Which of the following is disallowed by CEPC?

calling someone an idiot

revealing someone's private github repo without permission

koisisng somoene without consent

hitting a colleague

<adarose> wendyreid: if any of these are grey areas it should probably be made explicit

<adarose> tzviya:someone quoted Dan Appelquist's blog out of contest, which things not disclosed in a w3c setting should probably be respected

<adarose> wendyreid:for training purposes a list of examples which are super clear. We should also show how to handle it. Like if you physically assault somone you should probably be kicked out, if you call someone an idiot you should probably apologise.

<adarose> wendyreid:and the meeting can continue

Which of the following is disallowed by CEPC?

<adarose> tzviya:lets come up with some good examples

Punching a participant

Calling someone an idiot

revealing someone's private github repo without permission

Patting someone on the butt

The hugger

You have been working closely online with your working group colleagues for 3 months and are excited for your first face to face meeting. Your culture's traditional greeting is an affectionate physical embrace. You greet your co-author on Web 3.0 with such an embrace and she shrinks away. Another colleague reminds you about requesting consent for physical contact. What steps do you take to mend the situation with the your co-author? What will

you do differently next time?

<adarose> tzviya:What's the best way to format this, a discussion? interactive forms would probably not be accessible

<adarose> wendyreid: zoom has quizzes

<adarose> tzviya:that could work

<adarose> wendyreid:what about the hugging situation?

<adarose> wendyreid:it's clearly not allowed

<adarose> tzviya:it allows for the hugger to apologise which is a good example

You said "Jory, you're an idiot who failed to understand the finer principles of web design" in a working group meeting. You recognize that you should not have said that (not just because Jory is awesome). How would you go about apologizing?

<adarose> [tzviya pastes other examples]

adarose: Instead of "how would you go about apologizing" we can offer sample apologies

1. "I'm sorry, but you really are an idiot"

2. "That's just the way Jory and I talk to each other."

3. "I'm sorry, but I got caught in the heat of the moment."

<adarose> 4. I'm sorry, I should not have said that, I retract my statement, I should have said: "That is not a good decision because, reasons" <--- acknowledges the mistake, retracts it, allows conversation to move on

<adarose> and does not center the abusive party

I chair a WG. I have read through CEPC, and I realize that I violate the microagressions clause at every meeting. Should I fire myself as chair? SHould i approach the group to ask for feedback?

* This in appropriate use of CEPC

* Not necessary to step down. It means you're growing

* review the "if you've done something improper" section.

* review after a few weeks and ask for feedback

I chair a WG. I realize that I always ask women to scribe my meetings and that might be a microagression

What should i do?

<adarose> tzviya:it's important to have this because chairs can be fallible

1. Fire myself as chair

2. Apologize to the group ans ask for further feedback

<adarose> adarose:chairs should set the example

https://www.w3.org/Guide/elected-body-communication-guidelines.html

<adarose> wendyreid:until now chairs just ran the group but they should be peole who set good examples

<adarose> wendyreid:they are the leaders of that group of people so should have that responsibility

<adarose> wendyreid:people in elected positions of responsibility should be held to a higher standard they should know the cepc and procedures and set a good example

2. Ackoweldge the mistake, apologize to the group, and find a way to fix it (sribe list)

3. Check back in 3 months about how I'm doing on microagressions

<adarose> wendyreid:the chair should find someone way to enforce their own behaviour

<adarose> wendyreid:such as setting up a system i.e. zakim, or a scribe list.

zakim. make logs public

This is scribe.perl Revision of Date 
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/someone/tzviya:someone/
Present: tzviya wendyreid adarose
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: tzviya
Inferring Scribes: tzviya

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

WARNING: Could not parse date.  Unknown month name "09": 2020-09-08
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: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


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.)