Re: [meetings] Consider recording meetings (#10)

It seems like I'm generally against the grain here. Perhaps I should clarify my position more fully.

From the personal side, I actively try to limit my online presence. Sometimes this is not strictly possible due to work obligations. Most of this has to do with how I value my privacy; despite being in adtech, I am an advocate for increased privacy protections. Having my likeness or voice available in perpetuity publicly is... less than desirable.

From the standards process side, there are benefits, as Nick said, to increasing the level of candor in the discussion. The topics in particular for this group are in the sights of general media attention. The standards we are evaluating can also be highly contentious due to perceived threats to privacy as well as perceived threats to extant business models. (To wit: the entire #NoFLoC campaign, in my opinion, largely missed the purpose of FLoC and misinterpreted its privacy measures.) While some argue that this should be reason to increase transparency, I don't see why this should extend to literal recordings of said exchanges. The end result of the standards process for this group will be published, available for review and additional comment, and that is largely what matters. Drafts will be available on Github. If a participant wishes to publicize their contributions or the effects of standards as they're being developed, they are free to do so of their own accord. privacysandbox.com is a prime example.

Third, there are complaints about the fidelity of the work of scribes. While I agree that these can vary in quality, I actually used one today. Michael sent out the minutes from the January 5 FLEDGE meeting, which I was unable to attend as I was on PTO. I read the notes in five minutes and, as far as I can tell, largely captured the main points of the discussion. I'm glad I did not have to wade through a one-hour recording. If I required clarification, I could comment on the linked issues in question.

Finally, there's the discussion of fairness and disadvantage. First, we've agreed to rotate the timezones for the meetings. I am aware that this may preclude my attendance at a future date. That's a loss, and I don't think a video or audio recording will significantly recover that loss. The advantage of attendance is participation in the discussion, the ability to ask questions in the moment, and proffer one's own ideas to receive immediate feedback. Recordings are no substitute for this. Moreover, the bulk of the discussions should be happening asynchronously on Github anyway. If they're not, to the point where real progress is only made during a couple three-hour marathon meetings once a quarter or so, I think there's a larger problem in the process.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by appascoe
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/meetings/issues/10#issuecomment-1017154416 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Thursday, 20 January 2022 06:17:03 UTC