---
title: Server Meeting, Sept/Oct 2022
tags: meeting, agenda
description: Meeting topics and notes
---

# 24 Sept 2022 @ 1300 UTC - Server Meeting Discussion Topics

## Sept/Oct 2022

### 24 Sept 2022 @ 1300 UTC

[Audio Recording](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qMQia10M86r3tZD8iWDt2d6RZ5WzbzNl/view?usp=sharing)
>:memo: **ALL of these approved implementations will take place over the next 7 days**

> There is a limit to the number of reaction roles available with the current bot (MEE6)

#### 1. Making the vPA, PA, Challenge team *working group* roles a single role such as **Catalyst WG**
- `Reasoning:`
- currently I believe there is confusion between the PA, vPA and Challenge Team roles. These roles are dual prupose and that leads to confusion and false assumptions that certain members are willing to be part of a working group.
- `Side affects:`
- Phil - effective communication of role changes
- `Comments:`
- CDang prefers to create single Catalyst WG
- Dan agrees, concerned with roles disappearing, no roles are leaving
- Q no issues
- [x] Approve
- [ ] Disapprove

#### 2. Changed Operations WG role to Server WG role
> This would be determined after deciding on a Catalyst WG role.
- `Reasoning:`
- A more relative title for the role (???)
- `Side affects:`
- Users will need to deselect the role
- If role disappears, no deselect
- `Comments:`
- Make a symbolic role for those interested in server operations
- Change to server operations
- one objection - Quasar
- [x] Approve - as in comments
- [ ] Disapprove

#### 3. Create a Dework Admin and Dework moderator (manager) roles
- `Reasoning:` Distribute the overhead between other members and provides the community with POC (points of contact) for Dework issues.
- `Side affects:`
- Overhead
- How do we onboard new individuals
-
- `Comments:`
- Dan - Bounty (Dework) manager (assigned role) by others. Require survey questions answered. SMEs should onbaord new persons.
- Setup on Dework training on the server
- Individuals should be able to create polls
- `Results` - get with Dan about survey onboarding
- [ ] Approve
- **HOLD**

#### 4. Consolidating or removing channels with little to no usage
> This is a fine balance between too much organization and too little organization.
- `Reasoning:`
- some users state that many issues/improvments encompass more than one role
- users complaing of excessive channels making navigation difficult
- `Side affects:`
- requires archiving old posts which may just be as easy as copy/pasting posts into a thread in a new **archive** channel placed in, possibly, the **stay up to date** category. Here a thread is created for each archived channel reflecting the thread title reflecting the old channel's title -- *needs testing*
- conversation organization becomes limited as we remove channels
- `Comments:`
- while this is true, many of these tasks can be broken down and assigned to the various working groups.
- **DELETE** - open discussion -> shared medium
- **DELETE** - all voice chat channels
- **RELOCATE** - pa/vpa guides to a **Catalyst Guides** announcement channel in Stay-Up-To-Date
- Create **ARCHIVE Category**, drag all archived channels there.
- [x] Approve

#### 5. Implementing the Forums feature into the server
- `Reasoning:`
- Can provide a location for more focused discussions
- Allows multiple conversations in one forum channel versus creating multiple channels for these topics.
- `Side affects:`
- Potential for abuse
- More to moderate (although auto-moderator is active)
- `Comments:`
- Create a Catalyst WG forum - role permissioned
- Create a General Forum - all
- Create a Server Discussion Forum - all
- Monitor future and future forums
- [x] Approve

#### 6. Adding dRep related category or channels for discussion and process improvement
- `Reasoning:`
- This is a soon-to-be new role presented to the community and this being Catalyst United one would come to assume that this shouold also be part of the server and community discussion.
- `Side affects:`
- Relatively unknown role
- Increases server maintenance and overhead
- Potentially requires new role creation (and should this be a self-assigned reaction role or one that is truly verified?)
- this will increase overhead but maybe and API or a bot would be able to perform this verification.
- `Comments:`
- **Postpone**, let discussion take place in Forum
- [ ] Approve
- [x] Disaspprove

#### 7. Create a Dework team to coordinate processes and standardization within the server to include channel layout and required messaging parameters.
- `Reasoning:`
- Standardizing the category layout of Dework channels will help the community navigate the server and platform
- Removes conflicts between the various Dework spaces and working groups
- Incorporating a standard backlog can encourage persons to post taks freely with the team communicating with the broader Catalyst United server and determining which improvements to bring forward
- Create a communication layer between those using Dework and those on the sidelines, aids in Transaprency
- Reduces overhead of the current admins and working group managers
- `Side affects:`
- Will require archiving or moving a significant number of Community Suggestions within the various spaces assuming community suggestions is turned off.
- `Comments:`
- Covered in #3
- [ ] Approve
- [x] Removed

#### 8. Deteremine Admin Expectations for Catalyst United and onboarding requirements (if any)
> This role requires Nadia Hopkins to assign it. No current Admins may assign another persons the Admin role.
- `Reasoning:`
- The server is currently lacking active admins.
- Reduce the overhead of those who are currently in the role.
- `Side affects:`
- No incentive mechanism (aside from god complex...mostly kidding)
- Onboarding the wrong persons may be detrimental to the server, community and liveliness of the server
- Qualifications and expereience may vary
- `Comments:`
- Dan - onboard - Admins may not be good moderators
- qualified by shadowing (documented) current Admin over a period of time
- Ratio - Admins should be moderators first
- Dang - trial period for the moderator
- month or more
- Phil - increase the body of moderators then determine Admins
- [x] Approve

#### 9. Determine Moderator Expectations for Catalyst United and onboarding requirements
> Admins may assign this role
- `Reasoning:`
- Provide the community with more POCs for feedback, general questions, and engagement.
- Can help encourage community participation in the varying working groups or project teams
- Can reduce current overhead of both current admins and mods
- `Side affects:`
- No incentive mechanism (aside from god complex...mostly kidding)
- Onboarding the wrong persons may be detrimental to the server, community and liveliness of the server
- Qualifications and expereience may vary
- More brains = (hopefully) more focused direction, improvments, etc.
- `Comments:`
- Phil - moderator should just hang out and assit when needed.
- Ratio - open call for moderators
- current Admins/Mods monitor new members
- Q - should we announce during Circle onboarding, etc. see #1 below.
- Repsond to internal chat conversation and interact
- Removal of roles from non-active or minimally active moderators
- DM to announce removal of role
- Q - 3 epochs
- Ratio - 1 epoch
- Dan - 2 eppochs
- 2 epochs avg. <-- **THIS**
- [x] Approve

#### Other Issues, Discussion Topics

1. Coordination between servers with Circle onboarding and bounty boards - **Q**
- how does the cross-server information distribution happen.

No further comments from Q, Dan, Dang, Ratio