Meeting minutes
<tzviya> https://
discussion on the Tequitable demo in the member meeting...
Tzviya: ... Some tweaks in this PR (354).
… creating a new email address coc@w3.org goes to christine and catrina -
… the other thing ... legal have the ability to contact other people on the team ...
… we didn't want cultural resouces to get lost ...
… The wording is "after you work with the ombuds and it doesn't work, you can file a formal complaint."
… but we have to make clear that if there's something where your safety is at risk then you need to do something more immediate.
Sheila: Also this is where one of the ombuds can share info.
Chris: it's not clear where or how to start ... if I have an issue, what do I do? I'm a bit worried that there's the need to be flexible but at the same time … in the situations I've handled … it frequently is … whoever is involved in the incident needs support. Not navigating a system. E.g. at an event "talk to any of the event staff".
… there should be an easy on ramp. Every chair should be able to respond. Every staff member should be able to send you in the right direction.
Tzviya: ... workking on a doc with info such as "chair as first point of contact." ... this will go into our training slides. Walks people through what their role as a chair is. We need to train the chairs.
Chris: I'm not saying it's not right - just saying "when this messaging happens" ... CoC announcement can be a waste of time or it can be useful … if you say "if you have an issue here's who to go to." Then that's useful.
… totally hear you that we need to train chairs.
… we need to make sure that people know where to start and it's not complex.
Jen: I think it would be great if we treat this as we are launching a product or a service... do some usability testing. We have an opportunity with TPAC that announces it in a way that hits that point Chris just made - that it "lands" well - and as a way to recruit people to test the platform out.
… our messaging is another component....
<cwilso> +1 Sheila
Sheila: I agree that the success will be very dependent on the framing ... lots of research shows that people are more likely to raise a concern if they have multiple pathways to do so. We should have these different options - and here are the 3-4 ways you can respond if you're in a situation.
… that would help alleviate some of the tension... not create confusion.
… be clear about the end goal.
… people have choices when there's a problem.
<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to merge PR
Tzviya: agree with usability testing … I feel we should merge the PR for the guide... We actually have inaccurate documentation. The longer the PR sits the more complicated it gets.
<DKA> +1 to merging
Jen: do we have any marketing budget? It would be great if we could have something to announce it... How do we make this whole program more accessible.
… personal experience - when I have trouble scribing when people are having a side conversation - the code of conduct isn't equitable for us all... and that's part of what we have the opportunity to address.
… people treat recognized figures differently.
… this is part of the training as well... In some cases, people from large organizations can be quire aggressive and it's allowed ... that sets the tone where we lose opportunity for diverse voices.
<Zakim> cwilso, you wanted to react to JenStrickland
Chris: what I was trying to say: the mental labour shouldn't just be on the person reporting ... it should be easy and supportive... What I meant was "talk to any staff member" ... because all of them have been given the base level of training.
<JenStrickland> By budget for marketing I was thinking of some "thing" we can use to "signal" at TPAC -- both in-person and remotely -- to put the sniff, sizzle, sight, yum (smell, hearing, sight, touch) in the announcement.
<JenStrickland> Like there could be small social media campaign within the W3C, there could be pens on the tables, and what are some other things that are more inclusive. That's what I was imagining.
Wendy: I think this document ... needs … because we are going to have links to this … I'm happy to do an editoral pass … "is something going wrong, here are your 5 steps". Right now step 1 can't be "go to a chair" because chairs aren't trained. ...
… We should get this out and continue iterating ...
<tzviya> +1 to not necessarily needing a budget
<JenStrickland> Maybe there could be a Werewolf game that has a CoC theme? :D
Wendy: we do kind of need a community-wide mailing list ... this is the kind of communication that this would be used for … informing people about the code of conduct and enforcement procedure "here is what we have availballe for you in terms of help."
I do think we need stickers.
<tzviya> what kind of stickers?
<JenStrickland> You and Dom could design that Werewolf game.
Code of Conduct stickers.
<JenStrickland> Can also use Slack -- maybe get more folks in there.
<wendyreid> +1
Hidde: we could have a session .. and have people talk about their experiences with Code of Conduct... however this should also be in the CEO's keynote.
… a place where most attendees will go.
Tzviya: i will ask Seth to mention it.
… also a breakout.
… re the PR we need to polish it and also stress there
<tzviya> w3c/
<hdv> +1 I would be happy for this to be merged after Fantasai's comments resolved
Dan: suggests merging the PR (354) pending some editorial updates based on Elika's feedback.
<tzviya> w3c/
Tzviya: jeffrey had raised this issue about AI... I liked Hidde's proposal to narrow down the scope ... excluding the concept of plagiarism ...
<JenStrickland> I'm struggling to review the PR in the meeting and will need to give it a focused look later. My brain will not obey.
Wendy: I liked Hidde's sugestion.
… 2 parts to this … one is in the code of conduct but one is a process issue … something we might want to mention in the process. I don't think it's for the CoC to focus on authoring process.
… I think the additions to "deliberate misinformation" and talking about the roles LLMS have ... should be included.
… we should open a sister issue in something like the process to talk about use of AI.
… 5 levels of AI usage. Level 1: no AI, 2 is AI-assisted idea, 3 is editing, 4 task completion, 5 is no human oversight...
… we have to acknowledge that people will use AI to do their work.
… we shouldn't fault people for using tools to write.
… we should ack it.
<wendyreid> https://
<cwilso> +1
Wendy: we discuss the recent TAG issue that was the start of this issue …
Chris: the problem here is not AI … it's that LLMs make it easy to do "sustained disruption of discussion"
… takes zero effort to produce but immense amount of time on the receiving end to deal with ti.
… I think we're missing something in "sustained disruption of discussion" ...
… it's like sea-lioning … dogpiling but from one person.
… maybe closer to gish galloping.
<tzviya> ack
Tzviya: some nuances shoould be added to the CoC... something added to deliberate misinformation … Could Hidde work on a proposal to add to #7? And Dan or Chris could add something to section 14 …?
… We've intentionally stayed away from "dogpiling" so we need to maintain that nuance.
<JenStrickland> I worry that we are on a different conversation, which is very important, about disrupting collaboration. I agree about (as tzviya just said) negligent action. I also think aggressive communication needs to be reconsidered. I don't agree that "sustained" is necessarily the right measure. Just once can be an issue that should be addressed for the
<JenStrickland> health of productive collaborative work. People make snap or lose their temper, but there should be an apology or other responsibility/consequence. It's something I thought was missing in the CoC. I just never know what has been discussed in the history leading up to the CoC, so don't raise it.
Hidde: I'm happy to do a proposal for 7 ... updating with something like "negligence."
… I feel like "wasting time" and "irresponsibility" … [ need to be worked on ] …
Wendy: I will also put a note in the chairs training. One of the other things that shouldn't go by without comment … chairs should think about how AI should be used in their groups. Christ should have a conversation within their groups.
… group to group it might differ.
… some huge potential benefits but also huge drawbacks.
<JenStrickland> For example, sending an AI notetaker to a meeting and not attending oneself, without asking the group in advance, was something that happened recently.