[coc-tf] Draft Minutes – CoC TF Thirty-Fourth Call

Dear TF members,

Here are the minutes from our last call.

Cheers

Kjerstin

***

12 October 15:00 (UTC+2)

Attendees: Antony Gollan, Brian Nisbet, Leo Vegoda, Salam Yamout

Scribe: Kjerstin Burdiek

Summary: The TF discussed their plans for RIPE 85. These included a presentation by the CoC consultant and drop-in sessions for attendees to discuss the RIPE CoC. The group decided to hold several sessions over multiple days during breaks at the meeting. Next they discussed what updates were needed to the draft process documents in response to the community discussion on the mailing lists. The group decided to publish a blog post addressing some of the concerns that were raised and outlining some changes they would make in the process documents based on community members’ suggestions. They would publish this blog post early in the week before RIPE 85. The TF also planned for a short meeting on Monday evening during the RIPE Meeting.

1. Minutes

The minutes from the last meeting were approved.

2. Agenda

There were no changes to the agenda.

3. Actions

-(Ongoing) TF to think about how the CoC Team and the WG Chairs would work together to manage discussions on mailing lists. Including tools, e.g. Mattermost channel

This action remained ongoing.

-Antony to speak with the CoC consultant and other relevant parties about a possible CoC presentation at RIPE 85

Antony said this was done, and a plenary presentation had been aceepted by the RIPE Meeting PC for Tuesday.

-Athina to report on several risk evaluations

This action was put on hold until Athina could be present. Antony shared that the RIPE NCC Legal team was looking into this. 

-Athina to investigate the scale of risk that data might be needed in a court.

This action was put on hold until Athina could be present.

-Athina to review language over data retention, training and the broader team.

This action was put on hold until Athina could be present.

-Athina to evaluate the risk of discovery in common-law jurisdictions and what language is needed in communications templates.

This action was put on hold until Athina could be present.

-Leo to contact the Diversity in Tech session organiser to say the TF would not need time for a discussion.

Leo had contacted the organiser about this.

4. Risk

This item was put on hold until Athina could be present. 

5. RIPE 85

Leo shared that the office hours had been renamed drop-in sessions. He asked when the best times for these sessions would be. 

Antony suggested Wednesday and said the RIPE NCC Events team had confirmed a room would be available for them. 

Leo said they should advertise these sessions for attendees. 

Antony suggested doing so in the blog post. 

Leo asked which TF members could attend the drop-in sessions, as he would not be at the meeting.

The TF members discussed their availability. 

Leo said the sessions should be during breaks, with signs pointing attendees to the room. 

The TF discussed the best times and decided on holding several sessions over multiple days.

6. Document Updates

Leo said the RIPE Chair Team had not found there to be consensus on the documents yet. In response, he would inform the community that the TF was preparing a blog post on updates to the CoC process documents. He would share this message with the other TF members but first wanted to hear what changes they thought were needed in the process documents.

Brian said they should not make major changes to the documents. No change would meet all of the community’s requests.

Leo said the objections to the documents had mostly not engaged with substantive elements of the process. Some parts of the process appeared to have been misunderstood.

Antony said he had spoken to Mirjam about the nature of consensus. It included the concept of asked and answered, where answering an objection would suffice for addressing it even if the objection still stood. The TF could simply respond to the criticism without needing to change the document. The RIPE NCC Comms team had drafted a blog post for this.

Leo said this made sense, but there were some things the TF could change in response to the concerns. One example would be mentioning the CoC Team’s ability to disregard spurious reports. He invited Antony to share the blog the Comms team had drafted.

7. AOB

Brian asked when the TF could publish the blog post. 

Antony said he would share the blog with the group by the end of the day, and they could publish it the following week. 

Brian said it should be before RIPE 85.

Salam suggested the TF have a short meeting at the start of RIPE 85. 

The group discussed the best time to meet and decided on Monday evening, with Leo attending virtually.

Leo questioned whether it was wise to publish the blog post on the Monday before the RIPE Meeting. 

Salam suggested publishing it after the drop-in sessions so they would have more feedback.

Brian asked why Leo thought Monday would not be a good day to publish it.

Leo said there were a lot of competing events then. Salam’s idea could work.

Antony said it would be best to publish this before the meeting so the TF could point people to it. Then Mirjam could mention it in her opening plenary. 

Brian said the group should address the discussion that had been raised on the mailing lists through this blog post, which they could reference in conversations at the meeting. The TF could write a post-meeting blog if needed.

Leo said in that case, they should publish the blog early next week.

Brian noted that the risk evaluation and indemnity information would likely be another matter raised at the drop-in sessions, which the TF should prepare for.

8. Actions
-Antony to schedule the drop-in CoC sessions at RIPE 85.
-TF to find a room for a Monday evening meeting during RIPE 85.
-TF to respond to the draft blog post by Friday.