13:37:58 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwe
13:37:58 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/06/08-pwe-irc
13:38:05 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #pwe
13:38:09 <tzviya> Meeting: PWE
13:38:17 <tzviya> Date: 2021-06-08
13:38:21 <tzviya> Chair: Liz
13:50:33 <Ralph> regrets+
13:50:47 <Ralph> zakim, prepare meeting
13:50:47 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:50:48 <Zakim> Meeting: Positive Work Environment CG
13:51:59 <tzviya> regrets+
13:52:32 <tzviya> Agenda+ Zotero update (Jemma) Criteria for adding resources which include content copyright, authority, frequency + Growth and sustainability plan
13:52:32 <tzviya> Agenda+ CEPC PR https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/171 - review and merge
13:52:32 <tzviya> Agenda+ Survey updates (Tobie - will send materials in advance)
13:52:32 <tzviya> Agenda+ PWE Diversity Fund Committee formation
13:52:33 <tzviya> Agenda+ AOB
13:54:12 <Jemma> Jemma has joined #pwe
14:00:39 <wendyreid> present+
14:00:55 <Jemma> present+
14:01:13 <Liz_Lutgendorff> Liz_Lutgendorff has joined #pwe
14:01:26 <Nishad> Nishad has joined #PWE
14:01:32 <rhiaro> present+
14:03:21 <rhiaro> scribe: rhiaro
14:03:23 <wseltzer> present+
14:03:26 <sheila> sheila has joined #PWE
14:03:39 <rhiaro> Topic: Zotero update
14:04:10 <rhiaro> Jemma: how are we going to maintain the library, and how to grow the library?
14:04:21 <rhiaro> ... I found a great use case from harvard business review, thought it could be added to the PWE zotero library
14:04:27 <rhiaro> ... Two questions.. permission to add the resource?
14:04:33 <rhiaro> ... I'm comfortable with my capability to do it
14:04:37 <rhiaro> ... but it's the group's library
14:04:43 <rhiaro> ... what is the process to add?
14:05:03 <rhiaro> ... Second, harvard business review requires access, more than 3 free materials. As a university employee I can access them becuase we have subscription
14:05:06 <mallory> mallory has joined #pwe
14:05:12 <rhiaro> ... But if we want to add an article and someone doesn't have access to the subscription
14:05:15 <rhiaro> ... how will we deal with that?
14:05:49 <rhiaro> ... For the ?? library, the research is done, but for this group the zotero library should continue to grow
14:05:57 <rhiaro> ... so what is our reason for growing the library?
14:06:08 <Judy> Judy has joined #pwe
14:06:09 <rhiaro> Liz_Lutgendorff: as well as growing, how about removing things?
14:06:12 <rhiaro> ... Any suggestions?
14:06:41 <DKA> DKA has joined #pwe
14:06:43 <rhiaro> mallory: on zotero, how I've handled it with other groups is someone who does have access to a paywalled article pays for it once and then it's placed in storage, which is possible with zotero
14:06:47 <rhiaro> ... depends on the license
14:06:50 <DKA> present+ Dan_Appelquist
14:06:56 <Jemma> https://www.zotero.org/groups/2864452/w3c_pwe/library
14:06:57 <rhiaro> ... and possible ot set up with webdav so you don't have to have a zotero subscription, you can set up your own drive
14:07:05 <Judy> q+
14:07:06 <rhiaro> ... I feel it's fair to pay for the article once and for the people who are collaborating to access the PDF
14:07:34 <DKA> q?
14:07:44 <mallory> Sorry I'm new to the various processes and didn't mean to skip the queue
14:07:48 <rhiaro> Liz_Lutgendorff: any ability to say access needed or paywall on any of the zotero [..]
14:08:49 <rhiaro> Judy: .... emphasise articels that are shareable. If certain resources are critical to note those and make it clear what permissions are
14:08:51 <mallory> present+
14:08:58 <rhiaro> ... rather than trying to share a document without full permission
14:09:05 <Jemma> current zotero Group Library settings are 1)Public, Closed Membership
14:09:05 <Jemma> 2) 	Anyone can view, only members can edit
14:09:08 <rhiaro> ... Suggest to emphaisise ones that are free and open
14:09:24 <rhiaro> ... Note: a few of us who wanted to gather and talk about some of the details of managing the library and using the library, getting it out there for the community
14:09:27 <rhiaro> ... I got tasked with scheduling that
14:09:31 <hober> present+
14:09:38 <rhiaro> ... I haven't been able to yet
14:09:42 <rhiaro> ... But great to get some broad direction
14:09:51 <mallory> q+
14:09:53 <rhiaro> ... also eager to tie that with how do we use this resource for the entire broad w3c community
14:10:29 <tink> present+ Léonie (tink)
14:10:31 <rhiaro> mallory: we hav eknowledge available that's free and open, but Ithink it may not be one of the goals of this project to uplift research or other resources that are in the public domain or have a specific license
14:10:35 <rhiaro> ... seems orthogonal
14:10:45 <rhiaro> ... worth figuring out how to pay for the research because its relevant, or to pay for relevant subscriptions
14:10:53 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #pwe
14:11:12 <BarbaraH> BarbaraH has joined #PWE
14:11:16 <rhiaro> ... w3c is such a large organisation that closed access wouldn'tw ork in the sense that somebody could request access to that storage because theyve noticed something and don't want to pay themselves, if it's too large for that then the w3c should pay fees for the subscriptions necessary
14:11:18 <rhiaro> ... it's one or the other
14:11:28 <rhiaro> ... that would be in alignment with the goal of having this zotero library
14:11:35 <rhiaro> Liz_Lutgendorff: that's going into a whole area
14:11:48 <rhiaro> ... if we want to start curating this relatively quickly that we see that as a secondary thing, maybe as part of Judy's overall structure
14:12:03 <rhiaro> ... in th emean time, possibly default to raising awareness that it's a paid for article and you might not have access, see how that goes
14:12:07 <rhiaro> ... and as we develop it further look into paid access
14:12:12 <rhiaro> ... I recokon w3m would not go for it
14:12:18 <rhiaro> ... we should start small and iterate on what we an add to it later
14:12:22 <mallory> I suspect there isn't wide demand fwiw
14:12:24 <DKA> +1 support starting small and iterating
14:12:24 <rhiaro> ... I don't want to add complication
14:12:27 <rhiaro> ... I'd rather progress this
14:12:28 <DKA> +1 to progressing
14:12:34 <rhiaro> ... see that as another part of the work
14:12:59 <rhiaro> ... is it possible to flag on zotero that something requires paid access?
14:13:09 <rhiaro> Jemma: I can find out. Not a flag, but when you try to access the article it'll require login
14:13:20 <rhiaro> ... Think about indicating you need to pay to access an article?
14:13:22 <rhiaro> Liz_Lutgendorff: yes, user friendly
14:13:32 <rhiaro> Jemma: I can find out
14:13:37 <mallory> And so it follows that this means downloading a paywalled article and putting it in shared storage.
14:13:45 <rhiaro> Liz_Lutgendorff: getting a process in place and iterating is probably the quickest way to
14:14:07 <rhiaro> Jemma: action item for me?
14:14:16 <Judy> q+
14:14:20 <rhiaro> Liz_Lutgendorff: find if there's a flag, if we can't we live with it
14:14:55 <wendyreid> ack Judy
14:14:59 <wendyreid> ack mallory
14:15:01 <wendyreid> scribe+
14:15:10 <wendyreid> Judy: How easier or hard do people want this to be?
14:15:22 <wendyreid> Jemma: That's my question too
14:15:44 <annette_g> +1 to a little vetting
14:15:48 <wendyreid> Judy: Let's say you find something you want to share, are people comfortable with that going through some vetting, or is that too difficult, or easy enough
14:16:12 <sheila> +1 to light vetting
14:16:14 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: Basically, some vetting, or do some people have carte blanche, or a full review process
14:16:14 <DKA> q+
14:16:19 <Judy> ack j
14:16:38 <wendyreid> DKA: I just wanted to say it makes sense to me that there would be some review of anything that's posted
14:16:45 <wendyreid> ... similar to reviewing PRs on Github
14:16:50 <wendyreid> ... it should be lightweight though
14:17:05 <wendyreid> Judy: Lightweight and quick
14:17:10 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: I agree with that as well
14:17:29 <wendyreid> Jemma: I think we need to discuss the details, but we can handle it offline
14:17:55 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: What are we doing with this library?
14:18:06 <wendyreid> Jemma: I gave you a comparison of the Silver library
14:18:15 <wendyreid> ... this library is different from that case
14:18:29 <wendyreid> ... but we can also discuss this later
14:18:39 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: Are there any strong feelingso n this, a mission statement for the library
14:18:41 <annette_g> q+
14:18:45 <Jemma> s/the ?? library/w3c Silver, now WCAG 3 library/
14:19:01 <BarbaraH> q+
14:19:12 <wendyreid> annette_g: We might want to have this for people who need resources on understanding when they've been told their in violation of something
14:19:32 <sheila> I like the idea of guidelines so as not to risk arbitrary application of rules
14:19:36 <wendyreid> ... generally, for myself, it's always good to have access to information on positive work environment subjects
14:19:40 <wendyreid> ack DKA
14:19:43 <wendyreid> ack annette_g
14:20:10 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: That's a good direction, any other thoughts
14:20:10 <Judy> [JB finds this very helpful input as to goals of a resource library]
14:20:19 <Judy> q?
14:20:25 <wendyreid> ack BarbaraH
14:20:38 <wendyreid> BarbaraH: I look at it as is this a program or strategy
14:20:39 <Jemma> agenda?
14:20:49 <wendyreid> ... having the articles in a library, that's a tool
14:21:05 <wendyreid> ... to be more proactive, the question becomes educating on specific topics
14:21:12 <wendyreid> ... using it as a tool in case of a violation
14:21:29 <Judy> q+
14:21:33 <wendyreid> ... I was wondering if the library is one component in a strategy on being proactive on DEI initiatives
14:21:37 <wendyreid> ack Judy
14:21:45 <wendyreid> Judy: I sure hope so!
14:22:02 <wendyreid> ... this is something we need to put into place
14:22:17 <wendyreid> BarbaraH: When you have a proactive program, you can cite the library
14:22:27 <wendyreid> Judy: There can be multiple ways to bring this out
14:22:33 <wendyreid> ... different promotion strategies
14:22:41 <annette_g> q+
14:22:46 <wendyreid> ack annette_g
14:23:21 <wendyreid> annette_g: I hope this will not be just a substitute for action, reading as substitute
14:23:51 <wendyreid> Jemma: I want to understand what is the next step for this
14:24:15 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: This is mostly going to Judy for the offline discussion, but mainly, what is the library for, what is the process for adding to it
14:24:20 <wendyreid> ... it could be reactive and proactive
14:24:45 <wendyreid> ... it could increase inclusion, but also as a tool for people to educate themselves in case of a violation or curiousity
14:24:58 <wendyreid> ... a short summary of how this will work at a future meeting will be great
14:25:25 <Jemma> zakim, next item
14:25:25 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Zotero update (Jemma) Criteria for adding resources which include content copyright, authority, frequency + Growth and sustainability plan -- taken up [from tzviya]
14:25:28 <hober> Issue: https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/issues/150
14:25:30 <wendyreid> zakim, next item
14:25:30 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, wendyreid
14:25:37 <hober> PR: https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/171
14:25:43 <Jemma> zakim, close item 1
14:25:43 <Zakim> agendum 1, Zotero update (Jemma) Criteria for adding resources which include content copyright, authority, frequency + Growth and sustainability plan, closed
14:25:46 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:25:46 <Zakim> 2. CEPC PR https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/171 - review and merge [from tzviya]
14:26:02 <BarbaraH> Article on building an Inclusive Workplace - Possible framework - https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/0418/pages/6-steps-for-building-an-inclusive-workplace.aspx
14:26:17 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: Pr is open to add detail about unproductive discussion
14:26:26 <wendyreid> hober: I wrote it, so I'm happy to speak to it
14:26:34 <wendyreid> ... issue 150 was filed a while ago
14:26:51 <wendyreid> ... W3C has existed for 25+ years
14:27:01 <wendyreid> ... when it was smaller and everyone knew each other
14:27:39 <wendyreid> ... we were able to rely on everyone knowing each other, a shared vision, the original CEPC was much shorter and reflective of that small community
14:27:45 <wendyreid> ... that era is in our past
14:27:52 <wendyreid> ... not a bad thing, W3C has grown and changed
14:28:19 <wendyreid> ... we now are in a phase where we need to capture in writing what we've taken for granted, a shared understanding
14:28:53 <wendyreid> ... in particular, over time, we've seen a number of efforts or participants who might have taken advantage of that presumed good faith
14:29:08 <wendyreid> ... to engage in well-document forms of anti-social or trollish behaviour
14:29:41 <wendyreid> ... it's always been the case that groups have had the ability to control how to make their meetings productive (ie. time boxing)
14:29:56 <wendyreid> ... CEPC already has a line about sustained disruption
14:30:00 <DKA> q+
14:30:02 <wendyreid> ... but this PR fleshes that out a bit
14:30:15 <tink> q+
14:30:44 <wendyreid> ... since CEPC already has the line, the chairs are empowered, but this expansion helps with the "rules lawyer" type who might see an absence of detail and take advantage
14:30:51 <wendyreid> ... this is my attempt to address that
14:31:02 <wendyreid> ... I added some well-known and document behaviours
14:31:15 <wendyreid> ... I tried to keep it to the category raised in the issue
14:31:45 <wendyreid> ... it defines and adds text making it clear that behaviours like sealioning, gishgalloping, concern trolling, etc
14:31:52 <wendyreid> ... aren't welcome
14:32:00 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: Thanks for spelling them out
14:32:17 <wendyreid> hober: It's important to describe them, plus give a term that someone can research
14:32:30 <wendyreid> ... I've also included resources in the comments within the code
14:32:34 <wendyreid> DKA: +1 to the PR
14:32:46 <wendyreid> ... it's necessary and consistent with the approach of the new CEPC
14:32:57 <wendyreid> ... explains behaviours, makes expectations clear
14:33:02 <rhiaro> +1 what Dan said
14:33:07 <wendyreid> ... as a chair this would have been helpful to me
14:33:19 <Judy> q+
14:33:25 <wendyreid> ... it's good for chairs to know the rules are on their side when exercising chair authority
14:33:31 <wendyreid> ... to reorient dicussions
14:33:42 <wendyreid> ... I think the references section can be used for these
14:34:00 <tink> q?
14:34:03 <wendyreid> ... especially for these terms who are familiar with these tersm from the english internet, but others may not be as familiar
14:34:15 <wendyreid> ... having references helps underscore that we're not making these things up
14:34:33 <wendyreid> ... I don't want to gate the PR, but we should internationalize this a bit
14:34:45 <wendyreid> ... translations that are appropriate and contextual
14:34:58 <wendyreid> ... I support this PR
14:35:02 <wendyreid> ack DKA
14:35:04 <wendyreid> ack tink
14:35:09 <wendyreid> tink: I think we should merge this PR
14:35:17 <chaals> chaals has joined #pwe
14:35:37 <wendyreid> ... I want to emphasize hober's point that this is not changing anything in the CEPC, it's providing clarity and explanation
14:35:56 <wendyreid> ... it's more inclusive and accessible to users to provide clarity on these behaviours
14:36:02 <wendyreid> ack Judy
14:36:19 <wendyreid> Judy: This was really interesting, my first reaction was oh no more jargon
14:36:31 <wendyreid> ... but the definitions really help to explain and capture the meta-behaviours
14:37:05 <chaals> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:37:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/06/08-pwe-minutes.html chaals
14:37:10 <wendyreid> ... also agree with making these more internationalized and understandable
14:37:12 <Nishad_> Nishad_ has joined #PWE
14:37:17 <wendyreid> ... but strongly support adding this information
14:37:17 <chaals> rrsagent, make log member
14:37:26 <annette_g> q+
14:37:30 <wendyreid> ... procedurally, the CEPC went through multiple layers of review
14:37:43 <wendyreid> ... we can incorporate PRs to future revisions
14:37:56 <wendyreid> ... but there would be process for updating the formal version of the document
14:38:00 <wendyreid> ack annette_g
14:38:09 <chaals> present+ chaals(2ndHalf)
14:38:11 <wendyreid> annette_g: Definitely for making these changes
14:38:22 <wendyreid> ... all of those items on that list, are defined in rational wiki
14:38:26 <wendyreid> ... it's not just us
14:38:44 <wendyreid> hober: In the PR there's links to rational wiki and geek feminism
14:38:53 <wendyreid> ... I think it does make sense to surface the links in text
14:38:58 <wendyreid> ... I am happy to do that
14:39:07 <sheila> sheila has joined #pwe
14:39:11 <Judy> s/yes I learned these new terms today although/yet in reviewing the collection of terms I thought/
14:39:16 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: I'm hearing all agreement
14:39:31 <wendyreid> ... is there anyone who doesn't think we should go forward with this request
14:39:36 <wendyreid> Judy: Just to cycle back
14:39:39 <sheila> strong +1 to merging this PR. thanks to everyone who has pushed for it.
14:40:04 <wendyreid> ... these kinds of terms, because they're so jargon-y, they may be an internationalization barrier
14:40:14 <wendyreid> ... is there a way to bridge them
14:40:21 <wendyreid> ... to make the more welcoming
14:40:42 <wendyreid> hober: I hear the concern, each line describes the behaviour, then references the colloquial term
14:40:52 <wendyreid> ... which is in english, but so is the CEPC
14:40:57 <wendyreid> ... I'm not sure what else to do
14:41:39 <annette_g> q+
14:41:44 <wendyreid> ... I definitely think there's an argument for expanding some, but trying to make it fit with the same level of detail other items
14:41:55 <wendyreid> ... I'm happy to amend them to make them more understandable
14:42:12 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: I agree, adding more text makes it more difficult
14:42:19 <DKA> I think you've hit the right balance.
14:42:26 <wendyreid> annette_g: I think Tess did a good job of matching the style of the others
14:42:33 <tink> q+ to suggest we propose a resolution.
14:42:34 <wendyreid> ... the links provide a fair amount of description
14:42:52 <chaals> [Think that the addition is a net improvement, and we should resolve to merge this]
14:43:00 <wendyreid> hober: The only reason I didn't add the links as anchors was I wasn't sure if that would fit with the rest of the CEPC
14:43:07 <wendyreid> ... wasn't sure what the etiquette was
14:43:33 <DKA> +1 to links
14:43:57 <wendyreid> tink: suspect it depends if we classify the links as normative references
14:44:08 <wendyreid> ... we treat them the same as technical reports
14:44:10 <chaals> q+ to note we can merge this, then discuss linking...
14:44:18 <wendyreid> ... the references are relatively stable and not likely to change
14:44:28 <wendyreid> hober: linking to these are informative
14:45:16 <DKA> +1 to adding informative links.
14:45:18 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: I think everyone thinks this needs to be a bit more descriptive, and add the links
14:45:26 <wendyreid> tink: Let's create a proposal for everyone to vote on
14:45:51 <tink> Proposal: On the basis that this Pull Request (PR) provides explanation for an existing part of the CEPC, that it can be further iterated in future, and that the CEPC itself will undergo formal review by the membership before it is published, we should merge this PR.
14:45:54 <wendyreid> +1
14:45:56 <annette_g> +1
14:45:57 <rhiaro> +1
14:45:59 <sheila> +1
14:46:00 <hober> +1
14:46:01 <DKA> +1
14:46:03 <Liz_Lutgendorff> +1
14:46:03 <Jemma> +100
14:46:12 <tink> +1
14:46:16 <chaals> 1
14:46:23 <chaals> s/1/+1/
14:46:31 <Jemma> zakim, next item
14:46:31 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- CEPC PR https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/171 - review and merge -- taken up [from tzviya]
14:46:40 <Jemma> zakim, close item 2
14:46:40 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Jemma
14:46:43 <Judy> +1
14:46:48 <Jemma> agenda?
14:46:59 <Nishad_> +1
14:47:19 <wendyreid> RESOLVED: On the basis that this Pull Request (PR) provides explanation for an existing part of the CEPC, that it can be further iterated in future, and that the CEPC itself will undergo formal review by the membership before it is published, we should merge this PR.
14:47:26 <tink> RESOLUTION: On the basis that this Pull Request (PR) provides explanation for an existing part of the CEPC, that it can be further iterated in future, and that the CEPC itself will undergo formal review by the membership before it is published, we will merge this PR.
14:47:45 <Jemma> zakim, close item 2
14:47:45 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Jemma
14:47:54 <Jemma> zakim, take up next
14:47:54 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Jemma
14:48:11 <wendyreid> q?
14:48:14 <wendyreid> ack annette_g
14:48:19 <wendyreid> ack tink
14:48:19 <Zakim> tink, you wanted to suggest we propose a resolution.
14:48:20 <wendyreid> ack chaals
14:48:20 <Zakim> chaals, you wanted to note we can merge this, then discuss linking...
14:48:32 <wendyreid> zakim, next item
14:48:32 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Survey updates (Tobie - will send materials in advance) -- taken up [from tzviya]
14:48:36 <wendyreid> zakim, close item
14:48:36 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close item', wendyreid
14:48:37 <tink> ack me
14:49:31 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: Diversity grants, judges should be members, disclose any relationships, and have time to participate
14:49:36 <wendyreid>  ... keep it light
14:49:47 <wendyreid> ... isn't too onerous for the people involved
14:49:55 <wendyreid> zakim, next item
14:49:56 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- PWE Diversity Fund Committee formation -- taken up [from tzviya]
14:50:13 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: Happy to hear any suggestions or volunteers
14:50:25 <wendyreid> ... happy to volunteer myself, since I worked on it and I don't know anyone!
14:50:33 <Jemma> q+
14:50:33 <wseltzer> +1 to Liz
14:50:36 <wendyreid> ... comments?
14:50:54 <wendyreid> ack Jemma
14:51:27 <wendyreid> Jemma: I received the email from Tzviya, asking to be one of the members, I would like to be one of the members
14:51:37 <wendyreid> ... timeframe works for me
14:52:16 <chaals> [I am volunteering]
14:52:19 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: If you really want to volunteer please but your name forward
14:52:27 <wendyreid> ... Charles is volunteering
14:52:49 <wendyreid> ... we just wanted to limited the people seeing all of the volunteers
14:53:21 <wendyreid> wseltzer: I was supporting your nomination!
14:53:32 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: I'll email everyone and begin planning
14:53:37 <wendyreid> ... Jemma, Charles, and Me
14:54:16 <wendyreid> Judy: Wendy S's suggestion for a team representation/liaison
14:54:37 <wendyreid> ... it will be interesting at least in the first year to have someone helping
14:55:00 <Jemma> Q+. how many application usually we get?
14:55:01 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: We have the members from W3M as well, that's whats in the proposal
14:55:10 <Jemma> q+
14:55:14 <wendyreid> Judy: Maybe not necessary, but don't need to debate it here
14:55:26 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: We can have a chat afterwards to see what worked and what didn't
14:55:35 <wendyreid> ack Jemma
14:55:45 <wendyreid> Jemma: How many applicants do we usually get?
14:55:53 <wendyreid> tink: Last year we had just 2
14:55:59 <wendyreid> ... previously closer to 10
14:56:25 <wendyreid> chaals: I can't recall exactly, it is a few hours of work
14:56:43 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: I will make it easy for you Jemma, I'll make a spreadshet
14:56:51 <wendyreid> ... 2-3 hours max for deciding
14:56:53 <Jemma> ack me
14:57:04 <wendyreid> ... there's a lot in the fund, so we'll likely fund most people
14:57:09 <wendyreid> ... should be an easy decision
14:57:43 <wendyreid> Judy: Having been involved before, allocate more time, they're not always clear-cut and sometimes require some though, or unanticipated questions
14:57:49 <wendyreid> chaals: +1
14:58:09 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: The meeting of the people will be shorter, but we'll review the applications on our own before
14:58:18 <wendyreid> ... we'll talk offline to schedule the time needed
14:58:31 <Jemma> agenda?
14:58:46 <wendyreid> zakim, next item
14:58:46 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- AOB -- taken up [from tzviya]
14:59:01 <wendyreid> Liz_Lutgendorff: No AOB? Let us know if you have anything for the next meeting
14:59:37 <sheila> sheila has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <Nishad_> Nishad_ has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <chaals> chaals has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <BarbaraH> BarbaraH has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <DKA> DKA has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <mallory> mallory has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <Nishad> Nishad has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <Liz_Lutgendorff> Liz_Lutgendorff has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <Jemma> Jemma has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <join_subline> join_subline has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <hober> hober has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <ada> ada has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <cwilso> cwilso has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <tobie> tobie has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <tink> tink has joined #pwe
14:59:37 <csarven> csarven has joined #pwe
14:59:47 <tzviya> rrsagent, make logs public
14:59:50 <rhiaro> rhiaro has joined #pwe
14:59:59 <tzviya> rrsagent, make minutes
14:59:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/06/08-pwe-minutes.html tzviya
15:00:33 <tink> Thanks Liz and Wendy for charing and scribing.
15:47:15 <hober> on a github spring cleaning note, there are many, many stale branches in the repo that can almost definitely be deleted.
15:57:09 <tzviya> yes, i need to get to that