Meeting minutes
<koalie> Previous: 2020-10-13 join meeting of IDCG and PWECG as part of TPAC 2020
<koalie> Previous IDCG meeting (2020-10-06)
Pronouns in w3c bio
tink: It has been requested by ralph and wendy that people have the ability to put pronouns in w3c bio, we've been asked to share our thoughts
… First question is is this a good idea? should w3c do this?
… second one is the thinking is whether someone completes this section or not, that section will still be visible, the idea being it will hopefully encourage more people to add that information
… last question is are we aware of any guidelines we can use to make sure whatever gets entered into those fields, are there best practices to check that what goes into those fields doesn't send out the wrong message
… any thoughts on if this should happen?
<koalie> [Judy arrives]
tink: I think this would be a good addition
tzviya: I think i'ts a good idea also, as long as it's clear it's not required
Amy_Guy: +1
… and I agree it shouldn't be mandatory
<koalie> [chaals arrives]
tink: brings us back to the second part - shoud it be available if someone chooses not to fill it in
Amy: My instinct is: it shouldn't
… there are cases people might not be willing to share their pronouns widely
… if the field is not there at all, it may make some people more comfortable
tink: any other thoughts?
<tzviya> +1 to rhiaro
tink: the next part is should the field, if it exists, be user editable
<chaals> [IMHO absolutely should be user-editable]
<koalie> +1
tink: there is no widely available pronoun set
<tzviya> +1
koalie: yes, it should be user editable so we don't create discomfort by missing people
tink: i agree, this is a personal choice
Amy: in the http://
tink: good resource
… Ralph and Wendy asked for those
… do we know of any other resources?
… hearing none, this gives ralph and wendy a sense of where those of us on the call today are on this subject
koalie: yes I think that's helpful
What we think should happen with the BLM statement
<koalie> thread in public-idcg: Next steps with the BLM statement
tink: Recap - we worked on a statement, it was sent to the AC who consented for it to be published, but as the AC were reviewing it we also asked an external specialist, Kim Crayton, to review, who came back with very useful feedback
… brought it home to us ethat the statement as it stood did not perhaps do everything we hoped it would or send the messaged we hoped for
… this CG recommended that the statement wasnot published on behalf of w3c
… we now find ourselves at the point where we need to decide what to focus on next
jeff: a technicality - I don't think the AC approved the statement
… it went to review, there was one formal objection, the director was in the process of processing that objection
… the director might have overruled it, but while he was considering the issue we got the recommendation from Kim Crayton and pulled the statement back
tink: I had forgotten the objection.. it was a stressful time
<koalie> [Wendy Reid arrives]
tink: The situation we find ourselves in at the moment (there is a github issue) - the option as I think of them are that we could edit the statement based on Kim's feedback
… could go back ot the AC to look at it again
… one of the risks if we do that is that we as a group do not have any representation from any person of colour, for whom that statement is supposed to be support of
… that's a risk Kim pointed out
… it would be wrong of us to create a statement in support of a community of people that has no representation in this group
… An alternative we could decide is reediting is not where we want to focus our energies, and we could move forward with our todo list actions
… and send our support out to the web community by doing, and talking about what we've been doing
… there may be other possibilities
judy: I would favour our working on actions and trying to become a more welcoming community group
… so we can be more welcoming in those in our own community who haven't yet joined this, and also reaching out to others outside the w3c space
… I'm starting to work with a consultant for some of the areas of work that are looking at intersection of race and disability. Early stages, but every area of w3c work could benefit from some of that
… one of the things I hope we hang onto if we do focus more on actions would be the themes from the message cos I think that those will continue to be useful
… as areas of subgoals, learning, messaging, outreach, creating welcoming environment, supporting participants, ...
… we also need to work on regaining our momentum as a CG
… that may include some focus on logistics
… getting really clear announcements of meetings and agendas, getting stuff queued up to talk about
… that's my hope, and happy to help as much as I can
… I don't know if there's discussion about the timing, but it conflicts with an obligation I have
<jeff> +1 to Judy
tzviya: focussing on action items is important, but one of the things we talked about when were writing the statement is that one way of attracting people of colour to the community is to have a statement
… the earlier version of the statement was pretty robust, there was a lot of editing
… something i've noticed in looking at statements from people like the group p5 (who did great breakouts at tpac)
<tzviya> https://
tzviya: it's not necessarily an overt statement, but if you take a look at their community page, there's not a particular BLM statement, but in their page about themselves there's this list of stuff that they support and one of the things they mention is BLM
… I wonder if there's something we can do, maybe coming from w3c's page in general, talking about values that w3c support
… just making sure to be more inclusive in people of colour and these topics in general
… making sure in mentioning other values when we're talking about supporting organisations and social good and all of that
… as well as accessibility and privacy, but also BLM and particularly mentioning a phrase like BLM
wendyreid: I agree with everything tzviya just said, also like the p5js community statement
… in lieu of our .. I want us to publish a statement of some kind because as tzviya said we need to more obviously signal to the community that this is something we are concerned about
… we do want to be a more inclusive space, we want to welcome people from all backgrounds
… but I also think we need to do some action
… the statement maybe should be more inline with what p5 has done
… not just a one time blog post, something on the website, part of our comms and messaging, saying this is who we are now
… and not going to accept anything less than this
… I think that that might make a bigger statement
… we should probably get consultants from people like Kim and members in the community
… but we have to make it clear to members of our community that this is something we are concerned about
… there's nothing we can point to when people ask where w3c stands on social equity or something like that
<tzviya> I was also really impressed with Kay Martinez https://
tink: you think it would be okay to make the statement part of the w3c messaging itself rather than a one of blog post?
wendyreid: yes
chaals: a couple of thoughts... I agree with judy and wendy and tzviya
… what we do is pretty important
… by and large i would like to focus on that if we're going to make a statement i'm not sure what the best way to do it is
… I personally tend to favour fairly short statements
… the reason is because .. I favour the idea that we make short statements, because we should be focussing on our actions and backing them up
… yes we would like to be a much more welcoming organisation, is important, the fact that this is a middle class white anglosphere gropu suggests we would like that but we're doing a really bad job of it
… and we desperately want help doing that better. probably worth saying that
tink: do you mean a short statement in line with what tzviya and wendy were talking about, or a separate blog post?
chaals: maybe as short as "black lives matter" on the top of the website
… there is a question of how you get.. are we taking on a position that w3c members agree with or that they disagree with and if we are the director should be consciously saying I'm going to make this statement and if you don't like it leave
<rhiaro> +1 if you don't like it leave :)
jeff: I strongly agree with judy and chaals, emphasis on our actions
… also agree with tzviya and wendy's point of view that what we say is important
… I have a slight preference for the actions (speak louder than words)
… but both important
… we are long overdue for the values conversation
… it's happening in a number of places, at the AB to some extend
… and as part of the legal entity discussions and how we want to position the organisation for the future
… all of these are important directions
… there's a big question about venue
… I did want to express two cautions
… which go above and beyond what has been said
<chaals> [Note that I am the person least likely to support the director makes a statement and says 'if you don't like it, leave". But it might be the reasonable thing to do…]
jeff: the first is that we have to come to ground is whether we want to make a BLM statement at all
… when I was hearing tzviya talking about statements and p5 and so forth, I recall that one of Ki'ms critiques of our statement is that she characterised as it wasn't the black lives matter statement, it was an all lives matter statement
… we want to uplevel this to what are our values in general - if that becomes are focus we are also saying we are not going to have a BLM focus
… I don't see any way of avoiding Kim's critique
… it's suddenly about all of the values
… she wanted something focussed exclusively on Black lives
… we have to be conscious of that
… Also think our biggest problem as a CG is getting the membership involved
… any statement we make even if it's approved by the membership if there's no buyin and no passion and no action underneath it has the other thing that Kim critiqued
… what's going to be happening as a result?
… we have to find a way to get the AC actively involved
… if we had 5% of the AC, 20 AC members invovled with us, that would be a huge victory
… at the moment we're not a critical mass in our group
tink: as I understood it, Kim's feedback about not making the BLM statement into an All Lives Matter statement was said within the context of us publishing a statement about BLM
… tzviya was talking about a more general message about other things we support
… I don't think Kim was saing we shouldn't support a more general statement
… but if we were to make a BLM statement we should focus in on the one thing
tzviya: I was saying we should include something specific in a general statement of values
… I think Kim's concern was that our previous statement said "Black lives matter, but.."
tink: we should ask for input and feedback from Kim and others on how it might be perceived
jeff: I think I was misunderstood
… I agree Leonie that Kim would not object to our having a general values statement which talked about our general values and mentioned BLM as one of the things
… But she just wouldn't characterise that as a BLM statement
… my point was not to say we shouldn't have a general values statement - we should - but pointing out that it wouldn't qualify to be a BLM statement according to Kim's criteria
… if we put our energy into the general values statement, that's fine, but means we are taking off our immediate agenda our BLM statement
judy: my comment was about logistics and rebuilding momentum, i think that's well within our reach
… multiple people wanted to attend but the time change made it difficult
… What Jeff is focussing on is an important differentiation
wendyreid: Kim is not hear to speak for herself
… I'm really uncomfortable with people saying what Kim would say about what we're doing
… What tzviya and I are talking about is adding something to the w3c website that is inline with our mission statement
… there has been confusion in the past about the w3c mission statement
<koalie> W3C website: W3C Mission
wendyreid: this is a chance to reclarify it and reflect the modern values of w3c today
… this i think is very different from a BLM statement
<koalie> in particular: https://
wendyreid: the statemetn we were originally discussing was essentially going to be a one time blogpost/tweet that might invoke discussion or news coverage
… but it still would have been a one time thing, announcement wise
… we would reinforce it with actions, we still want to do that
… but one thing I took away from what Kim told us is that if we're doing the statemetn we have to be as impactful and short and to the point as possible
… we were driven into this awkward what-about-this kind of statement
… if we are to make a statement on top of what we do to change the mission statement or something like that, we should still be as short and to the point as possible
… internally we need to make these changes and perform these actions, and perform these actions before we make any sort of statement
… and we need help
… whether from the AC, and also consultancy
… there are many inclusion and diversity consultants out there
… we need professional help and buyin
… we're going in a slightly different direction, but we need to define that
<tzviya> +1 wendyreid
tink: I apologies if I spoke on behalf of other people
… I'd like to finish off by doing a strawpoll on some simple questions so people who are not in the meeting can get a sense of how those of us who are here are thinking
PROPOSAL: we edit the blm statement in response to Kim's feedback
<tzviya> -1
<tink> 0
<chaals> 0
<rhiaro> 0
<wendyreid> 0
<jeff> Judy:0
<koalie> 0
<tink> +1
PROPOSAL: we explore the idea of messaging along the lines of p5js
<wendyreid> +1
<koalie> 0
<tzviya> +1
<rhiaro>+1
<koalie> Judy: 0
PROPOSAL: we focus energies on actions that we have
<tink> +1
<wendyreid> +1
<chaals> +1
<tzviya> +1
<jeff> +1
<rhiaro>+1
<koalie> Judy: +1
<koalie> +1
tink: that's useful to get a sense on the record of how people are thinking
Change of Chairs for this group
tink: koalie and I have too much else going on our lives to feel we can continue chairing this CG
… we will both be stepping down at the end of this year
… with your help, we need to find other people to take forward the activities here
… It's up to the CG how we take this forward
… if people want to volunteer that's fine
judy: this is really important work for all of w3c and would be willing to help but would be really interested to chat with you both
… and it sounds like we would need some other folks as well
… this is something that definitely needs cochairing
… I'd be interested to talk with you
tink: happy to talk about that
chaals: I'm not sure I'm in a position to actually volunteer, but potentially.. I think it would be helpful to put out a general call and say we would like people ot know that you're stepping down and we'd like other people to step up
… and then the question is are we going to blessed with sufficient volunteers that we have to work out how to choose, or will we be struggling to drag someone kicking and screaming
… if it's the happy case of having more volunteers than we need, we need to think about how to make that selection
… an item for an agenda..
jeff: if we end up in the happy place that we have more volunteers than slots, there is so much work to be done ,we will find a way to channel all the energy people are willing to put into this
… if they're willing to do the work they don't necessarily need the title - we'll invent a title for them
<chaals> [+1 to the people who have been anonymously (but deservedly) thanking Koalie and Tink for the work they have done…]
koalie: yes chaals, we should issue a call
… we didn't say it, but it's something we should do and we intend to do that
… Also want to extend my heartfelt thanks to leonie for the excellent work she's been doing leading this group
tink: thank you koalie, and thank you for all our help making it possible
judy: do you plan to have two meetings in december?
tink: good question, not sure when they fall.... I don't see why not
judy: would be good in terms of momentum to announce those
tink: we have a calendar, the agendas do go out 24 hours in advance, and they're a regular fixture in the first and third tuesdays
… not sure how else to make the meetings visible
judy: folks might have missed this one because they were sorting out local calendars
… there were questions about UTC time
… just a confirmatory message on time and dates would be great
jeff: I'd like to congratulate the chairs for what they've achieved
… if you look at to what extend is inclusion and diversity and values on the map of the consortium, how much wer'e talking about it, compared to 3 years ago, we've made enormous progress
… it's probably hard to see that maybe in terms of measurable things
… we have a lot more to go
… but it's so much more in the conversation than it ever was and the chairs deserve a lot of credit
<koalie> w3c blog search on "diversity"
Update on action items
tink: anybody have any action update to report?
… I have finally got the last of the volunteers for the open office hours to give me their contact details for the table
<koalie> IDCG issues
<koalie> Issue 11: Hold open office hours
tink: I'd like to try and work with koalie and others to frame a blog post we can use to launch that and start getting word out to the community that there are those of us available for conversations about being part of the w3c community for groups who are typically underrepresented
… any others?
… Next meeting on the first Tuesday of December is Tuesday 1st. I'll send out a confirmation
… Thanks everyone for making it today
… Let's keep focussing on actions in the meantime