Re: Feedback on Zoom & Jitsi for CCG Meetings

Hey Manu, can you respond to my DM to discuss? :)

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 6:24 AM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
wrote:

> On 11/13/20 5:26 PM, Heather Vescent wrote:
> > I refuse to allow us to get distracted re-inventing the wheel.
>
> Well, that changes the whole dynamic behind the effort, doesn't it. :)
>
> The impression that I've had as we've tried to make the transition was
> that we had Chair support to upgrade W3C CCG infrastructure. Based on
> your response, it seems like this has changed (or maybe it was more of a
> +0 instead of a +1, or there never really was support of all of the
> Chairs).
>
> In any case, fighting the Chairs on anything is a losing proposition. I
> just wish I (and those that have helped) had known this before putting
> in all of the time.
>
> > I have to think you may have lost sight of the purpose of the
> > community, which is to focus on VCs and DIDs and credentialing
> > technology, not re-build infrastructure.
>
> With due respect, and as one of the founders that launched this group in
> 2014[1], wrote its first charter[2], and organized its meetings for
> years[3], I don't think I have lost sight of the purpose of the
> community. It's current purpose is very close to its original
> purpose[4]. The statement above makes it seem as if these initiatives
> are zero-sum and they are not.
>
> Our ability to collectively hold meetings that moves different work
> items forward in parallel is important, and as we grow, that has to
> scale. What we're doing right now is not scalable. It requires too much
> knowledge of W3C Process and Github and the scribing infrastructure,
> etc. It should all be automated in order for us to be able to empower
> more people to hold meetings w/o having to know all the things that past
> and current Chairs do about holding meetings. It's too burdensome.
>
> It's also clear that this transition has been burdensome to the current
> Chairs, as evidenced by your response, and I'm sensitive to that and
> have been doing my best to try and push us through this transition as
> quickly as time and availability allows. One of the goals here was to,
> over time, reduce the burden on the Chairs.
>
> That said, not having Chair support just sets the transition up for
> failure. The focus shifts from getting through the transition to how the
> next Jitsi error is going to be used as proof positive that we should
> abandon the current attempts and just go with Zoom. That creates a
> stressful environment for those working on the solution, where the
> expectation is that if the system fails, it's scuttled along with the
> time investment to date.
>
> At this point, I'm not sure what the Chairs want. Could the Chairs
> please provide a list of requirements for the new system? We're trying
> to build something that works for you, too. If what is being done right
> now isn't helpful, then just tell us to stop.
>
> -- manu
>
> [1]
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2014Aug/0001.html
> [2]
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2014Aug/0025.html
> [3]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/
> [4]http://manu.sporny.org/2014/identity-credentials/
>
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
> https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
>
>
>