Page Comparison

...

• Recording

• Presentation - LinkPresentation (PDF):

Notes

Remarks from John Jordan

...

Open Discussion - Barriers to Engagement

• David Luchuk indicated, in response to a member comment about shared calendars, that he is working with Linux colleagues to install a calendar plug-in for the wikdiscussed the aim and intention of Trust over IP to be open, welcoming and completely accessible to all its members. He acknowledged that the publication of a shared calendar and ability for members to self-subscribe to meetings is an overdue improvement and committed to progressing on these issues.
• David Luchuk also recognized the need to clarify how IP/licensing provisions of the membership agreement work so that all members feel comfortable contributing what they intend to our deliverables. Finally, he raised the possibility that members may have a hard time entering mid-stream debates/discussions that are highly technical and involve expert members.
• The floor was opened for all members to raise barriers to broader engagement and discuss possible solutions.
• Kaliya Young suggested that Trust over IP would benefit from recognizing that 2/3 of work in this space is happening outside this Foundation. There is a need to listen to the professionals in other organizations who are advancing important parts of the V/C and SSI movements. There is a lot of activity happening. Trust over IP needs to be some more listening and understanding than is the case presently.
• Sumiran Garg indicated that membership orientation and access to mailing lists and Slack help with engagement. However, she suggested that the membership process and documentation can be overwhelming and leave new members with more questions than answers. She also observed that it is hard to know who is leading Working Groups because the wiki is confusing and some pages are out-of-date. The fact Working Group meetings are accessible to non-members also raises the question of why join at all. Finally, she shared that failing to engage with members risks meaning there is no community at Trust over IP at all; just a crowd.
• Darrell O'Donnell suggested that the diversity of perspectives and expertise in the Foundation is a strength we need to be able to leverage. However, processes on some Working Groups is very tech-heavy. Immediate obstacles to progress are created as soon as GitHub pull requests are necessary in order to evolve a deliverable. Our work needs to be approachable, inclusive and traceable. We need to prioritize getting input from our diverse membership over technical tooling.
• Carly Huitema indicated she has found the Trust over IP group to be very welcoming. She recognized that IP/licensing confusion can create important barriers to participation and suggested members look to the Research TF for gain clarity on how this works in practice. She acknowledged that GitHub can be a problem because it does not seem to fit the notion of technology serving us. Finally, she suggested the wiki be treated as an entry point to our work and greater effort be made to maintaining the pages and links.
• Drummond Reed suggested that the Foundation will soon see its first round of deliverables produced out of multiple Working Groups and that members will be called on the provide community-review for as many as 10 (or more) products. Our members and the best and first audience for deliverables and this is a crucial opportunity and need to increased participation.
• Riley Reed indicated that he also feels there is aneed to make the wiki a better resource. It is difficult to find on the website and can be confusing to navigate. Trust over IP needs to make it as easy as possible for members to participate a-synchronously. This includes easy access to recordings, consistency in meeting pages and integration with Slack.