11 Feb 2020

Call Details: 11 FEB PM IN USA/12 FEB AM TAIPEI TIME - Connect on Skype in the first place

Participants: Paola Di Maio, Carl Mattocks, CG Group members welcome to attend, ping the list for a skype invitation

AGENDA: - Introductions and mission statements from co-chair/s

- Agreement on a nomination process and resignation process and any other necessary procedure

- Content of the web pages

- Discuss how to handle conflicts (for example, I do not understand how the blockchain/distributed process is relevant to this group and I am highly suspicious/paranoid about blockchain)

- Anything else call participants may want to bring up

Rough notes: Carl and Paola had a skype call, and introduced each other and talked about past lives and common experiences working around the web and in IT consulting It was discussed/decided that:

the intentions/vision for the CG are pretty much agreed, and that

concerns should be promptly addressed explicitly throught the list

no special procedure is necessary to nominate the co chair or to resign
other than discussion
that the co-chair mission statement will be best rendered in stratML
that the work being done by the group could potentially lead to some guiding document or lay the foundations for possible standards
(did not discuss the content of the web pages in this call)
agreed that the best way to handle conflict is to share views and have an open discussion about problems to clarify misunderstandings and clear up confusion
that the declared goals of the blockchain are OK, but both call participants agreed there are grey areas that KR could help clarify, this work could bring some useful contribution to the notion of blockchain
AI KR could contribute to clarify the gray areas of the blockchain
Carl is already started probing some aspects of blockchain/data storage
and that he may report to us some of his findings
Carl will start drafting and sharing some note and maybe help to organise future calls

Topics we touched upon that are candidates for future discussions include: Can the AIKR work evolve towards being A Body of Work that has broad relevance. As in: Take a path similar to how an excellent method for IT analysis and design (SSADM) morphed into ITIL then ITSM - shepherded by Pete Skinner (of UK Government’s Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency) who had the idea of building an equivalent approach to improve the operations of IT services. Provide reference material that is used to certify the capability of an AIKR based service. Perhaps emulating how TickITplus offers a framework of international standards and quality certification that has a Capability Dimension based on ISO/IEC 15504: an IT Process Assessment standard Curate a list of reference materials that contribute-to understanding of AIKR in practice. Much like IDESG Wiki which came out of their focus on guiding the development of trust frameworks ://wiki.idesg.org/wiki/index.php?title=Category%3AStandards