# GOSH Community Council *PUBLIC* meeting notes Wednesdays 22:00-23:30 UTC / 17:00-18:30 EST Policy Index link: https://pad.publiclab.org/p/GOSH-policy-index GOSH Community Calls notes: https://pad.publiclab.org/p/GOSHcommunitycalls ## GOSH!!! Community Council Meeting 2022-02-23 for 90 minutes Present: * Bri (facilitator) * lizbarry (EB) * Pierre (PP) * Maria (MF) * Laura (LO) * Pen (HPY) * Andy (AQ) ### Check-in warm up activity: *Time: 0:00 - 0:10* ### Health Check: updates and questions only, no discussion. Let's recap all news shared since last meeting (keep it 1-2 minutes): *Time: 0:10 - 0:25* * JS's recent post on the forum said @valerian has established a non-profit in Tanzania which might, similar to GOSH Inc. and OSEG, be another legal entity the community could connect to. * AQ: The GOSH Name can be confusing? What is the G? * “ G OSH is O pen S cience H ardware” recursive acronym by naikymen ## GOSH!!! Community Council Meeting 2022-02-16 for 90 minutes Present: - Bri (facilitator) - Pen-Yuan Hsing (HPY) - Laura Olalde (LO) - lizbarry (EB) - Andy (AQ) (Noteboy) - Maria (MF) - Pierre (PP) ### Check-in warm up activity: Favorite sport in the Olympics? *Time: 0:00 - 0:10* * JS: What my dad told me, which is any sport you can't play in the pub with a drink is not real -> So there's no sports in Olympics. * EB: Don't know, maybe ice skating? * LO: Not a fan of Olympics and not a good spectator of sports because I get bored! I prefer doing it myself. * HPY: I don't like competitive sports! I prefer cooperative board games and have a terrible poker face. * Maria: feels olympics has been added to too much. Norway has more olympics than murders * Pierre - Soccer * Bri - gymnastics ### Health Check: updates and questions only, no discussion. Let's recap all news shared since last meeting (keep it 1-2 minutes): *Time: 0:10 - 0:25* * Gathering WG: * Documents are over to Shannon/Jenny * New point of contact in place and very responsive * Website is being cooked up in prep for a soft opening and we can all test apply! Followed up by GOSH forum people then everyone else. * Connected with an artist and graphic designer connected with MF, they're getting cook'in * Thinkin' about stylised animal drawings or open source hardware * Regional Funding: * HPY: Still awaiting due diligence check, a couple applications are slow to respond to email * dinacon was slow too (shannons email went to spam, but we have it in now) * **TODO** we need two reviewers that don't have conflicts to help with next round * Collaborative Development: * Meeting w/ Open Hardware Makers on Friday at 9.00hrs UTC (To be confirmed) * Review board: 22 contacted (**No:** 1, **Yes:** 4, **No answer yet:** 17) * GOSH Forum: 01 project application, 05 people interested in WG * Problem is more reviewers than applications right now * Need to specify the roles and responsibilities of the review group * There are 3 people interested in applying with live questions * Pierre - how to assign num of applications per reviewer * if people should review both tracks? * Listening WG: * The plan is to * Establish a historical record of the election * Listen through as comprehensively as we can through various channels * Synthesise learnings from the listening to complete election autopsy * Make needed changes to election process * We had a couple of meetings and worked out a ***putative*** timeline here: https://md.opensourceecology.de/V7RY2xrnRHea_pKwqVQjEA?both# * It's pretty tight and we need to get moving. We need to do stuff THIS WEEK * For this week, let's come up with a list of key people to get in touch with * Community Manager Updates: * I added the GOSH whistleblower policy to the Council folder - don't need to do anything with it it just needs to be somewhere where we all have access * Next community call February 24th at 7pm UTC * From SD: every council member needs to fill out the following conflict of interest form, I will follow up with you all on it https://docs.google.com/document/d/14qhVMQrHfmM2NH2_Zgzj3_B0K60h0htE3YqU4PEz9lg/edit * Note from SD for collaborative development group: * I don't think these points are things reviewers should be doing: * 1) Follow-up on the deliverables of the applicants selected * 2) Overseeing the money transfers to selected projects. * Either this is something Jenny and I do (def in the case of the second one) or the lead on this program should be doing these things. * (hopefully we can do this in the meeting today) * JS- we were all voted in a council folks. How do we reach the folks who didn't vote. * Council member updates: * BRi * added gosh whistleblower to GOSH Drive * Council folks need to fill out conflict of interest form: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14qhVMQrHfmM2NH2_Zgzj3_B0K60h0htE3YqU4PEz9lg/edit * Next GOSH call is ______ * Maria to remove a couple things from the CDG post that were erroneous * *Possible* Open Source Ecology Germany hosting -> HPY: They're migrating their services to new hosting, might take a few weeks, but in the mean time they can give us accounts on this HedgeDoc instance. * Julian * Wrote letter to Shenny and Jannon. And that was the last we ever heard of him. !!!!! incinerated where he stood, bystanders recalled, in a surprising use of previously peaceable open source satellite hardware that was dedicated to conservation watch. Don't cross them * Julian is back! (was reconnecting because storm interruption) * Wrote the email and got comments. Largely positive. * Liz brought up the fact that we all are doing what a paid staff normally does. Liz says this can be valid criticism and important feedback to grant writers. * Maria says some things feel like work, and others dont. * Pen * Moe offered to host open source services for us * They are migrating their platform and can help us after. * They might be a legal entity for GOSH in Europe if we want * The first thing they could do for us, is make accounts for us on this HedgeDoc instance! -> Lots of +1s, OK HPY will contact Moe about it. ### Review Proposed Agenda *Time: 0:25 - 0:30* * Review election autopsy timeline and identify key people needed for listening process * Review items for next week (Pen) ### Agenda Item 1 - Review election autopsy timeline *Time: 0:30 - 0:55* * HPY: see timeline starting on row 93 of https://md.opensourceecology.de/V7RY2xrnRHea_pKwqVQjEA?both * The key people would be contacted to help with any or all of the following three things: * Giving 1:1 feedback * Act as liason to various GOSH-related networks (e.g. ReGOSH, AfricaOSH, etc.) or communications channels (e.g. Telegram or WhatsApp groups) * Willingness to be part of listening and/or election working group * Possible long form feedback seesion like example round-the-clock online event: https://safecast.org/safecast10/ * Bri created a cool sheet here to track key people: https://cryptpad.fr/sheet/#/2/sheet/edit/ng9zTTnblO5Pu6RJ5xZq2nEh/ * draft timeline from now through next election starts on line 93 here: https://md.opensourceecology.de/V7RY2xrnRHea_pKwqVQjEA?both * Julian brings up ethical concerns about talking to people * Liz comments that as an informal knowledge production process, we're going to be threading the needle between too generalized in a way that overasserts the interpreter's frames and too specific in a way that direct sentences are published in a way that is allows the identification of specific individuals. * About Key Individuals: * looking for most highly visible and also the quiet ones in our various community corners We'd like to hear your feedback about the election, and other people we might not otherwise hear from that you can introduce to us. And as a third point, there is a work. Liz (paraphrasing) We want to know from people in specific regions about who in their network might not have heard about these elections. Pen- once we reach out to people and some agree to provide feedback, we need questions ### Agenda Item 2 - Review agenda items for next week. * Maria- sort ideas for working stuff kanban style * Go through todo list (long health check) ### CLOSING ROUND: What are you taking with you as you depart? What do you need to say to leave this meeting with integrity? *Time: 1:25 - 1:30* * Laura - excited about listening approach * Andy- get us an extra reviewer or two for the * Pierre - maybe share a reviewer from CDG * Pen - thanks * Liz- appreciate things * Maria- nothing else to add, things were nice ## GOSH!!! Community Council Meeting 2022-02-09 for 90 minutes Present: * Bri (facilitator) * HPY * MF * PP * LO * lizbarry (EB) * AQ ### Check-in warm up activity: Favorite sport in the Olympics? * (skipped in lieu of general catch up chat!) **MIC CHECK - ARE WE USING ETHERPAD FOR THIS MEETING?** -> YES! ### Health Check: updates and questions only, no discussion. Let's recap all news shared since last meeting: Time 0:10 - 0:30 * Gathering WG: * LO: Good news! We're getting responses from the contact people, so things are looking better. I think the numbers are also looking OK in terms of budget. Getting to formal contract, under supervision by Jenny/Shannon. So, so far 26-29 October 2022 is on track! * Gonna get started on the website for this event! Using Wordpress right now. Will be accessible from GOSH forum. The website will be hosted on Moritz's server. * Next meeting is next week. * Progressing on translation of event guide to Spanish. * We're designing some communications/gadget-y things. * Still considering some diversity issues in upcoming registration form and planning registration fees. * Bri: Venue is gonna cost about 42K USD. * Regional Funding: * HPY: Shannon/Jenny's email about review procedure, and lessons for future funding rounds! * HPY: Future funds for more reviewers * 4 reviewers - 2 associated with Regosh so that left only 2 reviewers with no conflict of interest to go through the applications * Suggest we all read through Jenny's email * Use Jenny's email as a good point of reference for review process * Suggest to have more than 4 reviewers in case members need to recuse themselves * Suggestion to allow folks outside the GOSH community to review applications * EB: Acknowledge the effort put in by council members and perhaps it could be funded differently * JS: Sitting in a weird situation where funds were applied for by others (Jenny/Shannon). We are tasked with spending it but don't have authority. * JS: Feedback that there has been some tension in delivering someone else's aspirations * HPY: Doesn't consider this as complaint but as reflection. Not sure the best way to approach it. * JS: Very happy to be the person to bring this up. As long as everyone else is happy with that. * JS to draft something and share with council before sending. * Collaborative Development Program (could be agenda item): * JS: Something came up on the forum, pointed out that the total does not equal 110k. This has something to do with the breakdown between the tracks. We should rectify this! Flag this up with Shanny/Jennon. * MF: I think it was just a copy/paste error and we can fix this. We could go back to the numbers and plug the right ones back in. * JS: Yeah I'm happy to plug in the right numbers. * Note: could we have an option for those interested in reviewing to reach out via email/private message? * MF: At a crossroads between Global Gathering and this, might have to pick one. * We have constitution work, writing workshop, election autopsy, collaborative development funding, regional funding, global gathering working etc. Lots for 7 people! Two of those for one person might be too much. * PP: Related to the email I sent to the Open Hardware Makers team. They said they will check the collaborative dev program to see how we might collaborate. Maybe they can help especially with the first new project track. Will share updates as they come. * AQ: Is there a review group up yet? We definitely need more reviewers, probably gonna need 1-2 more for regional funding to get at least 3 without conflict of interest per application. * MF: There's one person who has shown interest. How do we better reach out to people? * AQ: Yeah I reached out to OSHWA people and it was hard to get people to commit. * JS: What if we be like some funding bodies and send someone a "thing" and directly ask them to do it? Might need to ask Shanny/Jannon whether they could also pitch in on some reviewing? * MF: Indeed it's hard for me to say no when people ask me directly sometimes. But would more unlikely to just "volunteer". * HPY: Take inventory and reach out to people on a one to one basis. Do we get applications first and then ask people, can you review these 5 applications?, as an example. * JS: I think it is feasible to ask reviewers to review ("can you review these 5 applications?") *after* we get applications. * Bri: Happy to reach out 1:1 to people, too! * HPY: another thing to add...near the end of the review process, in terms of providing feedback to applications, there is value in doing that. Do we provide one piece of general feedback or specific feedback for unsuccessful applications. It's something worth figuring out. * JS: We're sufficiently vague in the published processes that we have some flexibility. * E.g. if we say all reviewers will review all applications there are possible problems with that as we've seen. If we get 7 reviewers, we can get at least 3 to review each application, but this means with how things worked now, not all reviewers will see all applications anyway. So I think we can make it work where after applications come in, we can still choose to ask specific people to help review and come to a review meeting. * MF: Yeah agreed, and sometimes it's good to invite reviewers who are familiar with a specific application, who can competently say "this is good/doable" as opposed to the other reviewers. * JS: Seeing the applications, need to think about if one scored really high but it's not science specific, we need to have a good idea how we evaluate it. * Listening WG: (Bri, EB Pen, Laura) * We had a meeting this week, notes here: https://md.opensourceecology.de/V7RY2xrnRHea_pKwqVQjEA?both. We have two followup meetings scheduled to 1) create a 15 minute video overview of how the first ever election was set up and how it went including hopes, dreams, fails, technology, and demographics — the goal is to help everyone get their basic questions answered on their way to giving feedback to find wher the "squeaky wheels" are; 2) draft a timeline of the 2022 election to bring back for discussion. * In order to understand this better, we need to understand where these conversations are happening. We've been having these conversations on the forum and not everyone is on the forum. * There are 1:1 types of listening, or town hall, or listening at scale tools that Liz has introduced us to. * For this week, we want to meet and come up with a timeline and deadlines we need to meet in order to have new council members seated by June, and work back from that. * This also tells us when we need to complete the listening. * Next Monday, there will another meeting to keep moving this forward. * Bri/HPY will put together some slides about squeaky wheels and historical record of the election for the rest of the community to establish a common reality from which people can talk and we can listen. * Community Manager Updates: * Newsletter published (44% read rate!!!!!), next community call February 24th at 19:00 UTC! * JOGL wants to create space for GOSH, but still hesitant on whether this is needed. * Thanks Thomas! He's super keen to work with us, but we need to reflect on need for GOSH presence on JOGL. Either way, will at least have him give a presentation about JOGL more generally. * JS: My understanding is that we can have a test space on JOGL, allow GOSH community to experiment with it. * EB: Speaking as Public Lab which hosts project pages, and lots of project people wanna use version control, etc. JS: But this is a bit different -> they're not hosting your project, it's not a "project page", it's more about finding a community of people who might want to help out which might/might not be more possible to do this than the current GOSH forums. That's my understanding, so there is a potential benefit, but I/we will need to try it to better understand. And it is great to have a JOGL person we can talk to. * MF: I don't know JOGL that much, but having looked at a team in my experience, doesn't quite sit right with me. We need better understand that we're value-wise well aligned. * JS: There's actually really good adoption by our colleagues in Africa. * EB: Reminded of conversation with Thomas where JOGL is a centralized place where maximum number of people are interacting, they want numbers and baleen. * Bri: So far sounds like the upcoming community call is more about learning about JOGL more generally rather than GOSH on JOGL. * MF: Looks like JOGL is listed on Crunchbase suggests they're already looking more like a start up. We should better understand their goals, exit strategy? Monetising??? * Updates regarding writing workshops * Bri: Talked to Shannon. The funds is more for open science hardware focused stuff. *Maybe* a tiny bit for the constitution, but less sure. * Here's budget for workshop from last year: * Now there are landing pages for funding programs * https://openhardware.science/regional-events-funding/ * https://openhardware.science/collaborative-development-program/ * JS: I'm not e.g. a huge policy person, and wouldn't feel very empowered to say this is best way to spend $$$ on policy document. If e.g. we can only spend money on a policy document with not necessarily enough eager contributors from the community, then we might need to talk to the board about this. * HPY: This also sounds like something we could potentially have a conversation with the board. * EB/JS: So we're having some difficulties * Council member updates: * HPY: Update on Open Source Ecology Germany's offers? * Email sent re: offer from Moe, chairperson for Open Source Ecology Germany. * Understanding that they are very much aligned with GOSH values * They are hosting Gitlab and the HedgeDoc instance we're using today * Offer: to provide accounts for the HedgeDoc instance. Possibility to host NextCloud, Gitlab, etc. * Open Source Ecology is also an non-profit org that is also a legal entity that can hold funds in Euros * Ties in with conversation we had in council regarding having another entity for funds (in Euros) * It would be a receptacle for funding coming from European sources * JS: Uptime/stability of Open Source Ecology Germany is pretty good, but note that much of their hosted services are in German by default which might be even less accessible to GOSH than English. * HPY: Was able to change default language easily * Having English as default, could be feedback Pen takes back to Moe. * Happy to update everyone but prefers not to be the only one in contact with him * Bri: Revisit MF's point about the load of each council member * MF: In terms of reviewing applications, I'm not technically professional enough to chip in. Might be better for me to focus more on Global Gathering working such as designing stuff for it and working with those people. * PP: Concerned if we have enough people. But will continue working with JS and Open Hardware Makers. * AQ: There will be more steps after review. * PP: There are 4 kinds of responsibility. It's almost like the WG is doing all four. We should discuss. ### Review Proposed Agenda * The discussions above used up our time today! But it was useful and productive. ### CLOSING ROUND: What are you taking with you as you depart? What do you need to say to leave this meeting with integrity? Time 1:20 - 1:25 * LO: Noting the long discussion today! Lots over our shoulder * MF: Always nice to see y'all. Echo LO, this was a really long health check which like Bri said shows so much going on. Good to have a retrospective in May for next council to know, and make things better for next council. * JS: Good that we're doing enough that it took the whole meeting, which means we're not gonna take more than that. And it's possible that we don't end up doing all we wanna do, but this acknowledges the we couldn't do everything. We don't have to personally beat up ourselves for it! * EB: How can WGs and role select and make multiple centers of leadership given all the work that needs to get done. * PP: Related to listening WG, this is related to the motivations of GOSH people! E.g. do people come in for a side project, or as something you do professionally? How is this reflect in the forum? Would be good to know why does someone have an account on the GOSH forum? And better understand other channels like Telegram for ReGOSH. Also other languages. And there is another group like a Latin America group. ### Action Items: Time 1:25 - 1:30 * JS will draft an email to Jannon/Shenny regarding boundaries of funding work. * Bri will work with JS and PP on reaching out to reviewers.