Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Working Groups/Community Health/Minutes/2019-03-18

25 March

Feedback about scoping documents:

No feedback had been received on the document that was submitted, so it will be used as a final submission for conversations at the Wikimedia Summit.

Wikimedia Summit 2019

Schedule:

A highlight of Working Group activities to happen on Friday was provided including;

• Reconnecting, speeches, and ice breaker activities.
• Bring up to speed the organised affiliate members and other participants who are not invested and aware of the Movement Strategy Process.
• Mapping out the inter-dependencies and ensure synchronisation across Working Groups.
• Some Working Group members will also be part of the Affiliate Selected Board Seats (ASBS) session.
• Orientation and discussion of the plan for Saturday.
• Thematic discussions, aimed at better engagement and active participation of the community members.

Individuals are advised to notify the Working Group members about other parallel responsibilities that they might have to fulfill.

Presentation

• A lightning talk is recommended for Day 1, to allow for interaction. Working Groups have a dedicated corner and the materials can be made available for conversations to take place.
• Instead of a group presentation, an elevator pitch or a summary that indicates key aspects of the work of the Community Health Working Group with a condensed and concise overview of the work would be useful.
• Materials that can help in building conversations will be provided by the Core Team.

It was mentioned that instead of a presentation, Community Health Working Group will have a short summary representing their work.

Elevator pitch: An elevator pitch for Community Health should be prepared to capture attention and interest.

Know where other groups intersect with Community Health

Community Health members discussed overlaps and feedback that needs to be provided to the Scoping Documents of the other Working Groups as an outline of key items and (feedback in italics);

• Roles and Responsibilities Scoping Document:
  • Responsibility of the Foundation
  • Communication practices
  • Recommendations for more research
• Resource Allocation:
  • Did not find Knowledge as a resource
  • Who will be the recipients of resources?
• Partnerships:
  • Addressing infrastructural challenges for the Strategic Direction
  • Barriers/research
  • Burnout of community members.
• Product & Technology
  • Did not mention AI, user security
  • Technical capacities in relation to ethical pitfalls - can technology be used in a way that is a risk for the users?

We (Community Health) should bring up AI with tech. This was just published looking at AI to help address “bullying” in schools in Japan

• One of the important ideas of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is to build tools that can prevent harassment, our tech does not involve any AI and is not as effective as it should be.
  • Along with AI, humans also need to be included in this conversation going forward.
• Our current defense against misuse of tech is not competent and we need to update those systems.

• Diversity
  • Creation of content where male is the norm
  • Questions of the Diversity Working Group align with us.
  • There is a mention of Code of Conduct which is exciting.
  • Orthography, scripts and question 8 for Diversity were also interesting and exciting.

The point of age is important. Ireland is making editing Wikipedia mandatory, we have not discussed age in our Working Group. Younger users perspective regarding community health. This can be discussed during the summit or after the summit.

• Advocacy
  • Liked that they acknowledge that there is no single unifying definition of Advocacy. What we are working can be used across online communities.
  • Theory of change methodology was interesting and the framing of the necessary conditions.
  • Cross utilisation of Wikimedia projects.
  • Adverse or unaware environments as enabling environments.
• Capacity Building: Lots of overlap.
  • Burnout.
  • Decentralisation of Capacity Building
  • Mapping of the existing resources.
  • Communication as a capacity, high touch effort requiring a significant amount of time and resources.

Capacity Building should be thinking about the decentralised and centralised approaches of building capacity.

• Revenue Streams: Not a lot of overlap

Taking notes and Communicating roles

To avoid miscommunication and bring clarity to the points that are being discussed, individual members are encouraged to specify the role or position that they represent when taking part in the conversations. Please share notes with the other members of Working Groups about conversations that happen outside of the official note taking area.

Materials to prepare and have printed at the Summit:

Cluster documents are not yet finalised and might lead to more questions than helping conversations, people who are not part of the Movement Strategy might be overwhelmed with all the information, contact information and meta pages can be shared.

18 March

Discussion focused on the monthly Steering Group meeting update, Wikimedia Summit Preparations and the Scoping feedback

1. Summary of the Steering Committee meeting

Community Health members (Pavan, Philip) took part in the Steering Group meeting for all Working Group coordinators where next steps after scoping were shared: the Working Groups will energise, synchronize with other groups other, review the published scoping documents, and prepare for the Wikimedia Summit.

The Core Team offered to publish all WG calls’ summaries on Meta, and take this task off of the Working Group’s plate. Summaries will be created and share with the WG up to 48 hours after the call. If the CT does not hear any request for correction, deletion or any other kind of veto after 24 hours, the Core Team will publish the summaries.

2. WMSummit 2019 (schedule, plans and preparation)

Among activities that can be done before the Wikimedia Summit, Community Health Working Group is invited to determine linkages, overlaps, and liaisons, with other Working Groups and identify materials, glossaries, or any reading materials they would like to share with the  participants at the Wikimedia Summit.

• Working Group members who have been selected by the group Working Group to represent the group at the summit are asked to attend all WG and plenary sessions in that role. Members who are representing their affiliates are encouraged to find a balance on which sessions to attend, but the schedule of the Summit will mostly avoid conflicting sessions anyway.
• The Group has been encouraged to keep the two non-present members informed via email about important issues that come up at the summit.
• There might be a need for Working Group members who are attending Summit to take decisions like inviting someone into Working group or giving away key questions from scoping documents based if decided to be in the scope of other WGs. The Core Team asked the group to request those who will not attend to give the group a mandate to take decisions at the event. (Action item for Pavan, done already)
• WGs are asked to ensure that all important questions and results of their sessions are documented on sticky notes, flipcharts, or online. Content on paper will be digitised by support staff, harvesting at the plenary sessions will be organised by the design and facilitation team.
• After the Summit, feedback from the summit participants and from the community conversations will be incorporated by the WGs into the final versions of the scoping documents.
  • Community conversations will already start this week, and will include channels like meta, different language wikis, a survey (also for anonymous feedback), facebook or telegram groups.
  • The Core Team will work with the CH group to see if it would make sense to design – aside from the general survey with 3 questions per WG – an additional survey focused only on community health. The results can then feed into the WG’s analysis.  

3. Feedback gathered about our scoping document (if any)

A Wikimedia Summit India session was held on 16-17 March to have people understand and provide feedback to the scoping documents, these were the responses;

• The scoping terminology seemed hard for small communities to understand.
• Suggestions might not be the real solutions to challenges, since they are answered by local communities.
• The programmatic changes might happen before the structural changes.

These responses were expected from the community, and considered as helpful, which is the reason for having community liaisons to organise and get community feedback.

11 March

The Working group discussed the final output for scoping documents

Recap from Wednesday and the previous meeting

The informal meeting on Wednesday 6 March was aimed at compiling the 3 scoping documents into one document that will be published and shared for community conversations and the Wikimedia Summit.. Other content or extra questions not included in the scoping document will be added to the questions for the community survey that will also be used as part of the community conversations.

• Sandra and Jackie worked on the final merged scoping document that was submitted to the Core Team.
• The Core Team provided feedback on community questions, which the Working Group can optionally consider, by Tuesday end of day, if they need to update their documents.

Final output of scoping document(s)

The Core Team provided their reflections to the submitted scoping documents, which the group might include by Tuesday 12 March. These reflections are also meant to act as an orientation to what will come out of (feedback from) community conversations.

Some of the Working group members provided feedback and comments, while others still felt frustrated due to the changing demands of the process, which could have negative consequences on the Working Groups.

• The Core Team acknowledged that the need for adjustments was communicated very late, and that more clarity needs to be provided on the big picture and the purpose of the community questions.
• A draft document with some of the questions for the general community survey was drafted and not yet updated.

4 March

Main focus was to determine when scoping would be finalised

The discussion was a follow up to the previous week’s sub meetings about finalising the three clusters for scoping - Group culture, Structure/ Decision making, and Participation, Resources and Processes - these clusters had been reduced from five to three), most of the activities during this meeting were done asynchronously on the scoping document.

The scoping sections for each of the three clusters were reviewed, but some of the members never felt the document was ready to publish.

• Chinmayi offered to work with Jackie on the additional questions to engage community members as a ‘focus group’ that will be put up on meta in case they are not included in the final scoping document.
• If the Community Health Working Group is working towards one consolidated scoping document, it should not appear to have missed out on the voices of communities but must acknowledge the feedback and voices of the marginalised  communities.
• The intended audience needs to be specified, for the 3 community questions, whether new or more questions should be prepared for the affiliates attending the Wikimedia Summit.