Meeting on January 6th

Attendees

Nuritzi Sanchez Allan Day Rosanna Yuen Meg Ford Marina Zhurakhinskaya Federico Mena-Quintero

Agenda:

• Structure and planning processes Review of CoC Plan page Review of current research resources/status CoC planning: Description of encouraged behaviour Statement on cultural sensitivity Statement on what could happen if you violate the code of conduct

Review of previous action items:

• Everyone to fill in new sections that were added to spreadsheet

Notes:

Structure and Planning Process

• Allan's proposal for how to proceed with meetings: is everyone happy to proceed with it?
  • There were no objections.

Review of CoC Plan page

• Allan based the page ( https://wiki.gnome.org/Diversity/CoCWorkingGroup/Private/CoCPlan ) on a draft by Nuritzi. Not intended to be exclusive, but is a general outline of what we need to cover. Meant to capture the decisions we have made in our meetings.

  • What is the difference between "needs agreement" and "to be discussed"?
    • To be discussed means we haven't discussed it at all. "Needs agreement" means we've reached a preliminary agreement

Review of current research resources/status

• We need to make sure that the CoC spreadsheet and the planning page are mirrored.
  • Nuritzi: having the info in the spreadsheet shows the world we are doing research.
  • Rosanna: can't tell where she is supposed to be taking notes.
  • Nuritzi: we review in the spreadsheet and write what we've agreed on on the wiki.
    • If we take more notes on the spreadsheet then we'll have more documentation to present to the community
    • Allan: might create expectation that everything will be objectively documented, which could be used to argue against what we've decided.

• Federico: http://lifeofaudrey.com/consulting.html

  • Federico suggests that we use Audrey Eschright's services to help us with drafting the CoC and enforcement plan.
  • We could benefit from best practices for enforcement
  • Could hire this group to train our GUADEC team
• Allan: it's important for the community to feel like the process has been fair, not sure we can consult that out.
• Marina: agrees with Allan. Figuring out how to do it in a democratic way, not sure if having someone from outside would help address Ben's concerns. We've had other people with expertise in our group already. Having Audrey do the training would be great.
  • Allan: Coule be helpful if she acted as a mediator.
  • Nuritzi: If we have someone whose job it is to get this done, then it may help to move things along.
• Meg: John Sullivan from FSF has also offered to give us advice as an adboard member.
• Sarah Sharp is also starting out doing CoC enforcement training, recently did that for the FSF. Action: @Nuritzi to expand the spreadsheet to cover all the topics in the planning doc, @All - fill out the relevant columns for each week prior to each meeting. === Description of Encouraged Behavior ===
• Allan: What are our goals? Does anyone have an example of a CoC where it's done well.

• Marina: Contributor Covenant http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code_of_conduct.txt

  • Nuritzi: gives examples, seems like action items rather than "setting the general mood". Which approach to we like more?
  • Rosanna: action gives things people can actually do.
  • Marina: Geek feminism doesn't have any specific examples.

  • Allan: doesn't specifically tell people they must do positive things on the list. question of strength of statement of positive behavior. e.g. PyCon UK says that atendees are expected to show respect to others, etc.

    • Nuritzi: is there a way to combine suggested behavior and list of expectations?
    • GUADEC 2015: GUADEC is dedicated to a safe and friendly conference experience for everyone
• Agreement that having specific examples is good. Should revisit what specific examples we want.
• Nuritzi: do we also want an opening statement?

• Marina: MozFest also has specific examples.

• Allan: important to have commitment to providing a good conference, should not come at the expnse of us telling attendees what we'll provide.
  • Rosanna: GUADEC has "assume people mean well"
  • Marina: we should not have "assume people mean well"

• Summary: we like the contriibutor covenant, that specific list might need to be revised. Mozfest might have some sections that we can draw on to augment/revise that list. We like having a strong opening statement about the kind of positive behavior that is expected and required and we can draw on PyCon of GUADEC 2014. We shoud connect those two parts, starting with the strong statement of what's expected, and then segway into ways that people can produce that positive behavior.

• ACTION: @Allan to add the summary/notes to the CoC Plan page (https://wiki.gnome.org/Diversity/CoCWorkingGroup/Private/CoCPlan)

Action items:

@Allan to add the summary/notes to the CoC Plan page https://wiki.gnome.org/Diversity/CoCWorkingGroup/Private/CoCPlan

@Nuritzi to expand the spreadsheet to cover all the topics in the planning doc

@All - fill out the relevant columns for each week prior to each meeting.