14:03:04 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwe
14:03:04 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/01/28-pwe-irc
14:03:16 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #pwe
14:03:22 <tzviya> Meeting: PWE
14:14:22 <chaals> chaals has joined #pwe
14:23:52 <tzviya> Date: 2020-01-28
14:23:56 <tzviya> Chair: tzviya
14:24:28 <tzviya> Agenda+ Review PRs on CEPC
14:24:28 <tzviya> Agenda+ Next steps CEPC
14:24:28 <tzviya> Agenda+ De-escalation training
14:24:28 <tzviya> Agenda+ GitHub organization and labeling
14:24:43 <tzviya> topic: PWE
14:31:07 <Ralph> Ralph has joined #pwe
14:32:44 <Ralph> regrets+ Vlad
14:33:15 <Ralph> regrets+ Chaals
14:48:45 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pwe
14:55:56 <Judy> Judy has joined #pwe
14:57:17 <angel> angel has joined #pwe
14:57:23 <angel> present+ Angel
14:58:46 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has joined #pwe
14:59:25 <jorydotcom> jorydotcom has joined #pwe
15:00:04 <jorydotcom> present+
15:00:46 <tzviya> present+
15:01:00 <wendyreid> present+
15:02:06 <Ralph> present+
15:02:09 <Ralph> scribenick: Ralph
15:02:52 <Ralph> present+ Deborah
15:03:52 <jeff> jeff has joined #pwe
15:04:51 <tzviya> ] https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pulls
15:04:58 <jeff> present+
15:04:58 <Ralph> Tviya: Ada had stepped away as editor
15:05:08 <Ralph> ... Marcos will be joining us, from Australia
15:05:19 <Ralph> zakim, next item
15:05:19 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Review PRs on CEPC" taken up [from tzviya]
15:05:29 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has left #pwe
15:05:35 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has joined #pwe
15:05:58 <Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/108 #108 clarify "following"
15:06:13 <wendyreid> +1
15:06:21 <dkaplan3> +1
15:06:27 <Ralph> Tzviya: the purpose here was to disambiguate from social media "follow"
15:07:33 <Ralph> ... hearing no disagreement, I'm merging
15:08:01 <Ralph> present+ Judy
15:08:18 <Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/109 #109 swapped definitions
15:08:49 <Ralph> Tzviya: this corrects an error in the previous version, swapping the definitions of "sexual harassment" nd "unwelcome sexual advance"
15:09:00 <Ralph> ... both definitions are retained
15:09:03 <dkaplan3> +1
15:09:26 <wendyreid> +1
15:09:34 <Ralph> ... hearing no disagreement, I'm merging
15:10:08 <Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/110 #110 Moving Unacceptable Behaviour
15:10:29 <Ralph> Wendy: this puts positive behaviors first, unacceptable behaviors second
15:10:33 <jeff> +1
15:10:40 <Ralph> <ralph> +1
15:10:48 <Ralph> ... hearing no disagreement, I'm merging
15:11:24 <Ralph> zakim, next item
15:11:24 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Next steps CEPC" taken up [from tzviya]
15:11:39 <Ralph> Tzviya: there have been significant edits so we need another CfC
15:11:53 <Ralph> ... should this go to W3M again?
15:11:58 <Ralph> Jeff: yes, I think so
15:12:09 <Ralph> Tzviya: we'll start a 1-week CfC
15:12:16 <jeff> q+
15:12:20 <Ralph> ... advice on when to pass this on to the AB and AC?
15:12:20 <tzviya> ack jeff
15:12:32 <Ralph> Jeff: I put it on the AB f2f agenda, 25-27 Feb
15:13:05 <Ralph> ... as soon as it's clear the CfC has consensus it would be wise to send it to the AB for them to read prior to their f2f
15:13:09 <Ralph> Tzviya: OK
15:13:20 <Ralph> ... I'll also go through the open editorial GH issues
15:13:32 <Ralph> ... I believe all of them have been managed except for possibly one
15:13:47 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/issues/106
15:13:59 <Ralph> ... I was contacted suggestion -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/issues/106 #106
15:14:17 <Ralph> ... about someone misrepresenting themself
15:14:27 <tzviya> ack Judy
15:14:38 <Ralph> ... it's a bit late in the game to be editing, but ...
15:14:50 <wendyreid> q+
15:14:54 <Ralph> Judy: it does seem within scope of the updated policy
15:14:57 <Ralph> ... I support adding it
15:15:12 <tzviya> ack wendyreid
15:15:45 <Ralph> WendyR: my first thought was to look into guidelines, such as what a journalist would use
15:16:08 <dkaplan3> q+
15:16:18 <Ralph> ... a framework such as "it is important to be honest about your affiliation" would be helpful, particularly if we define scenarios
15:16:38 <tzviya> ack dkaplan3
15:16:43 <tzviya> q+ Judy
15:16:48 <Ralph> Tzviya: soem professional organizations have required disclosure
15:16:48 <tzviya> ack dkaplan
15:17:05 <Ralph> Deborah: sticking with just affiliation feels restricted
15:17:19 <Ralph> ... the specific situation described is dishonesty
15:17:37 <tzviya> ack Judy
15:17:45 <Ralph> ... I'm sure we can find a phrase from multiple professional ethics boards
15:18:04 <Ralph> Judy: funder disclosure for scholarly papers addresses a different situation -- conflict of interest
15:18:26 <Ralph> ... if there's a way to adjust the wording to fit existing definitions, ok
15:18:37 <jeff> q+
15:18:55 <Ralph> Tzviya: we have cases where Invited Experts are sponsored by an organization but don't work for them
15:19:08 <tzviya> ack jeff
15:19:12 <Ralph> ... we might add to Unacceptable Behavior something like "lying" or "outright dishonesty"
15:19:23 <Ralph> ... I'd appreciate help in wording
15:19:47 <Ralph> Jeff: on the one week review, we've processed 30 pull requests since the original CfC
15:19:59 <Ralph> ... this addition would also be substantive
15:20:09 <Ralph> ... so I'd encourage a two-week CfC
15:20:17 <Judy> q+
15:20:21 <Ralph> Tzviya: fine, as long as we have the time
15:20:29 <tzviya> ack Judy
15:20:35 <Ralph> Judy: does that keep us on schedule w.r.t. the W3C Process revisions?
15:20:53 <Ralph> Jeff: if it completes on 12 Feb that still gives the AB two weeks to review before their meeting
15:21:07 <Ralph> Judy: and W3M would be concurrent?
15:21:22 <Ralph> Jeff: I'll want to know by the end of today's call when we'll have the final version
15:21:35 <Ralph> ... I'll want to send the clean final version to W3M
15:21:44 <Ralph> Tzviya: I hope to have a final version by Thursday
15:21:58 <Ralph> ... need to check that Marcos can help with that
15:22:22 <Ralph> Jeff: I can put it on the 5 Feb W3M meeting, which is still plenty of time
15:22:47 <jeff> q+
15:22:48 <dkaplan3> if you decide you do want to add honesty language, society of american archivists code of ethics says "In their professional relationships with donors, records creators, users,  and colleagues, archivists are honest, fair, collegial, and equitable."  But "dishonesty" works for me.
15:22:51 <Ralph> Tzviya: I propose to add "dishonesty" to unacceptable behavior
15:23:32 <Ralph> ... just to be simple
15:23:34 <tzviya> ack jeff
15:23:41 <dkaplan3> Another longer one I just found is "A. HONESTY (1) being truthful, sincere, forthright and, unless professional  duties require confidentiality or special discretion, candid,  straightforward and frank;
15:23:41 <dkaplan3> (2) not cheating, stealing, lying, deceiving, acting deviously, nor  intentionally misleading another by omission, half-truth or other means. "
15:23:57 <Ralph> Jeff: words such a "lying" and "dishonesty": there are all sorts of white lies
15:24:08 <wendyreid> q+
15:24:13 <Ralph> ... I'd be more comfortable with "misrepresentation"
15:24:18 <Ralph> ... more clearly unprofessional
15:24:48 <Ralph> Deborah: I found ^^ from some on-line professional ethics statements; this was the shortest I found
15:25:12 <Ralph> ... I found some from professional boards that were two pages!
15:25:33 <Judy> q+
15:25:42 <Ralph> ... this language uses "honesty" and then defines it
15:25:53 <tzviya> ack wendyreid
15:25:57 <Ralph> ... it's very clear that it's not talking about "white lies" but professional deception
15:26:02 <jeff> q+
15:26:12 <Ralph> Wendy: I really like the longer one; it's a  positive definition
15:26:21 <Judy> q+ to say that I think that (currently discussed) language is a substantial change
15:26:24 <Ralph> ... and covers all the bases of the issue
15:26:29 <Ralph> ... I think it covers everything pretty well
15:26:50 <Ralph> Tzviya: how do people feel about adding this to "expected behavior" section?
15:27:07 <Ralph> ... what license does this have where Deborah found it?
15:27:09 <tzviya> ack Judy
15:27:09 <Zakim> Judy, you wanted to say that I think that (currently discussed) language is a substantial change
15:27:22 <Ralph> Judy: several considerations
15:27:39 <Ralph> ... we're discussing this due to an actual situation of misrepresentation
15:28:08 <Ralph> ... we work in a diverse cultural environment, internationally, with various motivations to participate
15:28:24 <Ralph> ... I worry that this sounds like a substantial change
15:28:46 <Ralph> ... and sounds like it goes very far
15:28:48 <tzviya> ack jeff
15:28:56 <Ralph> Jeff: +1 to everyone
15:29:13 <Ralph> ... the positive statement is very strong and I strongly support including the positive thing as an expected behavior
15:29:34 <Ralph> ... where Judy's concerns may be magnified is in defining the unacceptable behavior
15:29:59 <Ralph> ... it may be sufficient to just have the very strong statement about proper representation and honesty in acceptable behavior
15:30:04 <Ralph> Tzviya: that's what I'm proposing
15:30:21 <Ralph> Judy: that may indeed work
15:31:11 <Ralph> proposal : add  HONESTY (1) being truthful, sincere, forthright and, unless professional  duties require confidentiality or special discretion, candid,  straightforward and frank;
15:31:39 <Ralph> Tzviya: with ever-so-slight wordsmithing to make it stylistically like the rest of CEPC
15:31:43 <Ralph> <ralph> +1
15:31:47 <dkaplan3> +1
15:31:50 <wendyreid> +1
15:31:50 <tzviya> +1
15:32:05 <Judy> +1
15:32:30 <Ralph> Tzviya: I'll create the pr after the meeting and merge it so there's one body to look at, but highlight this change in the CfC
15:32:33 <jeff> +1
15:33:07 <Ralph> ... before I send the CfC I'd appreciate a volunteer to do a copyedit review
15:33:16 <Ralph> WendyR: I'll do it this afternoon
15:33:25 <Ralph> zakim, next item
15:33:25 <Zakim> agendum 3. "De-escalation training" taken up [from tzviya]
15:34:00 <Ralph> Jory: back during TPAC we talked about an opportunity for this group to suggeest some trainings for chairs
15:34:16 <Ralph> ... one topic we talked about was conflict de-escalation
15:34:26 <Ralph> ... in the issue I wrote a draft curriculum
15:34:56 <Ralph> ... the intention was not to make this mandatory but to be able to provide resources and support for those looking for them; to be supportive
15:35:12 <Ralph> ... over the weekend I worked on the curriculum to make it more of a course deliverable in an hour
15:35:43 <Ralph> ... Tzviya and I talked about doing this in two timzeones on March 4 & 5
15:35:51 <Ralph> ... with a pre-run about two weeks prior
15:35:56 <Ralph> ... around Feb 21 or 28
15:35:58 <jorydotcom> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ga3qv3EbdFJGGesEmknwNJ72AQvh3ULn6FmvYHN-LyE/edit#slide=id.g422c9cd2c2_0_13
15:36:10 <Judy> [JB would be interested in a preview training]
15:36:12 <Ralph> ... see ^^
15:36:50 <Ralph> ... discuss what makes sense for us as a collaborative community
15:37:10 <Ralph> ... what types of interventions work best for us
15:37:17 <Judy> q+
15:37:32 <Ralph> ... I did not invent this; this is taught in many management classes
15:37:51 <Ralph> ... as we're teaching this on-line we can't do the group exercises that are normally done
15:38:04 <Ralph> ... it is ambitious to cover this in an hour
15:38:20 <Ralph> ... we definitely want to apply a cultural lens
15:38:29 <Ralph> ... and make sure the material makes sense from that angle
15:38:31 <tzviya> ack ju
15:38:45 <Ralph> Judy: thanks for pulling this together
15:38:59 <Ralph> ... it gives us an idea of how you might approach it
15:39:30 <Ralph> ... it might be helpful to check the terminology for general international understanding, including non-English-fluent folk
15:39:40 <Ralph> ... "party-centric" popped out at me, for example
15:40:18 <Ralph> ... and since this would be presented in the W3C context, maybe there's a way to provide some anchors in the W3C structures and processes so people can place it in the types of discussions that happen in W3C space
15:40:39 <Ralph> ... does "present on-line" mean live video conference?  if so, maybe there are group exercises that would work
15:40:45 <jeff> q+
15:40:50 <Ralph> Jory: one reason I want to do a dry run is to test some exercises
15:41:04 <tzviya> q+ to talk logistics
15:41:05 <Judy> +1 to Zoom webinar format
15:41:08 <Ralph> ... the idea would be to deliver via webinar and allow people to participate
15:41:40 <Ralph> ... when we don't have a pre-registration list it's hard to pair people up, so the exercises would probably be directed individual exercises
15:41:50 <Ralph> ... .I have to figure out how to do that in the short timeframe
15:41:56 <tzviya> ack je
15:42:01 <Ralph> ... I love exercises; it's way more fun and useful for people
15:42:14 <Ralph> Jeff: this is terrific, Jory; thanks for doing it
15:42:23 <Ralph> ... it's more important that we get this done right than we get it done quickly
15:42:39 <Ralph> ... I think it would be better not to schedule the webinar until you do the dry run
15:42:45 <Ralph> ... something may come up in the dry run
15:43:00 <Ralph> ... we've been waiting for this for years; we can wait a couple more months
15:43:36 <Ralph> ... I encourage you to include Philippe Le Hegaret in the loop as he works with the chairs on a daily basis
15:43:56 <Ralph> ... after the dry run I suggest scheduling with a couple of months lead time so people have enough notice to arrange their calendars
15:44:05 <tzviya> ack jeff
15:44:09 <tzviya> ack tzviya
15:44:09 <Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to talk logistics
15:44:32 <Ralph> Tzviya: we're talking about a one hour session; I feel 1 month notice should be sufficient
15:44:57 <Judy> JB has a Zoom channel
15:44:57 <Ralph> ... and we're planning two timezones; one Europe-friendly and one North America-friendly
15:45:01 <Judy> q+
15:45:05 <Ralph> ... Jory has done this course before
15:45:18 <Ralph> ... and we're hearing from people who are eager for this training
15:45:26 <Ralph> ... maybe April rather than March
15:45:39 <Ralph> ... other logistics: getting an international eye on the terminology
15:45:57 <Ralph> ... and we need to notify people - ac-forum, chairs, and others
15:46:17 <tzviya> ack Judy
15:46:22 <Ralph> ... I feel comfortable having Jory tell us where she needs help and when she can get this done
15:46:38 <Ralph> Judy: we have a number of Zoom channels
15:46:46 <Ralph> s/nnels/nnels available
15:47:13 <Ralph> ... we should figure out the total size of the community we'd like to reach
15:47:44 <Ralph> ... an idea for an interactive activity: we might get more participation if we announce each session as limited to 40 people
15:48:02 <Ralph> ... and run it enough times so the majority of chairs and other roles we're trying to reach get a chance to participate
15:48:17 <Ralph> Jory: it doesn't matter to me if there are 40 peope, 100 people, or 5 people
15:48:41 <Ralph> ... once the materials are made and reviewed for consistency, culture, and accessibility then it's functionally done and repeatable
15:48:49 <Ralph> ... we could give it once a month even
15:48:53 <Ralph> ... I'm super-flexible
15:49:14 <Ralph> s/peope/people
15:49:34 <Judy> [JB withdraws suggestion to consider capping attendance per session]
15:49:43 <Ralph> ... the idea of asking people to sign-up ahead of time is probably good
15:50:18 <Ralph> ... beginning of March is still absolutely good for me
15:50:44 <Ralph> ... waiting an extra week or so after the dry run is fine too
15:50:59 <Ralph> ... I'll invite PLH to attend the dry-run
15:51:32 <Ralph> Tzviya: Jory and I can work the scheduling off-line, including PLH
15:51:44 <Ralph> zakim, next item
15:51:44 <Zakim> agendum 4. "GitHub organization and labeling" taken up [from tzviya]
15:52:10 <Ralph> Wendy: I've added some new labels in the repo
15:52:36 <Ralph> ... looking at the upcoming work I see four main projects: CEPC, Ombuds, Training, Procedures
15:52:48 <Ralph> ... I tagged each issue with the project it is related to
15:53:11 <Ralph> ... I will create folders to organize things
15:53:27 <Ralph> ... so the de-escalation training can be added to a 'resources' folder
15:53:44 <Ralph> ... I also created a 'propose-closing' label to help with agenda management
15:54:16 <Ralph> Tzviya: thanks Wendy; this will help us keep GH organized in a meaningful way
15:54:35 <Ralph> ... once CEPC is approved we'll look for people to translate it
15:55:07 <Ralph> ... we want it to be available in many languages
15:55:11 <Ralph> topic: Next meeting
15:55:21 <Ralph> Tzviya: we'll meet in two weeks; 11 February
15:55:36 <Ralph> ... look for the formal CfC in your email, hopefully tomorrow
15:55:48 <Ralph> ... and we'll be finished with this iteration of CEPC by the next meeting
15:55:51 <jeff> Tzviya++
15:56:02 <Ralph> ... still to get through the AB, AC, and Director
15:56:08 <Ralph> <ralph> Tzviya++
15:56:12 <Ralph> [adjourned]
15:56:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/01/28-pwe-minutes.html Ralph
15:57:14 <Ralph> zakim, end meeting
15:57:14 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Angel, jorydotcom, tzviya, wendyreid, Ralph, Deborah, jeff, Judy
15:57:16 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:57:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/01/28-pwe-minutes.html Zakim
15:57:19 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Ralph; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:57:23 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pwe
15:57:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/01/28-pwe-minutes.html Ralph
15:58:07 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has left #pwe
16:05:32 <Ralph> rrsagent, bye
16:05:32 <RRSAgent> I see no action items