Meeting minutes
<tzviya> Date: 2022-12-20
AC Forum
Introduced by Sheila in last PWE meeting
concerns about how unfriendly the AC forum can be.
<tzviya> https://
Barrrier for entry is high, sometimes we draft and re-draft emails, put more effort than we should into that.
One possibility would be to have a chair for the forum
One member learned the term "flame war" when she came here because of it.
Principle that we'll cover in the training: I don't have to be wrong for you to be right.
Nigel Megitt suggested that it's not how something sounds when you are speaking directly.
When it comes to CEPC, it's not necessarily the people who need to listen that.
(Above in this topic is all from Tzviya)
Sheila: The level of confidence makes me assume I'm missing content, so I find myself rereading issues and conversations. It seems like everyone is very sure that their solution to the issue is the correct one.
<JenStrickland> Wow, I can relate so much to what Sheila is saying!
<JenStrickland> I've learned I have to set the reminders on the calendar invites manually because there is none.
JaEun: I just found this meeting, wasn't getting the emails
tzviya: "May you have the certainty of a white 27-year-old CEO in Silicon Valley
tzviya: Yes, it sometimes feels like people take the attitude that they can't learn from others.
… It can be like reading a scholarly article because of all the references. I think it's the tone that we need to deal with. We can't tell people to change their style.
… It's that absolute certainty that is off-putting.
JenStrickland: Yes, you have a wonderful level tone about all this.
tzviya: what can we do? we can remind people that CEPC exists.
… sometimes one email from a person is fine but a collection is too much.
… more training?
Sheila: I hesitate to suggest more training. Maybe a refresher course.
… If we could isolate the skills, we could develop some curriculum around it.
… using a moderator, people might not understand the significance of the issue.
tzviya: there is an art to writing emails. A lot people I think are not writing the same style internally that they use for AC forum.
… Part of it is rereading your email before sending it.
<Zakim> cwilso, you wanted to comment on sheila's point about self-doubt and humility
cwilso: I definitely agree with many of the things that have been said here. Overwhelming confidence can cause people to not think through, it's going to be hard to knock that out. I don't know for sure that I don't do that myself unless someone tells me.
… I'm worried about how we can tell people so that they are listening. I've had times in recent days where I said that I am just done with this conversation because people failed to listen. If they changed their tone, we could have a productive conversation.
<Zakim> npd, you wanted to comment on having a moderator for every list
cwilso: On AC forum, people have strong opinions and don't always put that in the most positive way.
npd: I think people often match the certainty level of others, so there could be an advantage in better modeling.
… I was thinking about having a moderator, and I think that is valuable. We should have that for every W3C mailing list. There should be a moderator who will support the CEPC, let people know when they are off track.
<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to talk about modes of mod
npd: A moderator helps keep people from pushing the limits. Some people avoid that list because it's out of control. A moderator could help with people who are not feeling confident enought to send to the list.
tzviya: As chair, I've sometimes done that in working groups. Community groups are supposed to have that too. The question with AC forum is who should be the moderator.
tzviya: some people have suggested the chairs of the AB should do that.
… that's to be determined. It seems like there's a lot of support for moderators. That gives us support for if someone violates the CPEC.
tzviya: "watch your tone" might have more meaning from a moderator.
cwilso: one of the hardest things is who in heaven's name would take that job. I would run screaming, personally. The biggest challenge is that it's the main forum for members, and some have very strong opinions.
… I worry who is capable of taking that job. I don't think I could do it, don't think it would be a legally good idea working for Google.
cwilso: The same applies for chairs. It's hard to be part of the conversation and also moderate.
… that isn't the role the Team has today.
<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to go back to the idea of training
<npd> maybe a rotating w3c-ac-forum chair, as an act of service to the organization?
tzviya: On training, I think this is all related to chair training. If you're lucky, a new chair gets briefed on how to run a W3C meeting. I'd love to dig deeper into Sheila's suggestion.
Jen: I think the training and Sheila's suggestion about guidance, I always try to make sure I'm making room to make sure others are hears. There definitely needs to be someone assigned who is willing to be the host with the most, to keep things aligned with CPEC.
… There should be two people. In another group, we have multiple moderators because we know that we have heated discussions.
sheila: On what the training should look like, it should include how to be a good moderator. Conflict navigation, conflict management would be good to include.
… It feels like a free-for-all on topics. One person writes a really long thing, people disagree, tangential conversations start up in new threads. There could be more expectation/norm setting around how we engage in those conversations.
… As someone from a strategy/operations/governance background, I'm very confused to see those same conversations coming form those in the deep technical conversations. I also think there's something there around setting expectations and how to keep the conversation flowing, sticking to the substance of the meeting. That's hard to operationalize.
JenStrickland: The holidays are typically a little sleepy, but things are pretty hot now. As a candidate for AB, I feel like I got challenged that I'm supposed to show up. I almost decided to bow out.
tzviya: I also felt that was inappropriate
… Chair training doesn't cover email.
<sheila> empathetic communication could be another good topic for a training
tzviya: what I'm hearing about email in particular is about not just what we want to say but also thinking about our audience, and that they may be diverse.
tzviya: that's a good way to put it, empathetic communication.
… Then there's the tone. I'm not sure how to go about developing a training like this. If any of you know how, let us know.
sheila: I might be able to help pull together some materials. I don't think it would be as helpful as an actual training. There's the issue cwilso mentioned of getting the attention of the people who need it.
tzviya: I think having a moderator would be great, but we need to document what that means.
… Some of that might just be referencing CEPC.
… Another issue is that we have people from different cultures as well.
<Zakim> npd, you wanted to comment on chair vs moderator
npd: It seems good to define the set of skills and responsibilities. That makes training effective. I wonder if we want to split out chairing from moderating. We have a few lists where we would need to appoint a "chair" to moderate, so we have one term.
tzviya: We have a lot of action items. I don't want them all to fall to Sheila. Sheila will work on materials for email.
sheila: we can think about what the roles are. I like npd's suggestion of framing it like a chair role.
… I can start. My team has been looking into internationalization.
tzviya: our next meeting is in January. I'll cancel the Jan 3 one, we meet again on the 17th.
cwilso: It's not on the calendar yet.
tzviya: I'll send a new invite.
tzviya: other thoughts about AC forum?
Equity Update
JenStrickland: I've been giving updates in the equity subgroup calendar invites. We're looking into what it takes to implement the proposals.
… The first time, we didn't have a quorum. The second time we did the work and sent out an email with expectations for homework for each proposal.
… We need to cull the list of 9 proposals down to the 2 or 3 we would move forward with as recommendations.
… I'm a little worried that people are not getting the information. The W3C calendar, for the accessibility guidelines group, I don't think people understand how that calendar works. I think there are some cognitive considerations.
… Plus we have a member who snapped at me before the previous presentation. I asked them not to do that, but it's been hard. It's a shame, because they have a lot of energy to help.
… It's my first time trying to facilitate with more than one other person.
tzviya: yes, the calendar has some quirks. I guess the best thing is to also send an email with the dates.
… We can talk separately about dealing with the individual.
… One of the proposals is to move the equity group under PWE.
JenStrickland: This group clearly pays attention to equity, it's just a matter of putting it on paper.
tzviya: there had been a proposal to create an equity review board. I would love to make that happen. It would require the TAG to get involved. It adds another thing to horizontal review. npd probably has thoughts on this.
JenStrickland: my hunch is that we would create a community group for the reviews, put it out that PWE handles equity. A working group or a task force. The accessibility group focuses on disability-centered equity.
… This needs long-term commitment.
npd: I'd definitely be interested. I think horizontal review works best when we can say what particular improvements we've made. It might be we need to adjust what examples we have. We've had similar conversations about sustainability.
… If we just start with a few cases, we can learn horizontal review.
tzviya: any other comments for today?
sheila: I've not been getting the notes afterward.
tzviya: I'll circulate the notes and send a new calendar invite for 2023.