owned this note   changed 3 years ago  
Published Linked with GitHub

Etiquette Guidelines Public Discussion

September 4, 2021

Attendees

  • Heather Leson
  • Amanda McCann
  • Mikko Tamura
  • 2 others that did not identify here

Agenda

Discussion on the Etiquette Guidelines Revision

Notes / Questions

  • language - needs to be more clear, lower the grade level to serve a wide audience
  • shorter, simplier writing. concise
    • deadnaming - not a common phrase.
      • definitions or rewrite for clarity
  • reading complexity - words need to be non complicated
    • could a glossary assist with some of the words (if they are absolutely necessary
  • adjust sentence length
  • lists/bullet point lists - what to do and what not to do - make a list instead of the sentence
  • https://readabilityformulas.com/freetests/six-readability-formulas.php
  • behaviour change means being accessible and clear in documentation
  • we reflected on the comments on the mailing lists - what was mentioned overview
  • moderation selection might be complex
    • if they are moderators, they need to participate
    • they need to be familiar with the environment and people to be accepted/trusted
  • for new people - if people could read the lists before joining to know what they are getting into
  • each message should have a notice about etiquette and report issues
  • for long time communities - people will need to know when they might get flagged and why - need to socialize it. how to help guide
  • make visual aids - to help socialize it
    • more welcoming than a wiki link
  • getting out there - 1 minute video or fliers - getting it out there, ask the network to translate
  • examples - what those lines - narrows to help people to discuss
  • certain limitations with the current mailing list
  • hopefully in the future we can use discourse
    • good idea, moderation might be more helpful here on this platform
  • offer to have an editor review with recommendations
  • "behaviour and disrespect to individuals" - may be overally broad
    • this could be hard to define
    • recommendations - what are the parameters
      • this should not be up to the moderators - this might lead to lack of clarity, too loose, hard to enforce, bias expected
    • e.g. is it OK to say “Donald Trump is a racist misogynist”
  • respect person as a person or an authority
    • the wording
  • The more real life examples can help the moderation selection committee
  • The moderation committee can work it along the way to improve on it as well
  • wants a safe place to jump into the conversations and not to be attacked.THis is a move to encourage people to continue and joining the conversation.

September 2, 2021

Attendees

  1. Maggie Cawley - US
  2. Steve Friedl - US
  3. Amanda McCann
  4. Tobias Knerr
  5. Rubén Martín (HOT)
  6. imagico
  7. imre
  8. Michal Migurski
  9. SK53
  10. Dorothea Kazazi

Agenda

Discussion on the Etiquette Guidelines Revision

Notes / Questions

  • How to make sure moderators have the trust of the community?
  • How to encourage good collaboration / moderate spaces not managed by the OSMF? e.g. Twitter
  • Dorothea: Are you going to make specific suggestions to the board regarding the process/criteria for selection of the moderators..?
  • Maggie: If you know someone who would make a great moderator, please encourage them to join! Email local@osmfoundation.org
  • Imre: Suggest adding some more positive examples of behaviour - different norms in Hungary, China and other cultures. Example - when you disagree - here is some template language that would be polite. Express in this way - particularly when writing in English as a second language.

Timeline:

  • Sept 3 - Process for Moderation to OSMF board
  • Moderator Recruitment!
  • Sept 8 - close Etiquette Guidelines revision to public comment
  • Sept 24 - draft of Etiquette Guidelines to OSMF board

Process for Moderation Public Discussion August 21, 2021

Attendees

  1. Arnalie - Philippines / US
  2. Maggie Cawley - US
  3. Bert Araali
  4. Clifford Snow
  5. Dorothea Kazazi
  6. Heather Leson
  7. imagico
  8. Michal Migurski
  9. Micheal Kaluba
  10. RobJN
  11. Steve Friedl
  12. Tobias Knerr
  13. Willy Franck SOB - GeOsm Family (Cameroon)
  14. Miriam
  15. Ebrahim
  16. Game over!
  17. Kemal Oktay Aktoğan
  18. K. Dolatmanesh
  19. nata

Agenda

Discussion on the Process for Moderation https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Etiquette/Process_for_Moderation

Notes

*Introduction about the committee and work on Etiquette Guidelines/Process for Moderation (Maggie)

  • how can we make sure that incident documentation serve the next stages? (Tobias)
    • Heather: will be fleshed out; we thought that the moderation team will design this process over time and keep checking in with the community/board
    • mike - not a judical process, more of a conversation
    • some items will be public but there is some work that will need be confidential with the board. sensitive privacy
    • Tobias: how accountability will be achieved
    • Steve: the moderation team is accountable to the board, the board is accountable to the membership
    • Heather: let's not strangle ourselves with too much process before we know our boundary; respect and care for the moderation team and the community
    • Maggie: would it make sense to have an annual report eg 14 people banned?
    • Rob: how the community know that the moderation team is effective? observing the conversation in the public mailing list
    • Mike: moderation will be public and proactive. They will be direct and in the mailing list. Effective
    • Heather: not one person decision, it is collective, collaborative
  • Bert: question on proactive moderation. off-topic and irrelevant conversations can help us in establishing and encouraging people to our mailing list. where do we put the threshold when we say that the topic is off-topic and irrelevant?
    • Mike: when people aren't learning from each other. it becomes heated
    • Bert: as seen in the past, people go to these types of conversation, then organically get excluded in the conversation. Conversation dying out, or people dont respond anymore because they dont respond constructively
    • Heather: different definitions of a healthy community/conversation. If there's a lot of back and forth between 2 people, that environment is sometimes not culturally comfortable to others
    • Bert: we should also take into regard not to interfere with locals talking
    • Maggie: to take those 1:1 off the mailing list
    • Bert: Thank you , we can see how the pro-active moderation works in practice, we can always adjust. It's a good base guideline to start.
  • Willy: do we have the possibility to measure violation? intensity of violation to be considered as violation? and sanctions? and what would be the power of this person? what if the person who violated come back and make another account? maybe any welcome note?
  • Clifford: for moderation team - is there any conflict of interest where people would have to step out?
    • Maggie: yes, we have a document under construction. we hope to co-create this with the moderation team
  • Miriam: observing that more people are stepping out of email, most people are on telegram - check with telegram moderators on how we can adapt the guidelines/moderation. Eg in the Telegram LAtAm chat, we pose limit on how many people can chat so they dont dominate the conversation
    • how to modify it to moderate on telegram and other community spaces
    • Tobias: Note that the channels on Telegram, Discord etc. are not operated by the OSM Foundation (unlike the lists, forum and wiki).
    • Miriam: thanks Tobias, maybe a sort of recommendation to the channels not managed by the OSM Foundation
  • Arnalie: I am happy with how the process of moderation and and revision of etiquette guidelines are co-created with communities. and to clifford's point, I agree that CoI is also good to have to guide the that decisions of the moderation committee… how can we make sure the make up of the moderation committee are not constricted to one perspective and to make it diverse? opinions from west, east, north and south are different, men, women and lgbtq too. currently, most of OSMF WGs are made up of members with same background thus, no diverse perspective…
    • this is often about 'asking' people for their participation, mentorship
    • how can we be proactive
    • how to encourage other communities and people to join so that the moderation group can be more balanced
    • Steve: soon we will be actively recruiting moderators - volunteer to participate - people who are level-headed, keep their cool
  • Bert: something to put in place for communities, eg LGBTQ are prohibited and can have legal consequences
    • Maggie:
    • Mike: it is still possible for them to participate in this spaces
    • Heather: digital security for allies!
  • Dorothea: Thanks for your work :) This is regarding public documentation of actions by the moderators team, which you seem to have decided against.Provided that:
    • any offending emails are public/visible to all and
    • the moderators can take action even without someone making a report
      • I can't understand why is it not good to have a list which it has
        • action of the moderators and
        • listing the emails that triggered it.
        • (Not the name of person making a report 0 if there was a report).A public list of persons e.g. blocked is also the procedure that the Data Working Group follows. Such a list would offer transparency to the community and to any people belonging to groups that might not feel safe, knowing what exactly is being done.
    • Steve: DWG has list of public blocks; havent heard of a public block
    • Imagico: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/
    • Dorothea: but the embarrassment should be due to the content of the emails, not due to the moderators action

To do list:

  1. read and add your comments https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Etiquette/Process_for_Moderation
  • Public discussion
  • heather to schedule Asia timezone
  1. how to diversify the make up of moderation team?
  2. define the moderator team call for participation
Select a repo