14:03:04 <spotz> #startmeeting diversity-wg
14:03:04 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Tue Mar 14 14:03:04 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is spotz. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:03:04 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:03:04 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'diversity_wg'
14:03:08 <TheJulia> o/
14:03:14 <aprice[m]> o/
14:03:18 <spotz> #topic Roll Call
14:03:30 <fungi> ahoy
14:03:37 <spotz> #chair fungi TheJulia aprice[m]
14:03:37 <opendevmeet> Current chairs: TheJulia aprice[m] fungi spotz
14:03:48 * TheJulia blinks
14:03:49 <TheJulia> :)
14:04:18 <spotz> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/diversity-wg-agenda
14:04:28 <spotz> Agenda for anyone who needs it.
14:04:34 <spotz> #topic Summit
14:04:51 <spotz> I figured Summit would be relatively fast so thought we'd start with that
14:05:18 <spotz> Congrats for summit being the first certified Public health badge recipient
14:05:34 * fungi cheers
14:05:53 <spotz> aprice[m]: you mentioned the CHAOSS badge has been applied for? I know they won't assign it to me:)
14:06:40 <aprice[m]> it has! I saw a few comments on GitHub last week but hadnt had a chance to answer them because i was at SCaLE. i will get to those today
14:06:56 <spotz> No worries:)
14:08:19 <spotz> We have the Diversity Lunch sponsored by Bloomberg and the Speed Mentoring breakfast will be sponsored by Red Hat. I normally do the Speed Mentoring and we'll need to get the RSVPs attached once it goes on the schedule. Does Bloomberg need anything from this group that we know of?
14:08:33 <fungi> many thanks to bloomberg and red hat for their support!
14:08:52 <aprice[m]> spotz: not that i know of re: bloomberg support, but we have a meeting set up with them next week
14:09:56 <spotz> Ok let them know we're available to help with anything
14:10:36 <spotz> Is there anything else Summit wise we need to discuss at this point? We're closer then we think but it's still a few months off
14:11:05 <TheJulia> one question
14:11:12 <spotz> Go for it
14:12:03 <TheJulia> The agenda notes a proximity indicator, Are many conferences doing that these days?
14:13:33 <TheJulia> from a comfort level standpoint, I think it makes sense, but being at SCaLE this past weekend, I didn't see many yellow or red wrist bands, and even green ones disappeared and didn't seem that visible. Maybe it is just the nature of wrist bands? dunno.
14:14:51 <aprice[m]> yeah, i was forced to wear a yellow one due to lack of green :)
14:14:55 <spotz> Linux Foundation events have them I know for sure. They're the only ones besides us and FOSDEM that I've been to. I normally put mine on my lanyard so it's pretty visible. FOSDEM had nothing
14:16:00 <spotz> If we don't date them my suggestion would be to get 75 or 100% of attendees in each color
14:16:21 <TheJulia> I guess cost per unit will be the driving factor in which path we go then
14:16:22 <spotz> That way we could use them in the future if needed.
14:16:52 <spotz> Like show ribbons, if they're not dated clubs use them up over time
14:17:12 <TheJulia> It might be okay to run out, I think the inherent nature of a conference means people will be more willing to be in the yellow to green spectrum
14:17:59 <TheJulia> I'm just thinking outloud, we can move on from my point of view
14:18:22 <fungi> if cost is a concern, it could be as inexpensive as a few spools of colored 1/4" or 10mm ribbon cut into long enough pieces to tie to something and remain visible
14:20:07 <spotz> Custom wrist bands are a penny in a quick google search
14:20:48 <spotz> THere may be limits but that's not even $100 probably
14:21:19 <TheJulia> Even non-custom then, the is likely a ton of inventory out there
14:21:50 <spotz> Yeah
14:22:38 <aprice[m]> i have looked at some initial pricing and I think it's something we can do
14:22:59 <spotz> Great
14:23:07 <TheJulia> cool
14:23:34 <spotz> Anything else on Summit?
14:23:49 <aprice[m]> pronoun stickers are also in the works. can this group provide the full list of pronouns?
14:24:03 <aprice[m]> we will also have blanks for folks to write their own pronouns in
14:24:04 <spotz> Yeah we can get those for you
14:24:11 <spotz> Perfect
14:24:44 <aprice[m]> thank you!
14:24:55 <spotz> I thin we've in the past had the he/she/they combos so blanks would fill in anything we might miss
14:25:16 <aprice[m]> ok that works
14:25:28 <aprice[m]> it's another thing that i basically have in my cart online
14:25:36 <spotz> We'll see if there's any we missed from the combos though
14:25:59 <spotz> Ok anything else for Summit before we move to the CoC?
14:26:32 <aprice[m]> that was it from me
14:26:50 <spotz> We'll probably have to punt the Survey to vPTG and I'll get us maybe 2 sessions, one for CoC and one for Survey
14:27:01 <spotz> #topic Code of Conduct
14:27:16 <spotz> #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jhORItpdLXbciCXTyZPRiqM44NDtw5fe4l17io7XXq4/edit?usp=sharing
14:27:43 <spotz> That is the link to the working doc which we can track changes
14:28:01 <TheJulia> I've made a couple direct suggestions, and I've started leaving a few comments
14:28:09 <spotz> #link https://openinfra.dev/legal/code-of-conduct
14:28:15 <spotz> Our current CoC
14:30:01 <spotz> Julia reading through your comments it seems like you're in favor of keeping a more prose type of CoC? Does anyone feel like we need a more bullet list one similar to Fedora and CentOS - https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
14:30:57 <TheJulia> I think any dramatic change might raise a ton of eyebrows
14:31:06 <TheJulia> maybe that is a good thing, dunno
14:31:24 <spotz> One thing about the bullet list is the points are more visible, I think we cover a lot of the same things though
14:31:34 <TheJulia> I do like their direct and to the point nature, I could mentally go either way
14:31:49 <spotz> And we do have the bullet list under be careful with your words and actions
14:31:55 <TheJulia> Yeah, even just sifting through the existing text, it is a lot. Maybe a "summary", dunno
14:33:11 <TheJulia> maybe the negative first, and then the positive of our existing text?
14:33:21 <TheJulia> "Don't do this, here is what we strive for"
14:34:03 <spotz> I would flip it, this is what we strive for so don't do this
14:34:23 <aprice[m]> yeah, id start with the positive to reinforce what our expectations are
14:34:25 <TheJulia> so existing form of the text?
14:34:28 <fungi> main concern with a list of things not to do is that some bad actors will take it as an exhaustive list so they can argue that their actions aren't forbidden by the coc, but i suppose that's possible no matter how we word it
14:34:36 <aprice[m]> sorry - splitting between two meetings so catching up
14:35:04 <TheJulia> fungi: that is a thought which is rolling around in my mind as well
14:35:33 <spotz> I think we address tht currently with - This includes but is not limited to:
14:35:37 <TheJulia> I think the prose *does* help with that since there is much more of an expression of intent and our values
14:36:07 * TheJulia sees the highlighted text
14:37:36 <spotz> We can't possibly come up with everything and I think any attempt to do it would be very depressing
14:37:42 <TheJulia> I think, to the core point, it makes sense to explicitly add to the negative behaviors
14:37:44 <aprice[m]> one thing that I also wonder and that I dont think is explicitly called out.
14:37:59 <aprice[m]> I think most folks think of CoC as event policies, not ongoing policies around online behavior as well.
14:38:03 <aprice[m]> is that worth calling out more directly?
14:38:56 <TheJulia> aprice[m]: I was looking through and I think the 4th paragraph causes things to get framed into event policy fairly quickly
14:39:18 <TheJulia> aprice[m]: so some wording updates to that paragraph and I think that might help?
14:40:15 <spotz> We do have a separate CoC for events or did that get folded in?
14:40:25 <fungi> well, also we have separate community and event coc documents, maybe we need to make their purpose clearer
14:40:30 <TheJulia> If your skimming it in a heat of the moment, the third paragraph just doesn't feel like it really sinks in applicablity wise
14:41:18 <fungi> yeah, it does make reference to the separate event-specific coc in that parahraph
14:41:26 <aprice[m]> spotz: we do have a separate one, but i think it's just a general perception around CoC in general
14:41:50 <fungi> hopefully that perception is changing, since lots of online communities who don't put on events have a coc
14:42:52 <spotz> Shouldn't all sponsored events fall under the events CoC? If so moving that mention in the first line there might help?
14:43:26 <TheJulia> Maybe the issue is we're just overloading people with information?
14:44:26 <spotz> I think it's a lot there to read through vs being able to just skim
14:44:59 <fungi> well, the old-old original coc definitely didn't overload people with information, the additional text was added because "be excellent to each other" was insufficient guidance
14:45:12 <spotz> hehe
14:45:23 <fungi> i agree there's ptobably a careful balance to strike between too much and too little
14:45:52 <fungi> s/ptobably/probably/
14:46:00 <TheJulia> I concur
14:46:18 * TheJulia adds a comment to the doc
14:46:39 <spotz> So maybe start with more bulletted summary and then have the wordier one under?
14:47:32 <TheJulia> a tl;dr and then a full body?
14:47:43 <spotz> yeah
14:48:13 <aprice[m]> yeah i like that
14:49:54 <TheJulia> Maybe something like what I've suggested?
14:50:31 <spotz> My one concern would be we'd have 1, 1a, b, 1c, etc so it'd still be a bit long but I can't think of. way around that
14:50:59 <spotz> I can't type today but y'all are used to reading my typos:)
14:52:39 <TheJulia> Maybe the tl;dr is as simple as kind of going back to the "be execellent to each other" "listen, collaborate, and treat everyone the same" and
14:52:46 * TheJulia is still trying to work on a condensed bullet
14:53:31 <TheJulia> "Inappropriate or toxic behavior is not permitted, see below for examples."
14:54:01 <spotz> See below for a more complete but not exhaustive list?
14:54:14 <TheJulia> that works
14:54:52 <aprice[m]> and i wonder if we should say in the reporting part "if there is something concerning that is not included in this CoC, please reach out anyways"
14:55:07 <aprice[m]> so it reinforces that things can be reported and investigated if someone is uncomfortable
14:55:23 <TheJulia> perhaps "Do read onward to learn more about the values we strive for. If you have something concerning which is not explicitly covered, reach out." ?
14:55:24 <spotz> +1
14:55:37 <fungi> sgtm
14:55:44 <spotz> +1 was for Allison. Reading Julia now
14:55:59 * TheJulia groked it that way :)
14:56:05 <spotz> Ahh a wording option:) Yey
14:56:48 <TheJulia> 4 minutes
14:57:45 <TheJulia> should we just draw up some suggestions in the current doc?
14:58:32 <spotz> Yeah and does anyone have a preference for a day and time for the vPTG to continue? Maybe we should try for either 2 hours together or 2 sessions for this
14:59:08 <TheJulia> I think Wednesday is going to be very busy for me and I don't have awareness yet of any cross-community items
14:59:29 <spotz> I usually gor for Monday or Tuesday morning
15:00:17 <spotz> CoC has taken presidence over the survey right now but I'll make one session for that and hope the other projects show
15:00:17 <fungi> mainly i'll want it to not overlap with tc sessions. also i'll make sure to not schedule the security sig time when d&i is going
15:00:37 <spotz> Yeah that's my main conflict fungi so I schedule around them
15:00:39 <TheJulia> I think the survey is important too though
15:00:54 <TheJulia> When are we meeting next?
15:01:10 <spotz> It is, but without the other projects it's just an OpenStack oriented one
15:01:18 <fungi> second tuesday of april will be the 11th
15:01:24 <spotz> We've been meeting monthly
15:01:25 <fungi> day after easter monday
15:01:42 <fungi> i'll be on vacation that week, but don't let that stop anyone from meeting
15:02:01 <spotz> vPTG would be the next time we meet before our normal meeting
15:02:11 <TheJulia> I'd like to try and get a revised CoC in front of the board by May, if at all possible
15:02:12 <fungi> yep
15:02:45 <TheJulia> Which I think means we will need to collaborate async, but it sounds like we've kind of got a good consensus already
15:02:49 <spotz> I'll grab 2 hours for this at vPTG, then we'd have the regular meeting if needed
15:02:53 <TheJulia> aside from maybe some more minor wording items
15:03:12 <spotz> Yeah and then I think it needs to go to legal?
15:03:47 <TheJulia> legal and then board approval
15:04:08 <TheJulia> we would likely sync with legal while maybe floating to the board
15:04:25 <spotz> And we're past time so keep working async, we'll hopefully finish it a vPTG so it can go to legal before the board meeting
15:04:33 <TheJulia> ++
15:04:35 <TheJulia> Thanks everyone!
15:04:41 <fungi> thanks!
15:04:48 <spotz> Thanks all! Great work on this!
15:04:53 <spotz> #endmeeting