Meeting minutes
previous: 29 March
<Ralph> [I think this discussion is on-topic for PWE; it's a component of positive working]
the Zakim timer discussion to which we're been referring here
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'
… most chairs do not enforce this strictly but it's
there to help people who dominate conversations
… the point was made that if participants are not
accustomed to seeing the Zakim warnings it may be off-putting
WendyR: this might be a case where there are entirely opposite perceptions on the use of the speaker timer
WendyR: perhaps it would
help for the chair to explain at the start of the meeting how they
intend to use the timer
… to contextualize the intent
WendyR: just to get people familiar with it
Judy: it's worth expanding
the set of situations we would want the chair to be sensitive to
… I can think of some specific groups that would
benefit from the use of the speaker timer
… it could be offered at the start of the meeting to
try the tool
… and give the group an opportunity to have consensus
on how long the timer should be
Sheila: what if we provided
the context up front; the chair can explain how they are using the
timer
… put more onus on the facilitator
… I'm pretty sure the first warning would cause me to
stop talking
Hober: not seeing the timer, knowing I will get cut off but not knowing when, would be bad
Tzviya: I agree with Tess
Hober: I'd quickly forget how much time I have used
Tzviya: Ralph suggested that
Zakim could use gentler wording; we might think about that
… the first time I experienced the timer I was
startled, but after a couple of times I got used to it
… maybe we need to encourage chairs to explain how and
why they intend to use the timer
WSeltzer: tricky to use it to those who filibuster, without discouraging those who hesitate to speak
<Jem> At the toastmaster meeting, we change the background color of zoom meeting, from green, yellow, to red to indicate allotted time.
<sheila> would any of this be more effectively addressed with a more robust culture of feedback?
Tzviya: let's brainstorm on the wording
Jem: in ToastMaster we have
a timer rule
… we use cards; in Zoom we use virtual background
cards
… a green card, a yellow card, and then a red card
when you have 30 seconds remaining
… speakers know how much time they have remaining to
finish
Inclusion fund discussion
WendyR: we want to re-use
what we used in 2021
… Liz was going to reach out to Coralie on 2
questions:
<wseltzer> [Yes, we can change the form]
WendyR: can we change the
form; do we have to use WBS?
… WBS didn't allow us to use as robust a form as we
wanted
… we're hoping we can switch to another platform
… and if not, just use email
… the second question is whether we can create a
permanent page on w3.org
<Jem> +1 to have the permanent page.
<tzviya> +1
WendyR: we felt that having the announcement only in a blog post caused people to miss it as the post moved down
WSeltzer: we're free to use
whatever tools and pages are most effective
… we have the most control over where the data goes
with WBS
… suggestions welcome
<Zakim> Jem, you wanted to ask the timeline for the fund application
WSeltzer: I'm willing to facilitate
Jemma: I'm presenting to
University of Illinois staff members to encourage participation in W3C
… one topic I want to address is the Diversity Fund
… what is the current timeframe for applications?
… and +1 to a permanent page to which I can point
people
WendyR: on timeline, we
agree we need to move it earlier; the current plan is way too late
… we'd prefer to be able to tell grantees of their
award at least the first week of August
… we'd like to launch this month
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
<Jem> Do we have a diversity fund page that I can point to people?
Judy: in particular since we
want to encourage the sponsorships to be used by people from diverse
backgrounds
… I wish I had a list of tools that work
… some very popular tools have accessibility barriers
… WBS is relatively accessible; sometimes it's a
question of authoring the survey carefully
WendyR: I have a specific
tool in mind
… I've done some a11y testing of it
… a11y is certainly a huge concern
<wendyreid> https://
Tzviya: double-check access from China too
Ralph: +1 to what Judy said, especially for this particular activity
Tzviya: WendyR had mentioned wanting
to get the Inclusion Fund announced asap
… what are the steps we need to do?
… standalone web page
… new form
… fundraising
… I'll reach out to Léonie; she had documented some of
the steps previously
<Jem> since we have tight timeline, I would recommend using existing WBS platform.
WendyR: Liz has a bunch of documents; I don't recall where
Tzviya: I'll reach out to
Liz to make sure she has everything in a place we can access
… we want a [set of] permanent pages so all we have to
change each year is the application form
WSeltzer: Comm Team has the authority to create the page(s)
Jemma: I was a member of the
Inclusion Fund committee last year; I can share the materials we used
then
… there was a spreadsheet we used in the evaluation
stage
WSeltzer: one thing this
Inclusion Fund needs is a single project manager
… does someone think they are that person already?
… there are a lot of steps and moving pieces
Tzviya: +1
<wseltzer> https://
<Jem> above link is TPAC diversity fund assessment sheet.
<wseltzer> ^ the checklist used last year
WendyR: the plan was to use
the same resources as last year; same language, similar process
… we do need to change the dates
… but approximately the same cadence; applications
open for at least a month
… but otherwise the communications would be the same
… 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
Jemma: I'd like to discuss
the project manager role
… who owns that?
WSeltzer: see steps and plans we used last year
WSeltzer: we should think about how to improve our communications to encourage people to apply if they will participate
<Zakim> Judy, you wanted to comment on project lead, and to comment on sponsor support for remote and in-person
Judy: it could be useful to have dedicated staff support
<Jem> one awardee was frustrated with the process. there were so many steps to go through to get award.
Judy: we need to have a
clearer idea of tasks and who is willing to do which parts
… there was a question on whether we'd support both
remote participation and in-person participation proposals
… I would say "absolutely"
Judy: in-person participation will be out of the question for some for at least a few years
<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to respond to wseltzer
<wendyreid> +1000
Tzviya: I agree we need *a*
project manager
… I suspect Liz has a lot of notes
… if there's a volunteer, please speak up
… I'll also get back to Liz
… a lot of the response time last year was lack of
clarity on what would be funded for remote participation
… I expect we'll get more applications for in-person
support this year
… also the announcement was buried in a longer blog
post
… a separate page will make it easier to explain what
people are applying for
WendyR: everything we need
is in the page WSeltzer cited
… I agree we should be very clear that we will support
applications for remote participation
… when I look at the schedule now I think we can
simply move everything 1 month ahead
… I'm happy to draft and test a form and put together
a page if that helps Coralie
<Jem> I am thankful that Wendy Reid is willing to lead the project
WendyR: we have the text; it's just a matter of putting it together
<wseltzer> wendyreid++
Tzviya: thanks Wendy; the task is yours
Ombuds Update
Sheila: we want to combine
the budget we created for Ombuds and mediators
… we're researching price points on mediators, etc
… we're hoping to bring a draft budget here by end of
May
WendyR: Liz has a bunch of documents; I don't recall where
Tzviya: I'll reach out to
Liz to make sure she has everything in a place we can access
… we want a [set of] permanent pages so all we have to
change each year is the application form
Tzviya: we talked about the
difference between ombuds and mediators
… and where there are opportunities to merge those
roles
… I'd like to talk with WSeltzer about that in the
next few weeks
… make the job descriptions more robust and then take
a proposal to W3M
Sheila: those sound like the next steps to me as well
<Zakim> Jem, you wanted to ask whether applicants are from W3C Members or not
Jemma: is the applicant pool for ombuds restricted to W3C Members?
Tzviya: I don't recall what we decided
Sheila: we did not come to a
conclusion
… we had talked about them being external
… but we had a line for internal applicants
… I don't think we decided whether they would be
exclusively internal
… we developed a process and guide with the assumption
that they would be internal to the community
<tzviya> for reference:
Ombuds Job Description https://
<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 also comment on ombuds origins
Ralph: my intuition is that
a capable Ombuds brings generic skills and can quickly learn what is
unique about the W3C community
… so we don't need to limit the pool to just those who
are part of the community
Judy: it's my hope that we can get Ombuds who do that role professionally
WendyR: on the Inclusion
Fund, Sheila, Liz and I realized that one of the barriers to
application was the requirement for a W3C account
… one of the reasons we want a different form is to
switch it to not require a W3C account up front
<tzviya> +1 to requiring account at end
WendyR: if they're approved for participation they will need an account, but not up front
Sheila: +1 to not requiring
a W3C account up front
… that's a barrier that doesn't need to exist at the
application phase
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
… 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
… we may have to adjust the budget assumptions for
external Ombuds
<Zakim> Judy, you wanted to requeue for my previous comments on other topics
<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.]
Judy: ^^
… I don't want to exclude people with a professional
capacity in that role
… I have the impression from talking with others that
the PWE CG might be accumulating issues awaiting responses
Judy: we should keep tabs on comments we might be getting
<Jem> https://
<Jem> we may need issue triage for the repo
Judy: there's an updated discussion on accessibility of remote meetings that connect with earlier comments
Tzviya: I need to find time
to do triage on our GitHub issues
… some of them may be requests to add specific things
to CEPC
Tzviya: some of what people ask us to do is not something we have the power to do
<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to comment on accounts
Ralph: I'm concerned about lowering the application barrier on requiring a W3C account entirely
Tzviya: the short answer is
that it's another step
… while creating a W3C account looks like it should be
simple, there are glitches
… it's another hurdle
… people are hesitant to share information if they
don't have to
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
… we'd like to minimize the hurdles
Sheila: specifically, for
people who might be unsure about whether or not they are sufficiently
technical the specifics of joining W3C could feel intimidating
… I know some people who should apply and I can
anticipate their concerns'
<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to followup
<wseltzer> [We should also try to get feedback to improve W3C account system, but that's a longer project]
<sheila> that's a great point! we should be very clear about data privacy and consent
Jemma: we need a clear path
on what happens when someone receives an award
… I was contacted by someone who had difficulty
getting the funds in a timely manner