationship with CEO of a market research company
... I could ask her if that's of interest?

jeff: yes, let's ask

<jeff> ACTION: Julian will determine whether colleagues from market research firms could help with the market research study. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/08/01-webizen-minutes.html#action01]

julian: this plus Twitter could work

leonie: market research is really good, any data from community at large is valuable

<bkardell_> Is the problem how to get people to answer or what to ask?

jeff: so I hear +1

<cgueret> +1

leonie: anything we can get will help

<Julian-Nominet> +1

<MarkCrawford> +1

<LJWatson> +1

jeff: please type +1 that it fulfills or -1

<Kimberly> +1

+1

<cgueret> +1

<Georg> +1

jeff: so we have consensus
... now the fun part
... Brainstorming: the design of the program
... to recall, previous proposal we had a market basket of goodies
... cost was $100 to join to help defray some costs and also get some goodie, mug, shirt ...

<bkardell_> As I said previously... We have enough swag

jeff: But, Webizens collectively could somehow have some limited powers to participate

<bkardell_> The benefit is membership and representation

jeff: AC opinions: too many goodies cheapened the program

<bkardell_> I agree with ACS on this

<cgueret> +1 too

jeff: since then, we shouldn't have the goodies, that people want to join
... on giving webizens power to review, participate
... AC wasn't crazy about that
... some felt Webizens needed more power
... so question for us for this new task force
... what should fee be? $100 right? variable? min/max, $0?

<LJWatson> Think the fee will depend on the member benefits.

jeff: what benefits should there be?

<MarkCrawford> At one time OASIS charged $100 individual membership. Do we have any insight into how many individual members they were able to garner?

<bkardell_> Correct me: invited experts have no ac representation, right?

<Zakim> cgueret, you wanted to speak about goals for people that will become webizens

<jeff> brian, Correct.

Christophe: maybe we could have goals on why someone would want to join as Webizen

<Julian-Nominet> +1 to CV

<cgueret> example: https://www.aaai.org/Membership/membership.php

<bkardell_> So, again, I think this is the primary goal of a Webizen program.

Christophe: maybe to get entry line on CV
... maybe get discount to conf

<bkardell_> A way to collectively create "unions" with ac reps

Christophe: mostly gain benefits from activity

<MarkCrawford> I would suggest that we consider the benefit to be participation in the webizen ecosystem, TPAC attendance privilege with a discount to offset their membership fee, and recognition on a special W3C web page.

jeff: rather than decide as TF; create market survey and ask people why combination of this would encourage you to join program

julian: Christophe, where I was going, I think Christophe has picked on 'why would I want to join?"
... maybe someone who had useful input, they could be recognized for their contribution; could recognize on their CV

<bkardell_> Responsibilities is a funny word.. What responsibilities do any members have in prestige

<bkardell_> Practice

jeff: answering kimberly's question
... what must you? no formal responsibility other than pay the fee
... as julian pointed out, once you have an organization and there's activity
... you volunteer, that's how it grows
... may be consistent with Brian's comments

leonie: question then becomes how does webizen participate
... agree line on CV is key
... but what capacity does webizen have to participate

<bkardell_> Fwiw, I am launching efforts on participation soon

jeff: general public has broad possibility to participate

<bkardell_> I think we can achieve that without Webizen

jeff: any other comments on design on program?

jeff summarizes

Jeff: in terms of goal, we had good discussion

<bkardell_> But participation stops at feedback to a WG without some legit way to participate in w3c including vote

Jeff: sweet spot centered on C of Raman's list
... I will take action to summarize input from this call
... julian pointed out we need a Mission
... maybe on next call we'll discuss more
... 3 success criteria
... Marketing study; generic approach approved
... hopeful Julian's friend and colleague will have an add'l option
... so for next meeting we need to spend more time on Mission Statement
... I will also outline more on Marketing Study for TF to review
... next call not yet defined
... maybe week of Aug 18 for next call

<cgueret> +1 for a doodle

Jeff: we'll do another Doodle poll

<scribe> ... done with agenda for today

<MarkCrawford> thanks Jeff

<Kimberly> Thank you!

jeff: Thanks everyone for participating today.

<Georg> Thanks! Bye!

<cgueret> thx, bye bye everyone! :)

Bye!

jeff: can you open link for minutes? I don't have access privileges

<michiell> Hi, trying to dial in but need password

sorry michiell, the call has ended already

<michiell> veronica: sorry to hear that, I thought 8 AM ES = now.

thanks koalie for cleaning up my minutes!! I missed u on the call!

<koalie> yeah, sorry I missed it :(

<koalie> and thanks for scribing, veronica!