david-hernandez/gist:d1c6241d7af84b2102976027d18c39c3

## gistfile1.txt
In order to make it easier to record the transcript, post all comments in the main chat instead of using threads.

[10:05]
As always, if you don't feel comfortable commenting publicly you can privately message me or any of the other meeting organizers, or any member of the community working group.

[10:06]
With all these meetings, and all slack interactions, be mindful that the code of conduct applies.

[10:06]
I'll start by asking if anyone has any questions? I know there has been some confusion around this process and governance in general. I'm happy to try and clear that up as best I can.

[10:07]
I'll copy and paste some of my comments from earlier today.

[10:08]
Basically, after the governance survey was conducted a group of us were asked to review the results and see if there was anything to learn from it and report on it. While doing so, we felt that the "governance stuff" hadn't been going anywhere over the summer and were concerned that it will stagnant if we didn't begin doing something. So we took it upon ourselves to hold these meetings with the aim of getting people interested, communicating, and connected with each other. In the hope something would develop from it.

As these meetings go one, we are compiling take aways, all the thoughts and feedback we get from anyone, and report on it. We also aim to create some recommendations that we are working on submitting back to Dries and the DA

So I'm only asking people to share what they want, be it concerns or ideas, or make it know they are willing to even volunteer to help move things along.

We are not, I don't think, yet at the point where we are trying to actually solve the governs problems. We still need to see what we know and figure out how to proceed.

[10:09]
So open floor to anyone that wants to share or has questions.

nerdstein [10:09 PM]
I was curious to hear ideas on tools or processes we can use to continue to evolve our community governance ongoing. I noted before that I didn’t think this was “a one time thing”

davidhernandez [10:10 PM]
Yeah, ideas about how an iterative process for governance can work. Has anyone seen that implemented well in other organizations?

nerdstein [10:12 PM]
At CA, we leverage Agile with retrospectives and such. I wonder if such a concept could scale to a full community.

davidhernandez [10:14 PM]
Something that you purposefully do at the end of a project I assume?

[10:14]
I'm kind of interested in how we can have a process that can be triggered externally.

nerdstein [10:15 PM]
Both projects and sprints to make iterative changes during a project

[10:15]
What do you mean by “triggered externally”?

davidhernandez [10:17 PM]
It is one thing for the people internal to the system to choose to retrospect, but what if they think status quo is fine but someone(s) external to that structure see a problem?

nerdstein [10:19 PM]
That mirrors my commentary of scaling to the community. It might be hard to get wide scale participation within a retrospective (which is largely collaborative, brainstorming, participatory, etc)

[10:20]
And, doing it globally may warrant several meetings

davidhernandez
[10:20 PM]
im not referring to participating in the retrospective but what triggers it.

nerdstein [10:21 PM]
Well, generally it’s time based and happens periodically

[10:21]
Example: every six months

davidhernandez [10:21 PM]
is there a way to recognize that a specific policy needs re-evaluating for example, without the people in the governance structure recognizing that need themselves.

[10:21]
time based is also one ive been thinking about.

[10:22]
the one thing i like about time based is that it creates an understanding that things arent set in stone.

nerdstein [10:22 PM]
I think the retro format is ideal for bringing up things like this.

[10:23]
One way to scale might be having some sort of an ongoing backlog

[10:23]
And the retro is prioritizing and discussing

davidhernandez [10:24 PM]
a concern i might have there is lag

[10:24]
some issues might warrant an immediate evaluation of a policy.

nerdstein [10:26 PM]
Are there any examples you have in mind? Certainly  the CWG seems to already address some of the obvious examples that came to mind

davidhernandez
[10:27 PM]
It could potentially be any policy.

[10:28]
I guess the easiest thing to brainstorm is the code of conduct. What if, for example, X number of complaints about how the coc is applied automatically trigger a review of the policy?

[10:28]
instead of waiting for the next 6month review period

nerdstein [10:28 PM]
That seems reasonable. Also, it doesn’t need to be six months. Could be bi weekly

[10:29]
A shorter period would turn things around faster and probably not have things pile up like 6 months

mdrummond [10:29 PM]
On a board I used to serve on we had an annual retreat where we took a few days to go over the past year and plan the next year as well as long-term plans. We often pulled in a consultant to help with that.

davidhernandez
[10:30 PM]
true, but we probably dont want policy changes happening that often.

[10:30]
yeah review everything every six months is what i was initially thinking about the time based thing

mdrummond [10:31 PM]
We didn't call it anything fancy like a sprint retrospective, but similar spirit. I'd say that's a pretty common feature of governance structures.

nerdstein [10:31 PM]
@mdrummond I like the idea of a consultant too

davidhernandez
[10:32 PM]
people need to review the policy and the cases that it has applied to in the last time frame and see if any problems are noticeable.

mdrummond [10:32 PM]
Yes. I think bringing in experts is critical for the success of establishing governance and iterating moving forward.

nerdstein [10:33 PM]
Meetings could be scheduled as needed on top of periodic, scheduled ones

mdrummond [10:34 PM]
We're not super special and unique. There are other orgs with governance issues, including open source projects. In particular bringing in somebody with expertise on structuring governance in a way that supports inclusivity and diversity is key.

[10:35]
Whether the DA pays for that (would be good) or we fundraiser for it, want to see that as a part of this effort.

nerdstein [10:35 PM]
I think that’s the spirit of the question - what are other orgs doing for evolving governance?

davidhernandez
[10:35 PM]
i would like very much for us to look beyond just other open source projects.

mdrummond [10:35 PM]
Right we don't have to figure that out ourselves. There are consultants who have worked with multiple organizations and have done the research.

nerdstein [10:36 PM]
I also am curious who would be considered for this consulting

davidhernandez [10:36 PM]
a lot of what we face are general volunteer org concerns and there are lots of them outside of tech

mdrummond [10:36 PM]
I think having that person brought in early while values statements are being drafted is also useful.

davidhernandez [10:37 PM]
there are some organizations that exist that are specifically centered around non profit management and consulting.

nerdstein [10:37 PM]
@mdrummond do you know how we could identify and/or recruit potential people?

mdrummond [10:37 PM]
Ashe Dryden is one of the people that most comes to mind. Already familiar with Drupal too.

[10:38]
Drupal community I mean.

nerdstein [10:38 PM]
@davidhernandez the Apache foundation and Linux foundation comes to mind (these are OS and not broader non profit)

dsquaredb [10:39 PM]
As with other things, there will be some who resent/want to resist input from an outsider/expert while it would lend legitimacy to the process for others

nerdstein [10:39 PM]
@mdrummond we should consider starting a list and opening up to others

[10:40]
@dsquaredb do you feel this would be mitigated if there was community members working with the expert? And, hopefully in an open manner

dsquaredb [10:41 PM]
I think working with community members is essential

[10:42]
And totally agree we should look beyond open source and/or developer-centric organizations

[10:43]
We are basically a volunteer organization with such loose leadership no one knows whose in charge

[10:43]
*who is

nerdstein [10:44 PM]
It might be worth brainstorming how we identify something beyond that is still relevant to our community

davidhernandez
[10:45 PM]
my opinion is the DA is going to be best equipped to find the right consultant. especially since they'll have to pay for it. that recruitment though could be with the help of some community members.

[10:45]
and i would hope a consultant with experience in this area would know how to identify other orgs and models that might match our needs.

nerdstein [10:46 PM]
Would that be met with any concern of bias? I agree they have the resources to help move it forward

davidhernandez [10:46 PM]
what would be the bias?

dsquaredb [10:46 PM]
I heard that bias some against Whitney

davidhernandez [10:47 PM]
i was thinking more a firm as appose to individual.

nerdstein [10:47 PM]
Not opening the selection process up to the community

[10:47]
Oh, that could work.

dsquaredb [10:48 PM]
Bias not against any individual - just bias that by being choice of DA and/or Dries that there is a "directed" outcome.

nerdstein [10:48 PM]
Yes ^

davidhernandez
[10:49 PM]
the problem or bias would come later, if no one in the community has the opportunity to engage with a consultant and make sure the needs of the community are heard and that consultant is only talking to the DA.

nerdstein [10:50 PM]
I think the selection itself is certainly open to bias. That’s why things like nepotism and favoritism exist.

davidhernandez
[10:50 PM]
i largely agree with the previous comments, and wasnt making a counter point.

[10:51]
that also wasnt in response to your comment. man i love async communications.

[10:52]
To any lurkers who might want to share thoughts. You don't need to comment on policy specifics. We're just in those weeds at the moment. If you have other questions or topics, do post. (edited)

nerdstein [10:53 PM]
I also have been enjoying these Slack meetings. I wonder if people appreciate this format. It might be useful moving forward

nicklewisatx [10:54 PM]
I would think a major focus of this type of consultant would be helping manage the perception of the rollout, so the bias question may be something they'll help us solve. I think the more important point is the value of having a resource who's done this sort of thing before with large complex organizations.

davidhernandez [10:54 PM]
Multiple formats would be good. Definite plus and minuses. I do like the ability for the conversations to continue on throughout the day with different people. The channel never gets shut off.

dsquaredb [10:55 PM]
I agree with others who have expressed concern that we go through this exercise for nothing - probably because I had this happen in a pre-Drupal career

davidhernandez [10:55 PM]
Yes, I think that would be immensely helpful. Having someone with experience that can not just help with the process but also the communications which have not been handled well in the past.

dsquaredb [10:56 PM]
Maybe forming a core group of DA/community/consultant with formal oversight of talks would allay some fears about wasting time talking

davidhernandez [10:57 PM]
@dsquaredb We've talked a lot about that the past couple days. That is why I try to limit the effort to these discussions, since that is the only thing we can guarantee will have some result. Each step afterwards we will need to define criteria and so forth before asking people to get involved.

nerdstein [10:57 PM]
@dsquaredb that may be a next step to consider and something specific we could recommend from these meetings.

dsquaredb [10:58 PM]
Yes, I've been lurking a lot. :). And do think making that a recommendation would be good.
	In order to make it easier to record the transcript, post all comments in the main chat instead of using threads.

	[10:05]
	As always, if you don't feel comfortable commenting publicly you can privately message me or any of the other meeting organizers, or any member of the community working group.

	[10:06]
	With all these meetings, and all slack interactions, be mindful that the code of conduct applies.

	[10:06]
	I'll start by asking if anyone has any questions? I know there has been some confusion around this process and governance in general. I'm happy to try and clear that up as best I can.

	[10:07]
	I'll copy and paste some of my comments from earlier today.

	[10:08]
	Basically, after the governance survey was conducted a group of us were asked to review the results and see if there was anything to learn from it and report on it. While doing so, we felt that the "governance stuff" hadn't been going anywhere over the summer and were concerned that it will stagnant if we didn't begin doing something. So we took it upon ourselves to hold these meetings with the aim of getting people interested, communicating, and connected with each other. In the hope something would develop from it.

	As these meetings go one, we are compiling take aways, all the thoughts and feedback we get from anyone, and report on it. We also aim to create some recommendations that we are working on submitting back to Dries and the DA

	So I'm only asking people to share what they want, be it concerns or ideas, or make it know they are willing to even volunteer to help move things along.

	We are not, I don't think, yet at the point where we are trying to actually solve the governs problems. We still need to see what we know and figure out how to proceed.

	[10:09]
	So open floor to anyone that wants to share or has questions.

	nerdstein [10:09 PM]
	I was curious to hear ideas on tools or processes we can use to continue to evolve our community governance ongoing. I noted before that I didn’t think this was “a one time thing”

	davidhernandez [10:10 PM]
	Yeah, ideas about how an iterative process for governance can work. Has anyone seen that implemented well in other organizations?

	nerdstein [10:12 PM]
	At CA, we leverage Agile with retrospectives and such. I wonder if such a concept could scale to a full community.

	davidhernandez [10:14 PM]
	Something that you purposefully do at the end of a project I assume?

	[10:14]
	I'm kind of interested in how we can have a process that can be triggered externally.

	nerdstein [10:15 PM]
	Both projects and sprints to make iterative changes during a project

	[10:15]
	What do you mean by “triggered externally”?

	davidhernandez [10:17 PM]
	It is one thing for the people internal to the system to choose to retrospect, but what if they think status quo is fine but someone(s) external to that structure see a problem?

	nerdstein [10:19 PM]
	That mirrors my commentary of scaling to the community. It might be hard to get wide scale participation within a retrospective (which is largely collaborative, brainstorming, participatory, etc)

	[10:20]
	And, doing it globally may warrant several meetings

	davidhernandez
	[10:20 PM]
	im not referring to participating in the retrospective but what triggers it.

	nerdstein [10:21 PM]
	Well, generally it’s time based and happens periodically

	[10:21]
	Example: every six months

	davidhernandez [10:21 PM]
	is there a way to recognize that a specific policy needs re-evaluating for example, without the people in the governance structure recognizing that need themselves.

	[10:21]
	time based is also one ive been thinking about.

	[10:22]
	the one thing i like about time based is that it creates an understanding that things arent set in stone.

	nerdstein [10:22 PM]
	I think the retro format is ideal for bringing up things like this.

	[10:23]
	One way to scale might be having some sort of an ongoing backlog

	[10:23]
	And the retro is prioritizing and discussing

	davidhernandez [10:24 PM]
	a concern i might have there is lag

	[10:24]
	some issues might warrant an immediate evaluation of a policy.

	nerdstein [10:26 PM]
	Are there any examples you have in mind? Certainly the CWG seems to already address some of the obvious examples that came to mind

	davidhernandez
	[10:27 PM]
	It could potentially be any policy.

	[10:28]
	I guess the easiest thing to brainstorm is the code of conduct. What if, for example, X number of complaints about how the coc is applied automatically trigger a review of the policy?

	[10:28]
	instead of waiting for the next 6month review period

	nerdstein [10:28 PM]
	That seems reasonable. Also, it doesn’t need to be six months. Could be bi weekly

	[10:29]
	A shorter period would turn things around faster and probably not have things pile up like 6 months

	mdrummond [10:29 PM]
	On a board I used to serve on we had an annual retreat where we took a few days to go over the past year and plan the next year as well as long-term plans. We often pulled in a consultant to help with that.

	davidhernandez
	[10:30 PM]
	true, but we probably dont want policy changes happening that often.

	[10:30]
	yeah review everything every six months is what i was initially thinking about the time based thing

	mdrummond [10:31 PM]
	We didn't call it anything fancy like a sprint retrospective, but similar spirit. I'd say that's a pretty common feature of governance structures.

	nerdstein [10:31 PM]
	@mdrummond I like the idea of a consultant too

	davidhernandez
	[10:32 PM]
	people need to review the policy and the cases that it has applied to in the last time frame and see if any problems are noticeable.

	mdrummond [10:32 PM]
	Yes. I think bringing in experts is critical for the success of establishing governance and iterating moving forward.

	nerdstein [10:33 PM]
	Meetings could be scheduled as needed on top of periodic, scheduled ones

	mdrummond [10:34 PM]
	We're not super special and unique. There are other orgs with governance issues, including open source projects. In particular bringing in somebody with expertise on structuring governance in a way that supports inclusivity and diversity is key.

	[10:35]
	Whether the DA pays for that (would be good) or we fundraiser for it, want to see that as a part of this effort.

	nerdstein [10:35 PM]
	I think that’s the spirit of the question - what are other orgs doing for evolving governance?

	davidhernandez
	[10:35 PM]
	i would like very much for us to look beyond just other open source projects.

	mdrummond [10:35 PM]
	Right we don't have to figure that out ourselves. There are consultants who have worked with multiple organizations and have done the research.

	nerdstein [10:36 PM]
	I also am curious who would be considered for this consulting

	davidhernandez [10:36 PM]
	a lot of what we face are general volunteer org concerns and there are lots of them outside of tech

	mdrummond [10:36 PM]
	I think having that person brought in early while values statements are being drafted is also useful.

	davidhernandez [10:37 PM]
	there are some organizations that exist that are specifically centered around non profit management and consulting.

	nerdstein [10:37 PM]
	@mdrummond do you know how we could identify and/or recruit potential people?

	mdrummond [10:37 PM]
	Ashe Dryden is one of the people that most comes to mind. Already familiar with Drupal too.

	[10:38]
	Drupal community I mean.

	nerdstein [10:38 PM]
	@davidhernandez the Apache foundation and Linux foundation comes to mind (these are OS and not broader non profit)

	dsquaredb [10:39 PM]
	As with other things, there will be some who resent/want to resist input from an outsider/expert while it would lend legitimacy to the process for others

	nerdstein [10:39 PM]
	@mdrummond we should consider starting a list and opening up to others

	[10:40]
	@dsquaredb do you feel this would be mitigated if there was community members working with the expert? And, hopefully in an open manner

	dsquaredb [10:41 PM]
	I think working with community members is essential

	[10:42]
	And totally agree we should look beyond open source and/or developer-centric organizations

	[10:43]
	We are basically a volunteer organization with such loose leadership no one knows whose in charge

	[10:43]
	*who is

	nerdstein [10:44 PM]
	It might be worth brainstorming how we identify something beyond that is still relevant to our community

	davidhernandez
	[10:45 PM]
	my opinion is the DA is going to be best equipped to find the right consultant. especially since they'll have to pay for it. that recruitment though could be with the help of some community members.

	[10:45]
	and i would hope a consultant with experience in this area would know how to identify other orgs and models that might match our needs.

	nerdstein [10:46 PM]
	Would that be met with any concern of bias? I agree they have the resources to help move it forward

	davidhernandez [10:46 PM]
	what would be the bias?

	dsquaredb [10:46 PM]
	I heard that bias some against Whitney

	davidhernandez [10:47 PM]
	i was thinking more a firm as appose to individual.

	nerdstein [10:47 PM]
	Not opening the selection process up to the community

	[10:47]
	Oh, that could work.

	dsquaredb [10:48 PM]
	Bias not against any individual - just bias that by being choice of DA and/or Dries that there is a "directed" outcome.

	nerdstein [10:48 PM]
	Yes ^

	davidhernandez
	[10:49 PM]
	the problem or bias would come later, if no one in the community has the opportunity to engage with a consultant and make sure the needs of the community are heard and that consultant is only talking to the DA.

	nerdstein [10:50 PM]
	I think the selection itself is certainly open to bias. That’s why things like nepotism and favoritism exist.

	davidhernandez
	[10:50 PM]
	i largely agree with the previous comments, and wasnt making a counter point.

	[10:51]
	that also wasnt in response to your comment. man i love async communications.

	[10:52]
	To any lurkers who might want to share thoughts. You don't need to comment on policy specifics. We're just in those weeds at the moment. If you have other questions or topics, do post. (edited)

	nerdstein [10:53 PM]
	I also have been enjoying these Slack meetings. I wonder if people appreciate this format. It might be useful moving forward

	nicklewisatx [10:54 PM]
	I would think a major focus of this type of consultant would be helping manage the perception of the rollout, so the bias question may be something they'll help us solve. I think the more important point is the value of having a resource who's done this sort of thing before with large complex organizations.

	davidhernandez [10:54 PM]
	Multiple formats would be good. Definite plus and minuses. I do like the ability for the conversations to continue on throughout the day with different people. The channel never gets shut off.

	dsquaredb [10:55 PM]
	I agree with others who have expressed concern that we go through this exercise for nothing - probably because I had this happen in a pre-Drupal career

	davidhernandez [10:55 PM]
	Yes, I think that would be immensely helpful. Having someone with experience that can not just help with the process but also the communications which have not been handled well in the past.

	dsquaredb [10:56 PM]
	Maybe forming a core group of DA/community/consultant with formal oversight of talks would allay some fears about wasting time talking

	davidhernandez [10:57 PM]
	@dsquaredb We've talked a lot about that the past couple days. That is why I try to limit the effort to these discussions, since that is the only thing we can guarantee will have some result. Each step afterwards we will need to define criteria and so forth before asking people to get involved.

	nerdstein [10:57 PM]
	@dsquaredb that may be a next step to consider and something specific we could recommend from these meetings.

	dsquaredb [10:58 PM]
	Yes, I've been lurking a lot. :). And do think making that a recommendation would be good.