Meeting minutes
<Ralph> previous 04-Feb
<wendyreid> date: 2025-03-04
Brainstorming an emergency Ombuds Plan
sheila: we're developing the ombuds plan, but we don't have right now a plan for an interim plan if there's a threat of immediate harm.
… we have a plan for raising grievances, but that's not meant to be realtime.
… if there's an emergency, what is the pathway we have to resolve it?
cwilso: Agreed it's necessary and have done similar roles for events. I this should be something the Team is responsible for or under their authority
… execution plan for addressing issues, and needs to be done well
sheila: I agree; this should be members of the team, could be a recommendation to them.
wendy: I think I fall in the same camp. Team should designate point people.
… would be helpful for someone like Christine to have the legal review and assessment.
… I think this is probably pretty standard procedure
cwilso: In times I've been involved, there is an external and internal plan, what happens when someone raises an issue with a staff member.
… response to an internal channel, coordinate whatever action is needed
jen: this sounds like a plan for in-person, but do we have a plan for non-in person?
cwilso: That's the ombuds plan, it's not been operationalized at the speed we need on an ongoing basis, but its there
wendy: in the emergency plan there should be a provision/section for remote response
<cwilso> +1; probably the way to think of it is real-time vs async response.
wendy: just as likely to happen in zoom chat or side channels.
jen: happens in WGs today.
… [redacted] gets feisty
wendy: sometimes the chair needs to be made aware; I don't always see everything that happens.
jen: sometimes chairs don't always handle things.
jen: I like the idea of having this documented.
wendy: we do have a structure in place; ombuds@w3.org
… but it's not formalized, we don't have the structure an org of this size needs
… we have the day-to-day handled
… TPAC might be handled, but not WG meetings
<Ralph> [joining late]
wendy: behavioral enforcement cannot come from within; a lot of time you're too close to the problem
<JenStrickland> Intent v Impact
<cwilso> +1
<Ralph> [It's good to view a behavior from the perspective of someone who just joined the group]
<Ralph> [We do not want the situation that a person new to the group observes an uncomfortable interaction and does not see it corrected]
jen: sometimes, individuals are so strident/confident; sometimes people make allowances for people who are socially clueless/rude; even if that's for reasons, we need to not allow it.
… sometimes people don't realize they are being socially unaware.
… sometimes people get away with things/get allowances made for them.
<cwilso> +1 Ralph. [It's good to view a behavior from the perspective of someone who just joined the group, We do not want the situation that a person new to the group observes an uncomfortable interaction and does not see it corrected]
jen: it's also problematic with people who are looked up to; people will get intimidated because those are their heroes.
wendy: there are a lot of people who just walk away
jen: I have a whole group of techies who have walked away because their interaction needs weren't being accommodated.
jen: we need something in place now
wendy: we have the ombuds program in place, we want to make it a lot better.
<Ralph> [Ombuds are not "emergency responders"]
<JenStrickland> It might be good to be explicit for all face to face events.
ralph: if it's a threat of physical harm or violence, I would hope we get to "call security". In more complicated situations it's something we should develop more clear guidance.
… interested in what others have developed, because I dont think it's reasonably to expect a small group of people to enforce; it needs to be the community.
… in the case of long-term member of the community, that has a disability, it might need some polite interaction explaining why allowances are made.
jen: I agree it's the responsibility of the community. the community may not feel emboldened to speak up (cf current NA political situation)
… I'd rather see it from the AB rather than Seth: speak up to make sure the community is aware of their own behavior.
<Zakim> cwilso, you wanted to respond to Ralph
<Ralph> +1 to Jen: a message to our community acknowledging current challenges
jen: we are at a point in time where we need to hear from our leadership; strong leadership.
ralph: there's a nuance here: there's a set of people I know well, and in that environment I can use different set of behaviors.
<cwilso> +1
ralph: if a person who doesn't know me well observes that, how would they perceive it?
<Zakim> cwilso, you wanted to react to Ralph
cwilso: Self-policing is necessary but not sufficient
jen: one of the things we need to seek to understand is the need to "make points": to win battles
<dbooth> Sorry to have missed today's call!