Re: SWICG Community Meeting on September 22nd

čt 21. 9. 2023 v 16:38 odesílatel Benjamin Goering <ben@bengo.co> napsal:

> All interested Community Group members are encouraged to attend the
> meeting, especially if you want to record your position on a WG and data
> portability task force
>
> — jamesg@jamesg.blog
>
> As a point of order, I’d like to gently push back on any interpretation of
> the above that attending a meeting is the only or primary way for group
> participants to record their positions on matters or as part of the
> recommended conensus-seeking for group decisions.
>
> W3C Process on Consensus
> <https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20230612/#Consensus> says
> "Decisions may be made during meetings (face-to-face or distributed) *as
> well as through persistent text-based discussions*.” (emphasis added).
>
> Sustained concerns raised here on-list or other persistent text-based
> discussions are legitimate concerns, even without a participant in an
> inconvenient time zone staying up late to attend a sync meeting.
>
> --
>
> I'd like to focus on only voting for a WG of a specific scope.
>
> - dzagidulin@gmail.com
>
> We’re voting on a *recommended scope* to pass on to W3C staff.
>
> - evan@prodromou.name
>
> Voting is not an appropriate decision making process at this point, less
> than a week after the first discussions of chartering a WG on this mailing
> list, and less than two weeks after the surprise unposted agenda item at
> TPAC (minutes not yet posted here
> <https://github.com/swicg/meetings/tree/main>. We should adopt/post an
> operating agreement of where the minutes will be published in a timely
> fashion so we can also approve their accuracy).
>
> W3C Group Process on voting
> <https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20230612/#Votes>:
>
> A group should only conduct a vote to resolve a substantive issue after
> the Chair has determined that all available means of reaching
> consensus through technical discussion and compromise have failed, and that
> a vote is necessary to break a deadlock.
>
>
> "Consensus is a core value of W3C.”
> For more outside of w3c’s process on consensus vs voting, see “Decision
> Making Models: Voting versus Consensus" from SAMHSA.gov
> <https://healthandlearning.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Decision-Making-Models-Voting-versus-Consensus.pdf>
> .
>

Thank you for highlighting this, Ben. I've long believed that voting isn't
the best means for reaching consensus, though you've articulated it more
eloquently.

The IETF motto: ""We reject kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in
rough consensus and running code"


>
> It’s also worth noting that this mailing list has been accessible for less
> than 12 months
> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swicg/2022Nov/thread.html>,
> after it was reenabled in part at my request, and after it was unavailable
> for a few years while the w3.org CG homepage linked to
> https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/ as the ‘Forum’ of record. It would
> be edifying to document why it was disabled in the first place after SWICG
> was formed in ~2018.
> There has not been much time to gather a representative set of interested
> parties nor implementors in order to make informed decisions, especially
> ones like making a group decision on inputs to a WG.
>
> --
>
> Thanks in advance (and retroactively!) to our chairs who have volunteered
> to respect the W3C Community Group process
> <https://www.w3.org/community/about/process/#comms> including
>
> The participants of the Group choose their Chair(s).
>
>
> All communications must be archived.
>
>
> the Chair must ensure that the following happens:
> • the meeting is announced to the group in a timely fashion so that people
> can schedule attendance;
> • an agenda is posted;
> • meeting minutes are published, including topics discussions and
> decisions.
>
>
> The Chair must give actual notice to the participants of any material
> changes to the [operational] agreements
>
> * my understanding is that this SWICG does not have a charter or
> operational agreements posted, but may adopt new operational agreements as
> group decisions
>
> warm regards,
> bengo
>
> On Sep 19, 2023, at 1:19 PM, James <jamesg@jamesg.blog> wrote:
>
> Regrets are noted. Thank you.
>
> As always, we will have extensive notes taken by a scribe and the IRC
> transcript for review later. The Chairs may also provide summaries on the
> mailing list after the meeting.
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Tuesday, September 19th, 2023 at 18:20, Melvin Carvalho <
> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> čt 14. 9. 2023 v 19:13 odesílatel James <jamesg@jamesg.blog> napsal:
> Hello everyone,
>
> The Social Web Community Group met on September 12th in a hybrid W3C TPAC
> session, and in subsequent sessions on September 13th concerning
> ActivityPub test suite development and data portability.
>
> We have scheduled a meeting for Friday, September 22nd to follow on from
> discussions during the meetings held at TPAC.
>
> The meeting will be at 9am ET / 2pm UK / 6am PT.
>
> Thanks James. Regrets for this time slot. Have a prior engagement. Though
> may be able to attend the latter part.
>
> The rough agenda for the meeting is as follows:
>
> - Introductions (optional) and community announcements
> - IP Protection Note Reminder: (a) Anyone can participate in these calls.
> However, all substantive contributors to any CG Work Items must be members
> of the CG with full IPR agreements signed, and (b); To contribute to Work
> Items: ensure you have a W3 account, and sign the W3C Community Contributor
> License Agreement (CLA).
> - Motion to recharter a W3C Social Web Working Group (WG).
> - If a WG is agreed to be rechartered, a discussion on the scope of said
> group.
> - Motion to start a data portability task force that would focus on social
> web data portability (particularly with regard to ActivityPub).
> - Discussion on scope of said task force.
> - Any other business.
>
> All interested Community Group members are encouraged to attend the
> meeting, especially if you want to record your position on a WG and data
> portability task force. During the call, minutes will be taken by the
> appointed scribe and distributed after the meeting, as usual.
>
> If you have any other business to propose, please contact the Chairs.
>
> If you would like to review the meeting notes from TPAC, you can do so
> from the following links:
>
> - SWICG group meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/09/12-social-minutes.html
> - Data portability meeting:
> https://www.w3.org/2023/09/13-social-minutes.html
> - Test suite meeting: [Cannot locate minutes; will follow up]
>
> Thank you,
> The Chairs
>
>
>
>