13:38:46 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwe
13:38:46 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/05/10-pwe-irc
13:38:55 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #pwe
13:39:05 <tzviya> Meeting: PWE
13:39:14 <tzviya> Date: 2022-05-10
13:39:17 <tzviya> Chair: Tzviya
13:47:34 <Ralph> rrsagent, please make records public
13:47:52 <Ralph> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pwe/2022May/0000.html
13:58:38 <Ralph> present: Tzviya, Ralph
14:00:15 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pwe
14:01:04 <Ralph> present+ WendyReid
14:01:15 <Ralph> present+ Hober
14:03:35 <sheila> sheila has joined #pwe
14:03:37 <wseltzer> wseltzer has joined #pwe
14:04:05 <Judy> Judy has joined #pwe
14:04:14 <Judy> q+
14:04:31 <Ralph> present+ WSeltzer, JudyBrewer, Sheila_Moussavi
14:05:05 <wseltzer> q-
14:05:30 <wendyreid> q+
14:05:32 <Ralph> [I think this discussion is on-topic for PWE; it's a component of positive working]
14:06:54 <Ralph> -> https://www.w3.org/2022/05/10-ac-minutes#x202 the Zakim timer discussion to which we're been referring here
14:07:23 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Ralph
14:07:28 <Ralph> scribe+
14:07:56 <wseltzer> zakim, give each speaker 2 minutes
14:07:56 <Zakim> ok, wseltzer
14:07:59 <wseltzer> ack tzviya
14:08:05 <Judy> ack J
14:08:17 <Ralph> Tzviya: in the AC Office hours just before this meeting there were a couple of comments about the use of 'zakim, allow speakers 2 minutes'
14:08:25 <wseltzer> zakim, stop timing speakers
14:08:25 <Zakim> ok, wseltzer
14:08:48 <Ralph> ... most chairs do not enforce this strictly but it's there to help people who dominate conversations
14:09:08 <tzviya> q?
14:09:12 <tzviya> ack wendyreid
14:09:17 <Ralph> ... the point was made that if participants are not accustomed to seeing the Zakim warnings it may be off-putting
14:09:24 <Ralph> present+ Jemma
14:09:40 <Jem> Jem has joined #pwe
14:09:47 <Ralph> WendyR: this might be a case where there are entirely opposite perceptions on the use of the speaker timer
14:09:57 <Jem> rssagent, make miniutes
14:10:09 <Judy> q+
14:10:10 <sheila> q+
14:10:11 <Ralph> ... perhaps it would help for the chair to explain at the start of the meeting how they intend to use the timer
14:10:19 <Ralph> ... to contextualize the intent
14:10:19 <tzviya> rrsagent, make minutes
14:10:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/05/10-pwe-minutes.html tzviya
14:10:25 <Jem> rssagent, make minutes
14:10:29 <Ralph> ... just to get people familiar with it
14:10:39 <tzviya> q?
14:11:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/05/10-pwe-minutes.html Ralph
14:11:06 <tzviya> ack Judy
14:11:28 <Ralph> Judy: it's worth expanding the set of situations we would want the chair to be sensitive to
14:11:49 <Jem> present+
14:11:53 <Ralph> ... I can think of some specific groups that would benefit from the use of the speaker timer
14:12:07 <Ralph> ... it could be offered at the start of the meeting to try the tool
14:12:42 <tzviya> ack sheila
14:12:43 <Ralph> ... and give the group an opportunity to have consensus on how long the timer should be
14:13:20 <Ralph> Sheila: what if we provided the context up front; the chair can explain how they are using the timer
14:13:30 <Ralph> ... put more onus on the facilitator
14:13:46 <Ralph> ... I'm pretty sure the first warning would cause me to stop talking
14:14:07 <Ralph> Hober: not seeing the timer, knowing I will get cut off but not knowing when, would be bad
14:14:18 <Ralph> Tzviya: I agree with Tess
14:14:30 <Ralph> Hober: I'd quickly forget how much time I have used
14:14:59 <Ralph> Tzviya: Ralph suggested that Zakim could use gentler wording; we might think about that
14:15:29 <Ralph> ... the first time I experienced the timer I was startled, but after a couple of times I got used to it
14:15:38 <wseltzer> q+
14:15:48 <tzviya> ack ws
14:15:53 <Ralph> ... maybe we need to encourage chairs to explain how and why they intend to use the timer
14:16:10 <tzviya> ack ra
14:16:12 <Ralph> WSeltzer: tricky to use it to those who filibuster
14:16:49 <Jem> At the toastmaster meeting, we change the background color of zoom meeting, from green, yellow, to red to indicate allotted time.
14:16:58 <wseltzer> s/filibuster/filibuster, without discouraging those who hesitate to speak/
14:16:58 <sheila> would any of this be more effectively addressed with a more robust culture of feedback?
14:17:06 <Ralph> Tzviya: let's brainstorm on the wording
14:17:19 <Ralph> Sheila: in ToastMaster we have a timer rule
14:17:35 <Ralph> ... we use cards; in Zoom we use virtual background cards
14:17:51 <Ralph> ... a green card, a yellow card, and then a red card when you have 30 seconds remaining
14:18:09 <Ralph> ... speakers know how much time they have remaining to finish
14:18:41 <Ralph> zakim, agenda?
14:18:41 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
14:18:59 <Ralph> topic: Inclusion fund discussion
14:19:01 <sheila> s/Sheila/Jem
14:19:10 <wendyreid> q+
14:19:35 <tzviya> ack wendyreid
14:19:50 <Ralph> WendyR: we want to re-use what we used in 2021
14:20:00 <Ralph> ... Liz was going to reach out to Coralie on 2 questions:
14:20:05 <wseltzer> [Yes, we can change the form]
14:20:06 <Ralph> ... can we change the form; do we have to use WBS?
14:20:10 <wseltzer> q+
14:20:17 <Ralph> ... WBS didn't allow us to use as robust a form as we wanted
14:20:26 <Ralph> ... we're hoping we can switch to another platform
14:20:33 <Ralph> ... and if not, just use email
14:20:53 <Ralph> ... the second question is whether we can create a permanent page on w3.org
14:21:20 <Jem> +1 to have the permanent page.
14:21:22 <Jem> +q to ask the timeline for the fund application
14:21:24 <tzviya> +1
14:21:25 <Ralph> ... we felt that having the announcement only in a blog post caused people to miss it as the post moved down
14:21:31 <tzviya> ack wseltzer
14:21:41 <Ralph> WSeltzer: we're free to use whatever tools and pages are most effective
14:21:42 <Judy> q+
14:21:55 <Ralph> ... we have the most control over where the data goes with WBS
14:22:00 <Ralph> ... suggestions welcom
14:22:04 <Ralph> s/com/come
14:22:09 <tzviya> ack Jem
14:22:09 <Zakim> Jem, you wanted to ask the timeline for the fund application
14:22:11 <Ralph> ... I'm willing to facilitate
14:22:20 <Ralph> Jemma: I'm presenting to @@ to encourage participation in W3C
14:22:27 <Ralph> ... one topic I want to address is the Diversity Fund
14:22:33 <Ralph> ... what is the current timeframe for applications?
14:22:42 <Ralph> ... and +1 to a permanent page to which I can point people
14:23:05 <Ralph> WendyR: on timeline, we agree we need to move it earlier; the current plan is way too late
14:23:13 <Ralph> ... we'd prefer at least the first week of August
14:23:18 <Ralph> ... we'd like to launch this month
14:23:26 <Jem> s/presenting to @@/presenting to Univeristy of Illinois staff members/
14:23:41 <tzviya> ack Judy
14:23:43 <Ralph> s/at least/to be able to tell grantees of their award at least/
14:24:10 <Ralph> Judy: caution on tooling; I'd love to say we could use any tool but in reality less than 50% of the tools out there are accessible
14:24:11 <Jem> Do we have a diversity fund page that I can point to people?
14:24:27 <Ralph> ... in particular since we want to encourage the sponsorships to be used by people from diverse backgrounds
14:24:36 <Ralph> ... I wish I had a list of tools that work
14:24:48 <Ralph> ... some very popular tools have accessibility barriers
14:25:04 <Ralph> ... WBS is relatively accessible; sometimes it's a question of authoring the survey carefully
14:25:13 <Ralph> WendyR: I have a specific tool in mind
14:25:31 <Ralph> ... I've done some a11y testing of it
14:25:39 <Ralph> ... a11y is certainly a huge concern
14:25:41 <wendyreid> https://www.typeform.com/
14:25:43 <tzviya> ack ra
14:25:51 <Ralph> Tzviya: double-check accesss from China too
14:26:20 <Ralph> Ralph: +1 to what Judy said, especially for this parituclar activity
14:26:35 <Ralph> topic: Ombuds Update
14:26:43 <Ralph> Sheila: we want to combine the budget we created for Ombuds and @@
14:27:05 <Ralph> ... we're researching price points on mediators, etc
14:27:13 <Ralph> ... we're hoping to bring a draft budget here by end of May
14:27:19 <Ralph> ---
14:27:45 <Ralph> Tzviya: WendyR had mentioned wanting to get the Inclusion Fund announced asap
14:27:51 <Ralph> ... what are the steps we need to do?
14:27:56 <Ralph> ... standalone web page
14:28:02 <Ralph> ... new form
14:28:06 <Ralph> ... fundraising
14:28:30 <Ralph> ... I'll reach out to Léonie; she had documented some of the steps previously
14:28:37 <Jem> since we have tight timeline, I would recommend using existing WBS platform.
14:28:50 <Ralph> WendyR: Liz has a bunch of documents; I don't recall where
14:29:05 <Ralph> Tzviya: I'll reach out to Liz to make sure she has everything in a place we can access
14:29:33 <Ralph> ... we want a [set of] permanent pages so all we have to change each year is the application form
14:29:46 <Ralph> WSeltzer: Comm Team has the authority to create the page(s)
14:30:09 <Ralph> Jemma: I was a member of the Inclusion Fund committee last year; I can share the materials we used then
14:30:10 <wseltzer> q+
14:30:19 <wendyreid> q+
14:30:20 <tzviya> ack ws
14:30:20 <Ralph> ... there was a spreadsheet we used in the evaluation stage
14:30:37 <Ralph> WSeltzer: one thing this Inclusion Fund needs is a single project manager
14:30:50 <Ralph> ... does someone think they are that person already?
14:30:58 <Ralph> ... there are a lot of steps and moving pieces
14:31:01 <Ralph> Tzviya: +12
14:31:03 <Ralph> s/2//
14:31:06 <tzviya> ack wendyreid
14:31:22 <wseltzer> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/main/TPACDiversityFundProposalComms.md
14:31:30 <Jem> above link is TPAC diversity fund assessment sheet.
14:31:32 <wseltzer> ^ the checklist used last year
14:31:40 <Ralph> WendyR: the plan was to use the same resourcfes as last year; same language, similar process
14:31:47 <Ralph> ... we do need to change the dates
14:32:00 <Ralph> ... but approximately the same cadence; applications open for at least a month
14:32:03 <wseltzer> q+
14:32:09 <Ralph> ... but otherwise the communications would be the same
14:32:23 <Jem> q+ I am interested in addressing Wendy's question - ownership of the project
14:32:41 <tzviya> ack je
14:32:42 <Ralph> ... we do need to add to the coverage list as last year was fully remote whereas this year there is also an in-person opportunity
14:33:02 <Judy> q+
14:33:05 <Ralph> Jemma: I'd like to discuss the project manager role
14:33:23 <Ralph> ... who owns that?
14:33:30 <tzviya> ack ws
14:33:40 <Judy> q+ to comment on project lead, and to comment on sponsor support for remote and in-person
14:33:52 <Ralph> WSeltzer: see -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/main/TPACDiversityFundProposalComms.md steps and plans we used last year
14:34:23 <tzviya> q+ to respond to wseltzer
14:34:30 <wendyreid> q+
14:34:44 <tzviya> ack Judy
14:34:44 <Zakim> Judy, you wanted to comment on project lead, and to comment on sponsor support for remote and in-person
14:35:07 <Ralph> ... we should think about how to improve our communications to encourage people to apply if they will participate
14:35:45 <Ralph> Judy: it could be useful to have dedicated staff support
14:35:53 <Jem> one awardee was frustrated with the process. there were so many steps to go through to get awared.
14:35:59 <Ralph> ... we need to have a clearer idea of tasks and who is willing to do which parts
14:36:06 <Jem> s/awared/awarded/
14:36:24 <Ralph> ... there was a question on whether we'd support both remote participation and in-person participation proposals
14:36:29 <Jem> s/awarded/award/
14:36:32 <Ralph> ... I would say "absolutely"
14:36:41 <tzviya> ack me
14:36:41 <Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to respond to wseltzer
14:36:41 <wendyreid> +1000
14:36:47 <Ralph> ... in-person participation will be out of the question for some for at least a few years
14:36:56 <Ralph> Tzviya: I agree we need *a* project manager
14:37:04 <Ralph> ... I suspect Liz has a lot of notes
14:37:14 <Ralph> ... if there's a volunteer, please speak up
14:37:19 <Ralph> ... I'll also get back to Liz
14:37:46 <Ralph> ... a lot of the response time last year was lack of clarity on what would be funded for remote participation
14:37:56 <Ralph> ... I expect we'll get more applications for in-person support this year
14:38:04 <tzviya> ack wendyreid
14:38:07 <Ralph> ... also the announcement was buried in a longer blog post
14:38:20 <Ralph> ... a separate page will make it easier to explain what people are applying for
14:38:33 <Ralph> WendyR: everything we need is in the page WSeltzer cited
14:38:48 <Ralph> ... I agree we should be very clear that we will support applications for remote participation
14:39:13 <Ralph> ... when I look at the schedule now I think we can simply move everything 1 month ahead
14:39:29 <Ralph> ... I'm happy to draft and test a form and put together a page if that helps Coralie
14:39:29 <Jem> I am thankful that Wendy Reid is willing to lead the project
14:39:38 <Ralph> ... we have the text; it's just a matter of putting it together
14:39:44 <wseltzer> wendyreid++
14:39:48 <Ralph> Tzviya: thanks Wendy; the task is yours
14:39:52 <Ralph> ----
14:40:04 <Ralph> Tzviya: we talked about the difference between ombuds and mediators
14:40:11 <Ralph> ... and where there are opportunities to merge those roles
14:40:11 <Jem> agenda?
14:40:25 <Ralph> ... I'd like to talk with WSeltzer about that in the next few weeks
14:40:43 <Ralph> ... make the job descriptions more robust and then take a proposal to W3M
14:40:54 <Ralph> Sheila: those sound like the next steps to me as well
14:40:56 <Jem> q+ to ask whether applicants are from W3C Members or not
14:41:04 <tzviya> ack Jem
14:41:04 <Zakim> Jem, you wanted to ask whether applicants are from W3C Members or not
14:41:25 <Ralph> Jemma: is the applicant pool for ombuds restricted to W3C Members?
14:41:32 <Ralph> Tzviya: I don't recall what we decided
14:41:40 <Ralph> Sheila: we did not come to a conclusion
14:41:47 <Ralph> ... we had talked about them being external
14:41:57 <Ralph> ... but we had a line for internal applicants
14:42:04 <Judy> q+ to check on status of a few other issues including comments received by this cg, also to cycle back to the meeting length question that I asked up front
14:42:06 <Ralph> ... I don't think we decided whether they would be exclusively internal
14:42:18 <tzviya> ack Ralph
14:42:19 <Ralph> ... we developed a process and guide with the assumption that they would be internal to the community
14:42:59 <wendyreid> q+
14:43:04 <tzviya> for reference: Ombuds Job Description https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/main/DraftOmbudsJobDescription.md
14:43:09 <sheila> q+
14:43:18 <Judy> q+ to also comment on ombuds origins
14:43:26 <tzviya> ack Judy
14:43:26 <Zakim> Judy, you wanted to check on status of a few other issues including comments received by this cg, also to cycle back to the meeting length question that I asked up front and to
14:43:29 <Zakim> ... also comment on ombuds origins
14:43:39 <Ralph> Ralph: my intuition is that a capable Ombuds brings generic skills and can quickly learn what is unique about the W3C community
14:43:52 <Ralph> ... so we don't need to limit the pool to just those who are part of the community
14:44:10 <Ralph> Judy: it's my hope that we can get Ombuds who do that role professionally
14:44:13 <tzviya> ack wendyreid
14:44:27 <Judy> q+ to requeue for my previous comments on other topics
14:44:42 <Ralph> WendyR: on the Inclusion Fund, Sheila, Liz and I realized that one of the barriers to application was the requirement for a W3C account
14:45:04 <Ralph> ... one of the reasons we want a different form is to switch it to not require a W3C account up front
14:45:18 <tzviya> +1 to requiring account at end
14:45:20 <tzviya> ack sheila
14:45:23 <Ralph> ... if they're approved for participation they will need an account, but not up front
14:45:35 <Ralph> Sheila: +1 to not requiring a W3C account up front
14:45:47 <Ralph> ... that's a barrier that doesn't need to exist at the application phase
14:46:26 <Ralph> Sheila: on Ombuds, it's OK if it doesn't have to be someone internal; it's OK if at least one of the positions is external
14:46:32 <Jem> q+ to suggest the clear path to getting awarded by the diversity fund
14:47:07 <Ralph> ... the Ombuds is the most informal of the positions, so someone internal who is familiar with the day-to-day cadence and known in the community would  work better
14:47:25 <Ralph> ... we may have to adjust the budget assumptions for external Ombuds
14:47:29 <tzviya> ack Judy
14:47:29 <Zakim> Judy, you wanted to requeue for my previous comments on other topics
14:47:32 <Judy> [jb: clarifying -- I did not mean to exclude members & invited experts from the ombuds role. I just want to make sure that we are open to external people, and not exclude that.]
14:47:53 <wseltzer> q+
14:47:53 <Ralph> Judy: ^^
14:48:04 <wseltzer> q-
14:48:15 <Ralph> ... I don't want to exclude people with a professional capacity in that role
14:48:59 <Ralph> ... I have the impression from talking with others that the PWE CG might be accumulating issues awaiting responses
14:49:14 <Jem> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/issues
14:49:20 <Ralph> ... we should keep tabs on comments we might be getting
14:49:39 <Jem> we may need issue triage for the repo
14:49:48 <Ralph> ... there's an updated discussion on accessibility of remote meetings that connect with earlier commetns
14:49:59 <Ralph> Tzviya: I need to find time to do triage on our GitHub issues
14:50:27 <Ralph> ... some of them may be requests to add specific things to CEPC
14:50:34 <tzviya> ack ra
14:50:34 <Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to comment on accounts
14:50:44 <Ralph> ... some of what people ask us to do is not something we have the power to do
14:51:38 <tzviya> ack Jem
14:51:38 <Zakim> Jem, you wanted to suggest the clear path to getting awarded by the diversity fund
14:51:50 <Jem> ack me
14:52:02 <sheila> q+
14:52:03 <Ralph> Ralph: I'm concerned about lowering the application barrier on requiring a W3C account entirely
14:52:18 <Ralph> Tzviya: the short answer is that it's another step
14:52:36 <Ralph> ... while creating a W3C account looks like it should be simple, there are glitches
14:52:41 <Ralph> ... it's another hurdle
14:52:51 <Jem> q+
14:52:51 <Ralph> ... people are hesitant to share information if they don't have to
14:53:25 <tzviya> ack sheila
14:53:25 <Ralph> WendyR: we would ask a grantee to create an account before TPAC; we just don't want that to be the first step they have to do
14:53:31 <Ralph> ... we'd like to minimize the hurdles
14:54:02 <Ralph> Sheila: specifically, for people who might be unsure about whether or not they are sufficiently technical the specifics of joining W3C could feel intimidating
14:54:21 <Ralph> ... I know some people who should apply and I can anticipate their concerns'
14:54:28 <tzviya> ack Ralph
14:54:28 <Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to followup
14:54:41 <wseltzer> [We should also try to get feedback to improve W3C account system, but that's a longer project]
14:55:32 <tzviya> ack Jem
14:55:36 <sheila> that's a great point! we should be very clear about data privacy and consent
14:55:50 <Ralph> Jemma: we need a clear path on what happens when someone receives an award
14:56:12 <Ralph> ... I was contacted by someone who had difficulty getting the funds in a timely manner
14:57:05 <tzviya> rrsagent, make minutes
14:57:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/05/10-pwe-minutes.html tzviya
14:58:11 <Ralph> zakim, end meeting
14:58:11 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Tzviya, Ralph, WendyReid, Hober, WSeltzer, JudyBrewer, Sheila_Moussavi, Jemma, Jem
14:58:13 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
14:58:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/05/10-pwe-minutes.html Zakim
14:58:16 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Ralph; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
14:58:20 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pwe
15:51:39 <Ralph> rrsagent, bye
15:51:39 <RRSAgent> I see no action items