W3C

– DRAFT –
PWE

02 March 2021

Attendees

Present
Amy(rhiaro), Barbara, Jeff, Jemma, Léonie, Nish,  Ralph, Sheila, Tess(hober), Tobie, Tzviya, WendyReid, WendySeltzer
Regrets
Liz
Chair
Tzviya
Scribe
Ralph, rhiaro, wendyreid

Meeting minutes

<Ralph> previous 16-Feb

Introductions

Amy: I work with Digital Bazaar on decentralized stuff

Barbara: I have secured Anssi to back me up here

Tzviya: we're maintaining both CG GitHub repos

PWE CG issues

IDCG issues

Ombuds roadmap

<tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/wiki/PWE-Roadmap

tzviya: judy, sheila ralph and I spent time walking through this
… we welcome other input
… the first items are that judy and ralph are working with the hosts to look at what is relevant right now
… sheila and I are working on defining and documenting the current ombuds role
… and gathering information about existing ombuds programs
… as the pandemic was beginning, judy and I met with someone from the IOA and gave a cursory overview
… we didn't have a chance to share the information with you
… we met with the director of the IOA
… we put together extensive questions for him

2020-03-24 Ombudsperson update

tzviya: it was an interview/information session to find out if working with the IOA would be a good fit and what advice they had
… as the w3c will stand as a legal entity is a unique situation
… international, primarily volunteer
… a lot that stands out, we have our meetings mostly remote but meeting in different jurisdictions in person
… a lot to consider
… he had helpful advice
… it didn't seem like working with this person would be the best way to go but he did point us to resources
… and ?? suggested looking at other resources
… some of the advice is that the ombuds people should meet on a regular basis and have a longitudinal review to assess patterns
… not about specific issues, but to detect patterns and figure out where to go from there
… possibly with legal consult if necessary
… he talked about how we assess credibility and maintain confidentiality, but not specific steps, some resources
… and about the need for publicising what the ombuds people can and cannot do, which we haven't done historically
… we'll focus on that, it's important
… right now it's unclear what the ombuds people do for you

<Zakim> tobie, you wanted to ask about relationship to CoC enforcement in open source communities?

tobie: quick question whether you had talked to CoC enforcement in open source communities. Feels similar
… in terms of what the community looks like

tzviya: Jory is our connection there

tobie: the nodejs community has interesting work around moderation, I can try to find a contact person

Judy: I agree with what tzviya said
… overall describing the role of ombuds, most orgs do it differently and more carefully than our current setup

[I suspect the available enforcement options in an open source community might differ in important ways from those in W3C]

Judy: good to hear him outline the selection process as well as the nuances of how confidentiality is handled
… and to what extent the ombuds is a sounding board rather than a proactive role
… but sometimes that an ombuds can be proactive wrt to the organisation based on the kinds of patterns that they are seeing
… hence one reason why discussion among ombuds for pattern identification is a useful part of it

<sheila> +1 to the idea of ombuds connecting regularly in order to share broad patterns. in addition to soundboarding, that can be an avenue for meaningful impact.

Judy: I noted that ralph had come up with other mentions of ombuds with resources from before. I think we wanted to look back to determine the access. We should try to see if we have shareable resources to give this group background

[some other meeting records related to outside discussions on Ombuds resources:

https://www.w3.org/2019/06/13-pwe-minutes#item01

https://www.w3.org/2019/08/08-pwe-minutes

https://www.w3.org/2020/06/02-pwe-minutes#t03

https://www.w3.org/2019/03/07-pwe-minutes

]

Judy: complimentary to getting ombuds stuff refocussed is the policies and procedures section of the pwe work, we need to do the same thing
… go back over and update the roadmap parts
… that's something that anyone interested could have an info session and walkthrough in an upcoming week and make sure that work is tasked

tzviya: agreed
… we can schedule a meeting to discuss that
… going to require writing some revision text, if anyone is interested

<tzviya> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#Procedures

Judy: happy to do a first pass update at the chairs direction

tzviya: we should focus on the direction of ombuds because right now there's no information on what the ombuds do
… I'd be happy for you to lead a walkthrough of what needs to happen

Inclusive language, issue 17

tzviya: we've had this issue about inclusive language for months, it's important, but when léonie and I were talking about planning we realised it branched into possibly two issues
… when it was initially opened, the initial thought was to talk about conversational issues
… it kind of morphed into a discussion about things like changing our github repos so that we no longer use 'master' but 'main' instead
… that's where the focus has shifted, and a number of extremely valuable resources in here
… for both conversational inclusive language and the formal way we document things
… that was really useful for me earlier this week
… Léonie and wanted to propose breaking this into two issues
… and maybe creating a list of these resources
… we wanted to talk about peoples thoughts about that
… and about where we go from here

<tobie> +1 to all what you said.

tink: I think the IETF shortlist is a really good resource
… a topic like inclusive language, there is so much to cover and so much good material out there that if we point people off to read 16 different articles there's a good chance nobody will read any of them

<tzviya> https://github.com/ietf/terminology

tink: I think borrowing the IETFs list which is short and easy to read, means a lot more people are likely to read it, which seems like a win

BarbH: a couple of high level things
… this inclusion conversation is gotta be more than here is some information
… it needs to be a journey
… eg. it should be topics that there could be a forum on inclusive language
… this month is international womens and there could be say a w3c reach out to how do we celebrate women within the w3c
… all I'm trying to say is we've got to make cultural changes vs just here is a static web page
… to go look
… so that's my high level.. if we think inclusive language is important, what are the layers?
… it could be anything from a forum or chairs reminding people that these are the standard inclusive language
… trying to make sure that we move from yes this is a good idea to moving to a cultural change within the w3c
… stackoverflow just completed their developer survey and on occasion you should look outside and it was shocking that for gender they did it worldwide but gender is still less than 7% of the community
… we need to look at research like from stackoverflow or grace hopper and say okay what does outside in data tell us

<Jemma> I heard Barb as the need to "outreach" for cultural change..\

BarbH: lets track outside in information

<Zakim> tobie, you wanted to talk about Tatiana Mac's resource.

tobie: I'm for splitting the issue in two
… I would encourage people on the language list to look at tatiana mac's resource linked earlier on
… it would be good as an organisation to try to help out community projects rather than rebuild our own
… or offer competing suggestions
… it's an interesting and well thought out project, that is also looking at providing an api
… I would like us to do mor ewith the community

Ralph: thanks BarbH for referring us to other resources. Could you share a pointer to the stackoverflow survey?

BarbH: I'll put that in

<tzviya> tatiana mac's selfdefined https://www.selfdefined.app/

BarbH: and the grace hopper survey
… the negative with that is they only did the survey for US companies
… stackoverflow did 160 companies
… I'll put both links in there, there have been articles which say gender balance is still not where it needs to be
… the w3c is not unique in some of the challenges that they're facing

tzviya: what léonie and I had talked about with this issue - we know we're not close to where we need to be - is that a lot of these links might be overwhelming
… we're trying to draw a community that is perhaps slowly becoming aware
… some of us are going to read all of these articles. A lot of the people we're trying to convince to sotp using terms that are offensive are not going to read through most of these articles
… a resource like tatiana mac's selfdefined I think is amazing
… someone who might be offended by being told they have to change all of their github repo branch names or the way they speak is going to find that overwhelming
… so the IETF put together a list of 10 terms that are a starting point
… terms we come across regularly in tech
… it's a great starting point
… it exists already
… it's just to dip peoples toes in
… we're not saying lets get rid of these. if you want to learn more, here's where to go. maybe that's how we start to pull the community along
… and that can help us break it into the two issues of conversational and technical
… and create a resource to help improve the way you speak and code to become more inclusive

Judy: some of the approach I've been advocating earlier some people may have found annoying
… when you look at try to change cultures and systems I don't think one can ever expect having a list of resources to do the job
… that's one reason I have been proposing clusters of actions such as gathering relevant resources, annotating them for relevance to the organisation and context
… offering opportunities to discuss them to give people who do care enough to wade in an opportunity to think about it together an dhow to talk with others in the community
… and then finding ways to promote it
… maybe certain calendar triggers
… some things to promote for people interested
… but unless there's a thought through package of activities we may not get much result from the best list of resources
… I want to encourage us to plan how we try to change

<Zakim> wseltzer, you wanted to discuss IETF

wseltzer: a note around the ietf resource page
… there is ongoing and unfortunately disputed efforts in the ietf
… be careful about how much we depend on those resources as outcomes

<BarbH> Stack Overflow - Survey of 65,000 software developers from 186 countries around the world - https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2020

wendyreid: I agree with what BarbH is saying, and the monthly idea might be a good one
… rakuten recently every month focus on a different, try to observe every different cultural or group history month
… every month they have a list of events, resources, newsletters with different.. film screenings, a book or articles, we get almost weekly emails about these things
… a really interesting program
… partially runs by comms and our employee resource groups
… something very similar, we can't do as extensive stuff because it's mostly going to be us.. but an interesting way to nudge people along and teach people things they might not have been exposed to otherwise
… also worth .. I like the list from ietf, but incorporating it into things like chairs training, getting chairs on board so they can guide their groups
… to help build up the culture bit by bit
… the more education we can do in subtle ways will be the best approach
… we can't change everyone but we can help educate people bit by bit

<sheila> +1 wendy. love the idea of trainings, preferably regularly occurring

Jemma: I agree with Barb and tobie's suggestions
… particularly work on outreach
… we can add another branch, which would be outreach
… working on the outside would also bring about cultural change

<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to resolve what to do next

tzviya: I am hearing great demand for training

tzviya: I am hearing great demand for training
… I'm not going to focus on that today
… If you have the capacity to provide training or resources available and can provide information please be in touch
… to what we do with this issue - the proposal was to break this down into smaller issues
… we have the how to create technical work standards github issues that have more respectful language
… and the aspect of conversational, and cultural shift
… and a collection of resources
… breaking it down into 3 things
… is it okay to break it into those 3?
… wendy s raised the point that leaning on ietf document isn't the best idea because maybe it isn't stable, but maybe there's something else that isn't as overwhelming
… I'm hearing that perhaps we do need to overwhelm the community and introduce this with training

Jemma: curious about how would you define success of cultural shift?

tzviya: it's too big a question to answer right now
… I don't know
… it's a great question to ask

tzviya: I'm gonig to break this into 3 issues

Gathering statistics

tink: this conversation dates back to the origins of the inclusion and diversity cg back when it was the women at w3c cg briefly
… in our very first meeting at tpac

tink: Nell Waliczek at the time made a point that if we want to understand how far we've come we need to understand our current situation
… in terms of diversity we recognise certain things
… we know we have a majority of white faces and not people of colour or from other ethnic backgrounds, far more able bodied people than people with disabilities
… to really measure any degree of progress we need to have something to compare ourselves against
… there was a lot of support for that idea

<BarbH> Outside In - AnitaB.org published Top Companies for Women Technologist – 2020 Key findings and insights. https://anitab.org/research-and-impact/top-companies/2020-results/

tink: the initial suggestion was that really the only way we've really got to find out our current status quo is to ask people to share information
… about who they are, where they come from, all those other characteristics we're trying to improve in temrs of diversity
… it got pushback from one person and brought the conversation to a halt
… as a CG here we haven't pursued the conversation since then
… I have spent a lot of time working with orgs to do this very thing
… and it always come back to the idea of some form of survey with all the personal data and privacy questions necessary in place
… but it comes down to asking people to tell us about themselves so we can understand how bad our situation is
… so in the years ahead if we were to run it again we can see if we've made measurable progress
… we wanted to bring that idea back to this merged cg
… lots of people who weren't involved in the early part of the conversation to get your sense of if this is something we should do
… if the answer is yes, how do we go about doing that?
… is some kind of privacy protected survey the right way, are there other ways, reasons for and against any of these things
… an open conversation to draw on your ideas

<Zakim> tobie, you wanted to share OpenJSF's discussion on the topic.

tobie: the openjs foundation is having exactly the same conversation on this topic
… we';ve been talking about this for a couple of weeks
… bumping on the actual cost and privacy issues around doing a survey like this
… I think we're at the point we'd welcome any kind of knowledge in this area
… there might be opportunities to work on a survey we could run across organisations

BarbH: I second that
… on the survey, is to include it .. this is what I liked about stackoverflow, they weren't doing an inclusion and diversity survey, they were doing a developer survey and also asked the question gender
… is there any w3c surveys? at one point there was a mozilla survey that w3c was working on
… I guess on a high level if we want to measure we should just include measuring as part of the other surveying activity
… if you hyperfocus on inclusion and trying to capture different demographics that's going to be scary to anybody
… include it with your existing survey efforts

tink: I really like Barb's idea
… I found myself thinking it'd be really interesting to know how many front end devs, how many browser engineers, how many in education, other information

<BarbH> +1

tink: great idea to wrap it into something broader
… and the almost certain outcome of encouraging more people to complete the survey

<wendyreid> +1

tzviya: a great idea

<sheila> +1

tzviya: here's a question... anybody have experience writing surveys?
… many of us have been the victims of terrible surveys

tink: yes, some over the years
… I know there are other people at w3c who have spent more time
… and do a lot of user research
… I could talk to them
… there are experienced people we could tap up for a bit of help

<Zakim> tobie, you wanted to say that we've based our question on StackOverflow's

tobie: we're actually basing ours in openjs on stackoverflow as a base, so that might be something we can share
… not for the broader set of questions

tzviya: that's useful

<Zakim> Judy, you wanted to describe previous experience conducting surveys and not to volunteer

tzviya: I support the idea, it would be helpful if w3c and openjs could work together

Judy: I have experience conducting surveys and i had the opportunity to work with a professional survey company and found it amazing because they were able to point out that a lot of times when you ask a certain question you're almost guaranteeing you'll gey different information than you think you're getting unless you're really carefull how it's phrased
… surveying demographic information is probably the hardest kind of survey to do
… unless there's a chance that w3c might put professional resources into it, I subscribe to tobie's suggestion to leverage cooperation with other orgs to get something good
… it helps to be really thoughtful and to second guess and even dry run your surveys
… have people tell you what they think is being asked

tzviya: our next up I'm hoping is that maybe tobie will be able to report back about the possibility of working with openjs? in two weeks
… tobie if you think it would be helpful for one of us to join your meeting?

tobie: I can report back in two weeks, and let you know if we're having a specific call on this topic and email you

How can we facilitate open discussion

tzviya: another topic was that this group was intended to be an open forum for discussion which we know works really well when we're in person
… you're at tpac, you set aside an hour
… it can be a place where you can discuss things that didn't go as planned, a place to talk about potential cepc violations
… a place where you can say "I can't believe that there are so many people with disabilities and yet it is still so difficult to do xyz" ... etc
… a place where people have some common ground and have a place to discuss
… and a place for listening
… inclusiveness is a sense of belonging
… a sense of empathy when someone is listening to you
… it's hard to do remotely
… we want to brainstorm how we can create something where we have a place to go to talk to each other
… creating breakout rooms?
… is it possible or desired?
… léonie and I do this, we have a post meeting chat
… a lot of us have friends, but is there some way thsi group can act as that forum as discussion?

Ralph: that's really really important
… we've been doing this remote stuff for almost a year
… some colleagues for longer
… I wonder if your assertion that we can't do it remotely, how accurate that is now
… we're all exhausted by seeing each other screen to screen only but this is a really important topic
… I wonder if it's true that those who would wish to participate in such a chat session really feel it can't be done using this technology

tzviya: a large part of what creates the discussion is that these meetings are unminuted
… we could certainly do that
… a sense of having a safe space to talk
… a lot of people here I've never met in person

Ralph: those who participate definitely have to agree on what if anything escapes the conversation

hober: I love the idea of this group being an open space where people can come in and frankly talk about their experiences and vent and all of that stuff
… maybe it's constructive, maybe it's just cathartic
… the current group though is not well suited for that
… looking at the sea of rectangles on my screen I see a number of people who are in intimidating leadership positions, people in the AB, the CEO.. people in positions of power
… that's exactly not the room that i want to go to to be frank and let things out..
… I feel like that while clearly this group should want such a space, this group currently is not that space

<sheila> +1

tzviya: good point

Judy: there's been a pattern of offline comments I'll generalise... I've talked with different people in the w3c community about the group and people have approached me to talk about it
… one pattern of comment I was hearing from a few different people is that people are interested in the work of the group and would be interested in having a safe discussion space
… but they feel like even though they have an identity that is marginalised in a certain way maybe it's not on topic so they don't feel they can not be judged or feel awkward for their comments
… I have no idea what the right approach is
… it could be something buried in some of the original ideas that were posted, including for this group to offer discussion space, but not necessarily expect that it's in this cg where that can best happen
… but try to create discussion fora that would be explicitly set up as safer discussion spaces for some topics
… for people who are interested in promoting inclusive and diversity but at an earlier phase of talking out loud about it

tzviya: I'd love to hear more about that
… It's very difficult to just say lets having a meeting to talk about venting and figure out who the right mix of people is
… on idea was maybe having breakout rooms so it's smaller
… I've experimented a bit, you can have 4 or 5 people
… you have to get lucky with who you're in the room with
… you don't necessarily want the CEO in the room.. it might be we don't have anybody from the team in the discussion
… perhaps we want to give some thought to how we can plan this.. perhaps we want unminuted discussions.. people don't need to tell us what they want to talk about

BarbH: on the cultural change, I have to shout out to Tess, Tess gave a detailed report on cultural changes last august
… it did talk about how you can measure cultural changes
… I ended up sending it to a bunch of people
… one thing that has worked in some forums I've been involved in is that a topic is brought up and then people come in with their perspective
… if there is a topic on inclusive language then people can jump into the forum and make it a safe zone
… there could be topics around something as simple as AI and its impact on the ecosystem and diversity in general
… you throw out a topic and then people come in and they can express their feelings
… key is to have the right moderator who can capture the sentiments
… and steer
… but just to throw out hey inclusion and diversity... you need to frame it with a topic

hober: I'm pretty sure it wasn't me..

BarbH: I'll put it in the chat
… it impacted me so much

AOB

tzviya: thanks everybody

<BarbH> Driving Cultural Change - Masculine Defaults: Identifying and Mitigating Hidden Cultural Biases (August 2020) https://depts.washington.edu/sibl/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Cheryan-Markus-2020-Psychological-Review.pdf

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).