Inclusivity WG Meeting - 2015-11-17 08:00 PST

[nebrius]

There are a lot of open questions right now (basically all the other issues and PRs on this repo), and it was suggested in #7 that we hold a meeting to try and iron out the really pressing issues.

I think this is a great idea, and I have a few questions I'd like to get feedback on:

• Who wants to participate?
• What times work for everyone?
• How long do we think the meeting should be?
• Should we use Google Hangouts on Air, and if so, how do we want to handle inviting people to participate? Open to all, first come first serve? Only to people in the Slack? Something in between?
• Other things not listed here?

List of people who have expressed interest in joining the meeting:

• @ashleygwilliams
• @sup
• @Fishrock123
• @juliepagano
• @thefourtheye
• @JungMinu
• @zkat

List of people who have expressed interest in joining, but in a less active/non-active role:

• @thealphanerd
• @mikeal
• @jedireza
• @nathan7
• @nebrius

Proposed Agenda:

• Scope/mission of the WG
• The submission process for joining the WG
• Balancing privacy and transparency in public/private communication systems
• Moderation policies and enforcement
• Schedule and Assignment of Deliverables (when due, reviewed, submitted, and by who, to whom)

Deliverables:

• Membership Policy 1.0 (how to join, responsibilities)
• Charter 1.0
• CoC 1.0

Proposed time: Tuesday, November 17th at 16:00 UTC (08:00 PST, 11:00 EST, 17:00 CET, 21:30 IST)

[ashleygwilliams]

• hi i want to participate
• EST, work hours are fine for me
• cap it at an hour
• let's record it and cap it at 5-6 people
• an agenda and someone to keep us on task and someone to follow up

these opinions based on my experience with efficient meetings

i'd be happy to participate (even though i have to work out some issues with my mic). as for times, i'd be free the entire weekend, but during weeks, 4-11pm CEST should be fine. for all the other points, i agree with @ashleygwilliams :)

[MylesBorins]

If there is a seat let me know and I'll participate. That being said I would rather someone from an under represented group take part than myself.

[Fishrock123]

I am willing to participate for purposes of TSC representation if necessary. If so, I'll work around everyone else's times.

[mikeal]

I'd like to be in the meeting in a non-voting capacity and I shouldn't be considered a candidate for membership in the group, but I can fill in a lot of the context around governance and foundation resources and how all of that stuff works. I'm in Pacific time.

[edef1c]

I'd like to participate, I'm in CET (but I'll happily deal with whatever time).

[jedireza]

I'd like to be in the meeting. I'm in Pacific time. Like Myles, I'd like more people from under represented groups to attend.

can you guys define 'underrepresented groups'? i'm a non-native english speaker and not from SF, so do i fit in any of those?

[ashleygwilliams]

gender, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, economic status, age

[Fishrock123]

@mikeal can probably fill in for what I could so there's not much reason for me to be there then. (besides I have enough meetings already.)

[ashleygwilliams]

so, including, but not limited to:

• women
• people of color
• trans, gender queer
• bisexual, homosexual, asexual
• poor
• people not in their 20s/30s

[MylesBorins]

don't forget physical disabilities and non native english speakers

both a11y and i18n need to be deeply considered

[ashleygwilliams]

YES. thanks @thealphanerd

[ashleygwilliams]

documenting this should maybe be one of the deliverables

[MylesBorins]

anyone who feels they have an opinion that is not being represented should feel welcome to take part