Working Group Minutes/SWG 2011-06-24

Attendance

IRC Name Present Apologies
_chrisfl Chris Fleming y
Eugene Eugene Usvitsky y
Firefishy Grant Slater y
apmon Kai Krueger y
mkl Mikel Maron y
RichardF Richard Fairhurst y
samlarsen1 Sam Larsen
stevenfeldman Steven Feldman y
toffehoff Henk Hoff y
TomH Tom Hughes y
wonderchook Kate Chapman


Minutes

3rd June 2011 Minutes approved

Old business

Outstanding matters were covered in the following agenda items, which continued previous discussions. We did not get to looking at these.

  • AoA: Action Henk: Review issues and advantages of charitable status with legal adviser on AoA subgroup
  • List etiquette: Action Kate: Draft moderation guidelines based upon the skeleton and the guidelines for the OSM professional list for 10th June - to be presented to OSMF Board on 11th June.

Agenda

  • Board meeting feedback.
  • AoA
  • Face to Face at sotm-eu
  • List etiquette
  • Front Page

Board meeting feedback

  • Board to introduce a management committee formed by the chairs of all the working groups and board representives to separate out management issues, and meet once a month.
  • The board agreed with our proposal for list-moderation: [[1]] Mikel, Andy R, and Michael Collinson will moderate talk, Communication WG will deal with communicating this change. We discussed if further review or discussion with the community would make any sense, but it has already had much discussion. Finally agreed that we will review a process for getting community feedback.

Face to Face in Vienna

  • Agreed to hold an informal meeting in Vienna.

Actions

  • apmon to send a short background on "Discussion about community feedback / decisions"

Carried over:

  • AoA: Action Henk: Review issues and advantages of charitable status with legal adviser on AoA subgroup
  • List etiquette: Action Kate: Draft moderation guidelines based upon the skeleton and the guidelines for the OSM professional list for 10th June - to be presented to OSMF Board on 11th June.

Next weeks agenda

  • Discussion about community feedback / decisions
  • Articles of Association
  • List etiquette
  • Front page


Next meeting

Next meeting 1st July 15.00 UTC

IRC Log

toffehoff joined the chat room.
[16:49] chrisfl__: stevenfeldman I think we are starting at 5uk time (4 UTC) although I also had it in my diary for 4 BST...
[16:51] stevenfeldman: chrisfl_ ahhhh, well my calendar is out of utc sync
[16:51] Eugene: yes, I also thought it should have started 50 minutes ago
[16:57] toffehoff: ... it said 1600 UTC on the wiki ....  Just a couple of minutes .... Hold on....
[16:57] apmon: I thought we had moved it an hour earlier after the polls, but it seems to have moved back again
[16:58] TomH: it was supposed to have moved I think
[16:58] • TomH slightly distracted bringing the last two servers back online
[16:59] apmon: good reason to be distracted
[16:59] stevenfeldman: if it said 1500utc on minutes that is my mistake (copy and paste error). Self slap on wrist and don't do the minutes for a month 
[17:00] stevenfeldman: Minutes say 1500 utc, someone has left 1600 in place holder for next meeting
[17:01] toffehoff: Anyways.... It's 1600 UTC now....
[17:02] toffehoff: First thing we apparently need to check: starting time of our meetings.
[17:03] toffehoff: Should it be 1500 UTC or 1600 UTC?
[17:03] stevenfeldman: should be 1500
[17:04] chrisfl__: yes I thougght we had moved it back an hour to 1500 UTC
[17:04] toffehoff: OK. Was still as 1700 in my agenda and on the wiki.....
[17:05] toffehoff: Next week 1500 UTC it is
[17:05] chrisfl__: cool
[17:05] toffehoff: 1700 = 1600 (argh ....)
[17:05] toffehoff: Are we with enough people now?
[17:06] toffehoff: ping apmon, eugene, tomh, richardf, twain47
[17:06] Eugene: I'm here
[17:07] RichardF: plong
[17:07] stevenfeldman: plong 2
[17:07] apmon: I am here
[17:08] toffehoff: That's 6 ...
[17:08] toffehoff: Right over our 50%
[17:09] toffehoff: Let's go then... First: who is able to minute?
[17:10] chrisfl__: I'll do it.
[17:10] toffehoff: Thanks Chris.
[17:10] chrisfl__: but I need to run on the hour.
[17:10] toffehoff: ok
[17:10] toffehoff: Minutes of last time: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/SWG_2011-06-03
[17:10] stevenfeldman: chrisfl_ you hero, thx for the break 
[17:11] toffehoff: Any objections to the minutes of July 3rd?
[17:12] toffehoff: May I conclude that there are no objections, so we can approve them?
[17:12] stevenfeldman: I wrote them so I guess I approve them
[17:12] chrisfl__: agree
[17:13] toffehoff: Minutes approved it is!
[17:13] toffehoff: Thanks Steven for making them.
[17:13] toffehoff: This week's agenda:
[17:14] toffehoff: - Feedback on board face-to-face
[17:14] toffehoff: - Feedback on Articles
[17:14] toffehoff: - Face to Face in Vienna
[17:14] toffehoff: - If we have time: front page....
[17:15] toffehoff: Anything I've missed?
[17:15] stevenfeldman: what about mail list etiquette?
[17:15] toffehoff: Right.
[17:16] toffehoff: Should be on there as well. So noted.
[17:16] toffehoff: First item then....
[17:16] toffehoff: Board's Face-to-Face
[17:17] toffehoff: Board had a face-to-face in Londen on June 11th-12th
[17:17] toffehoff: One change they've decided on is to introduce a management committee.
[17:18] toffehoff: The board was also discussing lot's of management issues. Wanted to separate them.
[17:18] toffehoff: Management Committee is formed by the chairs of all working groups.
[17:19] toffehoff: And representatives of board.
[17:19] toffehoff: They meet once a month
[17:20] toffehoff: If chair of WG cannot attend, a replacement should be available.
[17:20] apmon: What are the problems/issues the board is hoping to address with this?
[17:21] toffehoff: Board has not much time talking about what they really need to talk about.
[17:21] toffehoff: Most of time stuck in practical issues.
[17:22] toffehoff: Board has changed it's meeting frequency to weekly a half year ago.
[17:22] toffehoff: In order to get things done.
[17:23] toffehoff: instead of discussing strategy, it was also busy with lot's of day-to-day business.
[17:24] apmon: Was the change of frequency considered helpful?
[17:25] toffehoff: yes and no.
[17:25] toffehoff: We did get things done.
[17:25] toffehoff: But we needed to delegate more to working groups.
[17:26] apmon: Can you give some examples of things that should be delegated?
[17:26] toffehoff: We still got stuck in lot's of day-to-day discussions.
[17:28] toffehoff: all things related to keeping servers running.
[17:28] toffehoff: having a budget within which WG can do it's work.
[17:29] RichardF: having a "standing committee" to keep things running day-to-day is absolutely standard practice. Good move by OSMF.
[17:29] stevenfeldman: +1
[17:29] toffehoff: Without having to ask for each spending issue.
[17:30] toffehoff: It will hopefully also set the goals of the working groups clearer.
[17:31] toffehoff: By everything (day-to-day) that is not handled by a working group, we may need another WG for them.
[17:31] apmon: Having clearer objectives for WG and publicly documenting them sounds good
[17:31] toffehoff: Also the information flow between WG will hopefully better.
[17:32] toffehoff: For the SWG that means that Mikel is our representative on the Management Committee.
[17:33] toffehoff: So, for the structure of the SWG it won't change much.
[17:35] toffehoff: An other thing that has been discussed is the list-moderation.
[17:36] toffehoff: Board has agreed with the proposal of SWG
[17:37] toffehoff: Agreed with http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Etiquette
[17:37] toffehoff: That would mean that list-moderation on talk@ is in place.
[17:38] toffehoff: Moderators are also appointed.
[17:38] apmon: Who are the moderators?
[17:38] toffehoff: Mikel, Andy R, Michael Collinson.
[17:39] stevenfeldman: very moderate
[17:40] toffehoff: Thanks to the SWG for discussing this
[17:42] toffehoff: Enough about moderation and list-etiquette?
[17:43] apmon: When and how is it going to be announced?
[17:43] toffehoff: Communication WG is handling that.
[17:44] apmon: Should we wait for the CWG until we trickel it down to the respective "other language" communities?
[17:44] toffehoff: These are typical things that should be handled and discussed in a management meeting.
[17:45] RichardF: when is it going to start? 
[17:45] RichardF: please give me five minutes warning so that I can tell John Smith exactly what I think of him first
[17:45] • RichardF didn't just say that
[17:45] • chrisfl__ 
[17:46] toffehoff: ... it's in the irc-log now 
[17:47] • RichardF laughs
[17:47] toffehoff: Have to check with Mikel on the status of the moderation.
[17:47] apmon: There should in general be more than 5 minutes warning
[17:48] apmon: A week or two would probably be more appropriate.
[17:48] stevenfeldman: no one should notice the moderation unless they go off on one and then the process should be discrete and light touch
[17:48] toffehoff: It looks like we are all thinking that we have a huge ban of users coming up.....
[17:48] toffehoff: steven: _1
[17:48] toffehoff: steven +1
[17:48] toffehoff: Typing is difficult sometimes.....
[17:49] apmon: It is still curtsy to the community to inform them of these sort of things and give them a chance of discussion before putting it in place
[17:50] stevenfeldman: I look forward to the "discussion" on etiquette and moderation
[17:50] apmon: Has it been announced in any way that the SWG is working on a moderation process for the lists? Was there a call for feedback on this idea?
[17:51] toffehoff: I think that moderation has been discussed several times on the list....
[17:51] apmon: Specifically with respect that the SWG is working on it?
[17:53] toffehoff: Making it clear for me:
[17:54] toffehoff: Are you talking about announcing the moderation or...
[17:54] toffehoff: are you talking about having a discussion about whether we should have moderation on the list?
[17:55] chrisfl__: what about announcing it and going live straightaway, but with a review after say 6 months.
[17:56] toffehoff: This whole moderation thing should be reviewed on a "regular" basis. No doubt. And the etiquette rules are not fixed in stone either.
[17:56] stevenfeldman: chrisfl_ +1
[17:56] apmon: If you announce it and give a bit of time for the community to respond the the decision before it is in place, it would allow to revise the decision in light of community feedback where necessary
[17:57] stevenfeldman: surely this is not going to go through the whole loop again?
[17:57] toffehoff: apmon: do you expect that we would have much active moderation going on?
[17:58] chrisfl__: I can't see further discussion being productive. At best we end up implementing what has been agreed, at worst we end up starting again.
[17:58] apmon: Whether active moderation is going on or not, doesn't matter so much as what the community thinks of the idea as a whole.
[17:58] toffehoff: At least: the CWG is taking up the task on announcing this procedure.
[17:58] chrisfl__: we should go with what we have and then review and modify based on feedback and experience.
[17:59] toffehoff: chrisfl__: +1
[17:59] apmon: Can the announcement then at least be clear of the ways the community can change the policy if they are unhappy with it?
[18:00] stevenfeldman: apmon how would you judge community feedback? a few people shout loudly that this a takeover blah di blah while masses of people stay silent because they are fine with it, then what?
[18:01] stevenfeldman: announce on talk and jfdi then let's see what feedback we get
[18:01] apmon: May I propose the topic of "judge community feedback" and "making decisions within the OSMF with respect to the community" be brought up as a topic in SWG
[18:01] toffehoff: Sure.
[18:01] toffehoff: Will be put on the agenda for next meeting.
[18:01] apmon: Thank you
[18:01] toffehoff: Talking about the next meeting.
[18:02] toffehoff: We're at the hour.
[18:02] toffehoff: What to do?
[18:02] chrisfl__: I can hang on for 10 more minutes.
[18:02] stevenfeldman: say good bye 
[18:03] toffehoff: The last 10 minutes:
[18:03] toffehoff: Face-to-face
[18:03] toffehoff: What's the status of that?
[18:03] toffehoff: (During SotM-EU that is...)
[18:03] stevenfeldman: I have had no responses from my post on strategic re a face to face in Vienna
[18:03] toffehoff: I'm there, and happy to have such a meeting.
[18:04] stevenfeldman: Family and work stuff cmbined means I won't be out there so if there are people who want to meet up it will need Henk to organise
[18:04] toffehoff: Who will be Vienna?
[18:05] chrisfl__: I will
[18:05] toffehoff: Sounds like a crowd.
[18:06] stevenfeldman: you need a 3rd for a crowd
[18:06] toffehoff: I'm confident there will be a third one of us there....
[18:06] toffehoff:
[18:07] • chrisfl__ can't recall stevenfeldman e-mail
[18:07] toffehoff: June 3rd
[18:07] chrisfl__: found it
[18:07] toffehoff: SteveC and I responded.
[18:08] toffehoff: Will try to set up a short face-to-face meeting in Vienna then.
[18:09] chrisfl__: worth doing I think.
[18:09] toffehoff: Maybe informal when not that many are around.
[18:10] toffehoff: Ok, next week a discussion about community feedback / decisions
[18:10] chrisfl__: yes
[18:10] toffehoff: apmon: could you send a short background on the central question that needs discussing.
[18:10] toffehoff: So we are all on the same frequency.
[18:11] toffehoff: ... as to where we are talking about ...
[18:12] toffehoff: Think we're at the end of today's meeting.
[18:12] toffehoff: Next week an hour earlier....
[18:13] Eugene: Ok
[18:13] toffehoff: Thanks all for being here.
[18:13] apmon: toffehoff: OK, I will try and send something to the SWG list
[18:13] stevenfeldman: have a good weekend
[18:13] toffehoff: apmon: thanks.