<scribe> scribenick: Ralph
<scribe> meeting: Positive Work Environment CG
<scribe> chair: Tzviya
[some discussion of reuse of W3C's Code of Conduct by other groups]
Tzviya: any comments on the
minutes of 5-Dec?
... I have been keeping the minutes in a wiki
<tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/wiki/PWE-Minutes
Tzviya: hearing no comments, those minute are approved
<tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/75
-- #75 Decsribe role of chairs more
Jeff: I'd rather hold this
change
... we discussed #41 last meeting and felt that was a major
deficiency
... I don't disagree with Chaals' proposed text but it's not
descriptive enough
... we could adopt this and keep #41 open
... but I worry that we'd decide we solved #41
Tzviya: we're also planning to do
chair training
... I don't think it's good to add to CEPC too many specifics
about what a chair is supposed to do
... what level of detail should CEPC have?
... I think the somewhat vague language is actually pretty
good
Judy: I'd not seen Chaals'
proposal before now
... I have multiple issues with it
Jeff: hearing Tzviya's analysis of the language, I'm prepared to not object
Judy: I'm happy to add my comments to the issue
Tzviya: general guidance for
chairs in the Reporting section is a good idea
... I'd prefer to tweak his language, however; I don't agree
with some of the examples
... e.g. I don't think we want chairs to take a decsion on
their own about blocking people from a mailing list
... but the first bullet on advising the person that CEPC
exists [is appropriate]
... I suggest we tweak this pr a bit
... with the attitude that we not recommend chairs take
unilateral action
... we could leave "ejecting someone from a meeting" up to the
chair
... I'm not comfortable with chairs unilaterally blocking from
a mailing list and removing comments from an archive
... we should also advise that the chair consult with an ombuds
or team contact
Judy: w.r.t. blocking someone, it has been necessary to do this in the past but I'm not aware of any situation where a chair has done this unilaterally
<Zakim> jeff, you wanted to talk about the positive role of chairs and team contacts
Judy: that's one example where a
unilateral decision would be risky
... to assure uniform application of policy
Jeff: my expectations ...
... we've introduced the role of the chair as being a person to
help deal with these problems
... I don't think that's the role of a chair
... the chair's role is to
... (a) establish a group culture whereby people are reminded
of the values of W3C and the imperatives of a postive work
environment
... the team contacts have a role in advising the chair and
getting that point across
... it would be useful to list things the chairs can do to
remind people, be aware of edgy behavior, coaching people
before problems exist
... team contacts, chairs, and those in leadership position
also have a role when it comes to reporting
... the changes in section 4 are good examples
... but I had hoped that the discussion about chairs would
cover the full range of what we are expecting
... rather than dealing only with exception problems
Tzviya: so you'd like CEPC to
discuss how to prevent problems, not just how to solve
them
... I have mixed feelings
... I thought that would be covered in Chair Training
Jeff: it's not exclusive to cover
things in chair training
... I've observed that things we assign to "training" tend to
ebb and flow with whomever is energized to do training in any
particular year
... and things that are in documents persist
Tzviya: so the CEPC should appear in every slide deck
Vlad: in the 10 years since I was
appointed as a chair I've never even remotely been in a
position to have to _solve_ a problem
... there have been situations where I've had to remind people
[to avoid a problem]
... constantly reminding people that they have to be respectful
is counter-productive
... the chair has to be aware of things that could happen
... but sometimes simply setting the tone is enough
... constantly reminding people isn't productive
Judy: wondering if there's a
simple way
... instead of adding a new section
... what I like about grounding this in a purpose; putting a
reminder of the chairs' role in helping a healthy work
environment
... respond proactively and immediately
... keep up-to-date and help others get to the right
place
... tying a moderate amount of responsibilities with an
expection to assure a positive work environment
... if we can do this in a few words that would be a way
forward
Tzviya: I like the suggestion to
add a positive description of the role of chairs
... Vlad is lucky
... I like the idea of starting proactively, possibly by adding
a short section
Ada: I can work on that with Tzviya
Tzviya: Ada and I will propose revised language incorporating the positive language as well as what to do when something goes wrong
-- #66 Glossary
Tzviya: one proposed change re
'prejudicial' and 'marginalized'
... I don't feel very strongly about this
... the phrase on 'microaggression'
Judy: I'm guessing that "marginalized" is more broadly understood
Tzviya: I'm fine changing
this
... Ada, do you recall why we proposed to add a definition of
'professionalism' ?
Judy: is it essential to have such a definition for this release?
<ralph> +1 to skipping if we don't have good text
Ada: I definitely lean toward
skipping it
... it's a loaded term with subcontext
Tzviya: I'm happy to skip it
<Vlad> +1 to skipping "professionalism" definition
Ada: I don't actually remember why we propsed to add it
<ada> +1 to skipping
<Zakim> jeff, you wanted to talk about "enforcers of this code"
Jeff: we said we'd drop that
term
... we haven't yet done it
Tzviya: Chaal's pr has comments to change that
Ada: removing it is in #66
<angel> +1 to skipping "professionalism" definition
Judy: let's scan the rest of the document to assure that this doesn't appear elsewhere
Jeff: ok; I was just confused by Chaal's pull request
Tzviya: how about 'Neurotypical',
'Ombudsperson', and 'Sexism'
... I'll take 'Neurotypical'
... other volunteers?
<tzviya> Inclusivity
<angel> there is a seemingly definition of Ombudsperson on w3c website
Tzviya: the challenge is defining
these in our context
... the challenge is defining these in our context
Judy: how about looking at Wikipedia? It might have translations available
Tzviya: Ada and I did look at
Wikipedia
... for 'inclusivity' it's a little too broad
<Judy> [JB: Yes, they have a book for some of these terms. Too big.]
Ada: perhaps rather than trying to condense a topic we say "it's approximately this but is broader than can be defined in a short glosary, so here is a resource ..."
Tzviya: might work
<tzviya> ak Ralph
<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to comment on Ombudsperson
<angel> there are not many equivalents of Ombudsperson in other languages, think we need to do a good definition for people to understand
Ralph: 'ombudsperson' can be very
short
... or it's the aggregate of CEPC and the coming Procedures
document
... I'll try for a 5-word version
Vlad: didn't we agree that anything without a definition we'd drop for this version?
Tzviya: I'd like to include these
four terms if we can find definitions
... I'd really like to find a definition for 'sexism' so people
can't say they don't know what it means
Vlad: trying to define terms that are common and generally understood is condescending
<jeff> Merriam-Webster: Definition of sexism
<jeff> 1 : prejudice or discrimination based on sex especially : discrimination against women
<jeff> 2 : behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
Ada: of the remaining terms in the glossary, are there any that you think are clear and patronizing?
Jeff: 'sexism' is a common term
in the vernacular
... it seems to me that if we can't align with Merriam-Webster
we have a problem
... I gave ^^ their definition
... if it's a good definition, I'd use it
... if it's bad, I think we have a problem
Vlad: yes; if a term is defined in Merriam-Webster and is good than we don't need to include it
Judy: a lot of the dialog in the
US recently is about prejudice and discrimination based on
gender
... and I don't want to try to deconstruct all of that
Tzviya: I can live with [the Merriam-Webster] definition, though I feel it's missing something
Jeff: I don't feel strongly, but if we're defining a bunch of terms I wouldn't want to leave 'sexism' out
Ada: what's missing from that
[Merriam-Webster] definition is "perceived"; i.e. "perceived
gender"
... and something about the power balance in the
community
... I'd want to say that reverse-sexism can't be a thing, just
like reverse-racism isn't a thing
... as well as something about non-binary
Tzviya: we're down to 'Neurotypical' and 'Inclusivity '
<jeff> Back to Merriam - Webster. Definition of neurotypical
<jeff> : not affected with a developmental disorder and especially autism spectrum disorder : exhibiting or characteristic of typical neurological development
Tzviya: Ada and I didn't propose definitions as we feel these are outside our area of expertise
Vlad: do we need these?
Tzviya: yes
... 'Neurotypical' is evolving as a term
... it originated in the autism community and is taking on
additional meaning
@@
Tzviya: I don't know enough about
the area to write a definition
... CEPC uses the term, which is why we need a definition
Vlad: I don't see 'Neurotypical' used in the text other than in the Glossary
Tzviya: see 'Neurotype'
... we could change that in the glossary
<angel> the reason I put Neurotypical here is, people who dont speak English will have to google it anyway, do we want them to take whatever they find or we want to give them a least something that makes sense in W3C context
<tzviya> https://w3c.github.io/PWETF/
Judy: the reference given 'neurotype' makes sense and I agree with Angel
<Judy> Offensive comments related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability; both visible and invisible, mental illness, neurotype, physical appearance, body, age, race, socio-economic status, ethnicity, nationality, language, or religion
Judy: people wouldn't know that term unless they are super-fluent English speakers
<Vlad> +1 to what Judy said
Tzviya: the Wikipedia definition
of 'neurotype' is actually pretty helpful
... I'm more comfortable with that
Judy: most organizations would say "mental health" rather than "mental illness"
<Vlad> According to issue 62(now closed) we agreed not to duplicate dictionary definitions in the Glossary, unless we need to provide a different definition
<ada> /me +1 mh
Tzivya: that's an easy switch
<ralph> +1 "mental health"
<tzviya> see wikipedia https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/neurotype
<angel> +1 to mental health
Tzviya: so we're down to
'Inclusivity'
... where do we get a definition?
Judy: there's more now than there were a few years ago
Ralph: are the risks too high of people finding their own search results for 'inclusivity' that are bad?
Judy: yeah, it would be useful to give a baseline definition
Ada: the glossary is an
opportunity to provide some context
... if someone is confused by how something is worded [in the
rest of the document], they can refer to the glossary for
context
... e.g. racisim has a power dynamic to it and isn't just a
simple discrimination
Tzviya: one week from today
... we have one week to wrap this up
[adjourned]
<tzviya> rragent, make minutes
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154 of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/cgt/ct/ Succeeded: s/"model good behavior"/ the CEPC/ Succeeded: s/dont/don't/ Succeeded: s/tye/type'/ Default Present: jeff, tzviya, Ralph, Judy, ada, Vlad Present: jeff tzviya Ralph Judy ada Vlad Found ScribeNick: Ralph Inferring Scribes: Ralph Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pwe/2019Dec/0006.html WARNING: Could not parse date. Unknown month name "12": 2019-12-12 Format should be like "Date: 31 Jan 2004" WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]