[Minutes] 2019-07-11 PWE CG Call

Dear PWE CG,

 

Please find the minutes of PWE call on July 11 2019 at [1] and text content
below. 

 

Here are some take-aways for next steps.

1.       PWE CG will have group phone call every other week until TPAC2019,
so next group call is on July 25

2.       CEPC Publication plan draft will be sent to group for discussion 

 

[1] https://www.w3.org/2019/07/11-pwe-minutes.html 

 

============ minutes of PWE call on July 11 2019================

<Zakim> agendum 1. "Review and merge open Pull Requests" taken up [from
angel]

<Ralph> scribenick: Ralph

== jorydotcom [~jorydotcom@public.cloak] has joined #pwe

<jorydotcom> hello

<Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/issues/56 #56 Improve details of
reporting sections

<ada> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/issues/56


<Ralph> ... this was inspired by the BBC CoC which had very clear reporting
guidelines

<Ralph> ... rapid response / emergency services info was missing; see
separate PR

<Ralph> ... next PoC could be speaking to the chair

<Judy> q+

* Zakim sees Judy on the speaker queue

<Ralph> ... the chair should be familiar with those involved

<Ralph> ... but should the person not be comfortable raising an issue to the
chair -- or if the chair is the issue -- they should be able to go straight
to the Ombuds

<Ralph> ... and the chairs themselves should be able to go to the Ombuds if
they don't feel they can resolve the issue

<nigel> q+

* Zakim sees Judy, nigel on the speaker queue

<tzviya> q+

* Zakim sees Judy, nigel, tzviya on the speaker queue

<tzviya> ack Judy

* Zakim sees nigel, tzviya on the speaker queue

* tzviya to angel - i can manage the queue if you would like

<Ralph> Judy: I'm glad to see we're not assuming everyone would be
comfortable going first to the chair

* angel thanks tzviya! 

<Ralph> ... I encourage that we provide other channels

<Ralph> ... where is the link to the BBC policy?

<tzviya> https://www.bbc.com/aboutthebbc/reports/policies/codeofconduct


<angel> bbc
coc:https://www.bbc.com/aboutthebbc/reports/policies/codeofconduct


<tzviya> q?

* Zakim sees nigel, tzviya on the speaker queue

<tzviya> ack nigel

* Zakim sees tzviya on the speaker queue

<nigel> ->
https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/master/ReferencesAndResources.md

References and Resources

<Ralph> Nigel: regarding chairs being in the escalation path; some groups
have multiple chairs

<Ralph> ... it should be possible that one chair can seek assistance from
another chair

<Ralph> ... should a chair be able to do that, or approach another Team
member, before going to the Ombuds?

<Ralph> Ada: giving people options and letting them go wherever they're most
comfortable

<Ralph> Nigel: yes; open wording rather than closed wording

<tzviya> ack tzviya

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

<Ralph> Tzviya: +1 to Ada; we have to remember this is not a formal process
and that people will go where they're more comfortable anyway

<Ralph> ... I'd prefer to advise people to go to a chair or Ombuds

<angel> + 1 to encourage people to go to umbuds and chairs

<Ralph> ... our goal should be to circulate this for review very soon

<angel> s/umbuds/ombuds

<Ralph> ... we'd discussed whether reporting should be more robust in this
document or in a separate place

<angel> q+ 

* Zakim sees angel on the speaker queue

<Ralph> ... I'm fine adding a bit more to this document

<tzviya> ack angel

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

<Ralph> ... so we can circulate for review quickly

<jorydotcom> +q

* Zakim sees jorydotcom on the speaker queue

<Ralph> Angel: will all chairs be comfortable handling issues such as these?

<tzviya> ack jorydotcom

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

<Ralph> Ada: we could say that if a chair is not comfortable handling CEPC
issues the chair should help the individual raise it in other ways

<Ralph> Jory: that leads to the training issue

<Ralph> ... I've been talking with others about finding resources and
developing a training program

<Ralph> ... we'd need to provide training before asking chairs to step into
this role

<Ralph> ... we could even open it to everybody

<Judy> q+

* Zakim sees Judy on the speaker queue

<tzviya> ack Judy

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

<nigel> +1 to the idea of training for Chairs, as a Chair!

<Ralph> Angel: could raise this during TPAC Chairs' Breakfast

* ada +1 for training for chairs (also a chair)

<Ralph> Judy: important to have training for chairs, also important to not
put them in this role before there is training

<tzviya> +1 to chairs' training, as a chair

<wendyreid> +1 to chair's training, also as a chair

* Ralph Judy audio breaking up for me

<tzviya> q+

* Zakim sees tzviya on the speaker queue

<tzviya> ack tz

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

<Ralph> Tzviya: every chair with whom I've spoken thinks this [training] is
a good idea

<Ralph> ... people approach chairs now

* angel as a chair think this is a good idea too :)

<Ralph> ... we know that not everyone will handle such issues well

* nigel notes that every chair who has commented here has +1ed the idea of
training

<Judy> [jb: what tzviya is saying works for me]

<Ralph> ... people can judge for themselves what they think is the best
option

<Ralph> ... so we can list several options

<Ralph> Judy: if we raise this with the chairs at TPAC, let's have a
proposal; not just raise the question

<Ralph> Jory: agree; a concrete proposal for what we might provide

<Ralph> ... e.g. a 30-minute training session on responding to incident
reports

<Ralph> ... and point to the type of materials we might use

<Ralph> Judy: "welcome everyone to be resources for each other, plan to have
resources, plan to have a training session, any discussion"

<Ralph> Jory: sounds do-able

* angel about training, the MIT harassment training is still on the PWE
homepage, but 404

* Ralph is aware, Angel; continues to look for a public alternative\

<Ralph> Ada: I'll make a pull request for #56

* tzviya thanks nge

* Judy thanks Nigel

* nigel you're welcome!

<angel> topic: Pull Request 57 - Clarify what we reserve the right to not
act on

<Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/57 #57 "unacceptable" about
reverse -isms

<Ralph> Ada: there was an old discussion on #44 where people felt OK to
draft a pr

<Ralph> ... there have been some changes proposed to my initial text

<Ralph> ... social justice debates

<Ralph> ... tone

<Ralph> ... this is a list of stuff that Ombuds may choose not to act on

<Ralph> ... I'm working on improving the text based on the feedback

<nigel> q+

* Zakim sees nigel on the speaker queue

<Ralph> ... generally there seems to be agreement

<Ralph> ... the current conversation is on the opening text; do we have to
guarantee that we will give a response?

<Ralph> ... the pr largely seems to be uncontroversial; it's getting the
details right

* Judy has read the issue thread, and find it puzzling

<angel> ack nigel

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

* Judy glad if people involved feel that it is heading towards resolution

<Ralph> Nigel: what's the motivation for 'will' vs. 'should'?

* tzviya needs to sign off now - asks if someone else can help angel manage
queue

<Ralph> Ada: initially it read "will prioritize the safety" but the section
was moved into a "... but ..." case and I didn't want to reduce the
intensity of the initial statement

* Ralph wishes tzviya well

* angel tzviya, I can handle it now :-)

<Ralph> ... I didn't want to reduce the importance of that second bit with
it being after a 'but' in the initial phrase

<Ralph> Nigel: perhaps 'but' should be 'and'?

* Judy also wishes Tzviya well

<Ralph> Ada: there needs to be some contrast

<Ralph> ... we do need to take everything seriously but some issues
shouldn't be brought forward for these reasons

<Ralph> ... but maybe 'and' does work

<Ralph> Nigel: or a new sentence

<Ralph> Ada: perhaps [the initial sentence] should be moved elsewhere

<Ralph> Nigel, Jory: +1

<Ralph> Ada: I'll make that change; it makes more sense

<angel> topic: pull request #51

<Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/51 #51 added rapid response
info to Reporting

<Ralph> Ada: this is about contacting law enforcement first

<Ralph> ... we're waiting for an email address to populate the field

<Judy> q+

* Zakim sees Judy on the speaker queue

* Ralph q+

* Zakim sees Judy, Ralph on the speaker queue

<Ralph> ... then it should be OK to merge

<angel> ack judy

* Zakim sees Ralph on the speaker queue

<Ralph> Judy: a practical issue:

<Ralph> ... in most codes it's practical to say "contact local law
enforcement"

<Ralph> ... we work in a very diverse organization where people come from
multiple contries and may not be familiar with the jurisdiction they're
visiting

<Ralph> ... it may be bewildering to have to find local law enforcement, and
possibly not even safe

<Ralph> ... I suggest that we make this real and think about what might
actually work

<Ralph> ... for instance, "if you need help in doing so, here's how ..."

<angel> q+

* Zakim sees Ralph, angel on the speaker queue

<Ralph> ... these are hypotheticals but may be likely in our distributed
international environment

<Ralph> ... "contact local law enforcement but also contact the Ombuds"

<Ralph> ... [W3M] has had some discussion about rapid response procedures

* Ralph ack next

* Zakim sees Ralph at the head of the speaker queue

* Zakim sees angel on the speaker queue

<angel> ack ralph

* Zakim sees angel on the speaker queue

<nigel> scribe: nigel

<nigel> Ralph: 3 things.

<Judy> s/practical to say/common to say, in urgent situations,/

<nigel> .. I concur with Judy's comment that someone might not know how to
contact local law enforcement

<nigel> .. There's a W3M conversation about rapid response protocol.

<nigel> .. The current PWE procedures document notes [looks up the link]

<Ralph> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#ombuds


<nigel> .. lists the Ombuds and has a note that the Ombuds may be contacted
individually or in subset (or all of them)

<nigel> .. I realised we don't have a convenient way to contact all of them,
so

<nigel> .. I created an alias

<Ralph> mailto:ombuds@w3.org

<nigel> .. I suggest that might be a reasonable place to start.

<Judy> [JB: tries to clarify that I *wasn't* proposing adding detail about
"How" -- I was suggesting adding something to make it less of an either-or,
but rather a "both-and" -- e.g. contact local law enforcement, and feel free
to also contact ombuds to ask for help or support with dealing with local
law enforcement]

<Judy> q+

* Zakim sees angel, Judy on the speaker queue

<nigel> .. I proposed internally that we create an alias specifically for
rapid response

<nigel> .. That's undergoing discussion

<nigel> Ada: I'll add that to the PR

<nigel> Judy: That doesn't address my concerns fully

<nigel> Ralph: I didn't intend it to.

<nigel> q?

* Zakim sees angel, Judy on the speaker queue

<angel> ack angel

* Zakim sees Judy on the speaker queue

<Judy> q+ to re-focus the discussion of my suggestion

* Zakim sees Judy on the speaker queue

* Ralph wonders if nigel is willing to continue to scribe

<nigel> Angel: Practical suggestion: could we have the ombudsperson prepare
the local law enforcement contact info

* Ralph q+

* Zakim sees Judy, Ralph on the speaker queue

<nigel> .. and people may not have an idea how to call the police like
Tokyo, China, Lisbon.

* Ralph q+ for a practical suggestion about local instruction

* Zakim sees Judy, Ralph on the speaker queue

<nigel> .. When we have the location fixed before the event the ombudsperson
could check out the local law enforcement

<nigel> .. contact information and prepare that for quick access.

<angel> s/ location/contact info and way to contact

<nigel> Judy: Difficult suggestion to do. In a given country of the many we
hold meetings in, even from region to region

<nigel> .. or city to city the contact policies may be different and that
would be an exhaustive exercise to compile it.

<nigel> .. It could get left off the planning list.

<ada> q+

* Zakim sees Judy, Ralph, ada on the speaker queue

<nigel> .. The frequency of urgent situations is hopefully low, but not
non-existent.

<nigel> .. What I was thinking of was different, which was to indicate not
that a message would go to

<Ralph> -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emergency_telephone_numbers

[Wikipedia] List of emergency telephone numbers

* Ralph ack ju

<Zakim> Judy, you wanted to re-focus the discussion of my suggestion

* Zakim sees Ralph, ada on the speaker queue

<nigel> .. all the ombudspeople, but rather that we not present to somebody
an either/or if it is an urgent issue.

* angel was thinking of a lightweighted way, e.g. in US call 911, in China
to call 110, in Japan to call @#$%, that's it

<nigel> .. Just say "call your local folks and feel free to let an
ombudsperson know"

<nigel> .. Along the same lines as physical injury away from base, have to
go to emergency room.

* Ralph has an internal document with exactly that, angel

<nigel> .. We encourage people not to go alone but for someone else to go
with them esp if the country isn't familiar to them.

<nigel> q+ to ask about building security when available

* Zakim sees Ralph, ada, nigel on the speaker queue

<nigel> .. I'm thinking of something lightweight - if urgent, contact local
law enforcement and also you can let someone else know

* Ralph ack next\

* Zakim sees Ralph at the head of the speaker queue

<Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to discuss a practical suggestion about local
instruction

* Zakim sees ada, nigel on the speaker queue

* angel to Ralph, that's good enough, would be even better with some
pratical suggestion on how to deal with local police :D

<nigel> Ralph: I think we're deep into details which are probably better
handled outside this call

<nigel> .. I thought we'd had a conversation, I don't recall where, but
would solicit advice here, of making emergency, both

* ada I like that suggestion please can you comment it in the Github issue,
I couldn't capture al lthe detail.

<jorydotcom> +1 to that

<nigel> .. for law enforcement and health, a required part of every f2f
meeting logistics planning and documentation

<Judy> q+

* Zakim sees ada, nigel, Judy on the speaker queue

<nigel> .. It's more general than the PWE issues we're discussing

<angel> ack ada

* Zakim sees nigel, Judy on the speaker queue

<nigel> rrsagent, pointer?

<RRSAgent> See https://www.w3.org/2019/07/11-pwe-irc#T14-50-40


<nigel> Ada: From recent meetings, when the venue has been hosted at a big
organisation,

<angel> zakim, close the queue

<Zakim> ok, angel, the speaker queue is closed

* Ralph rrsagent, please draft minutes

<RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate
https://www.w3.org/2019/07/11-pwe-minutes.html Ralph

<nigel> .. we've been requested by the hosts not to call emegrency services
but inform someone in the building

<nigel> .. Wondering if important to see that represented.

<nigel> Ralph: Exactly, that's not PWE, it's instructions for organising a
meeting

<nigel> .. Those kinds of venue specific constructions can't be done by
ombuds in general.

<nigel> .. The local organiser knows building-specific instructions. Exactly
right Ada.

<nigel> .. Date specific too

<nigel> q?

* Zakim sees nigel, Judy on the speaker queue

* Judy surprised to hear that -- that is a typical break-down point, in
post-analysis of events that go wrong

<angel> ack nigel

<Zakim> nigel, you wanted to ask about building security when available

* Ralph ack next

* Zakim sees Judy on the speaker queue

* Zakim sees Judy at the head of the speaker queue

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

* Ralph q+ Judy

* Zakim whispers to Ralph that the speaker queue has been closed

* Ralph queue=Judy

* Zakim whispers to Ralph that the speaker queue has been closed

<jorydotcom> Nigel ... some buildings have security present

<jorydotcom> .. is it reasonable to suggest that they be part of a protocol

<jorydotcom> .. if people aren't comfy with local law enforcement

* Ralph thinks Judy is going to tell us that building security and law
enforcement for a CEPC violation are very different

* ada would definitely agree with concerns with not trusting local law
enforcement.

* Judy Ralph guesses wrong ;)

* Ralph :)

* Judy and was in queue for another comment

<jorydotcom> .. what happens if you go to a meeting hosted by a big company
with it's own building security

<Judy> q?

* Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

<nigel> s/Nigel ... some/Nigel: Some

<nigel> i/Nigel/scribe: jorydotcom

<jorydotcom> Judy .. when things have gone wrong, that's been one of the
problems

* Ralph thinks what Judy is saying is precisely why a local meeting
organizer needs to provide the instructions

<jorydotcom> .. let's say someone has a med emergency. you want to call
local law enf anyway and you can notify security

<jorydotcom> .. but building sec. can still be a 5-10 min response cycle
anyway

<jorydotcom> even in med emergency

* Ralph for example, MIT's instructions are http://emergency.mit.edu/


<Ralph> -> http://emergency.mit.edu/ MIT's emergency instructions (for
example)

<jorydotcom> .. so don't risk losing critical time by only contacting one

<jorydotcom> .. I like angel's idea about making sure local numbers are
available

<jorydotcom> .. i'm suggesting that we add something that says if you do
need to contact local law enforcement, please let an omsbudsperson know and
whether you want someone to go with you

<jorydotcom> angel... I thnk thiis should be part of meeting of preparation

* nigel has to leave in a moment, sorry I can't stay longer

* Judy cannot extend, very sorry

<jorydotcom> .. we have one more meeting between now and TPAC

* Judy ...could we also have another? 

* Judy ...yes

* Ralph wonders what specific items Angel believes could be finished today

* nigel yes can do biweekly

<jorydotcom> .. should we have another meeting?

* Judy ...biweekly ok with me

<jorydotcom> (+1)

* wendyreid can do biweekly as well

* Ralph can probably do every-other-week

* Ralph never certain what "bi-weekly" means ;)

<jorydotcom> .. group is +1 to scheduling bi-weekly

<jorydotcom> .. next call would be the 26th?

<jorydotcom> .. we still have items for today that are not finished

<wendyreid> +1

<jorydotcom> .. group is ok moving add'l items from this week to next time

[23:00] <Judy> [JB: does anyone disagree with the suggestion I've been
making? I can add an issue on this if needed; I have not heard an objection,
but neither have I heard anyone respond directly on my suggestion, only
other alternative ideas, some of which may also be useful.]

<Ralph> [I would appreciate an issue with specific wording, Judy]

<jorydotcom> .. we need to have something by end of August

* nigel sorry have to leave now

<jorydotcom> ada .. would it be ok to get something after #57 is merged

<jorydotcom> angel .. yes

<jorydotcom> judy .. also looking for feedback on my suggestion, will add an
issue

<jorydotcom> Ralph .. specific wording would be helpful

<jorydotcom> .. meeting concludes

 

-------------------------------------------------------

Angel Li (李安琪)

Standardization Department (标准化部) 

Alibaba Group (阿里巴巴集团) 



注意 : 本电邮(包括任何附件)含有机密资料及可能受法律保护。如未经阿里巴巴集团
事先书面同意，严禁向第三方分享本电邮（含附件内容）所载的任何信息。如您错误收
到此电邮，敬请以电邮通知寄件人，于您的系统内删除本信息，及不可将本电邮复印或
用作任何用途或对任何人士透露本邮件之内容。多谢合作!
Notice: This email (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
legally privileged. It’s strictly forbidden to share any information
contained in this email to third parties without the prior written consent
from Alibaba Group. If you received this email in error, please notify us by
reply e-mail, delete this message from your system and do not copy it or use
it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you.