Meeting — April 24, 2020

  • Attendees from last week: Salt, wolftune, smichel, alignwaivers, iko, mray, Adroit
  • Attendees (current): alignwaivers, smichel, iko, Adroit, MSiep, wolftune

Adroit: I can do that this time :)


Discourse (over past week):

  • Signups: 0 -> 0
  • New Topics: 10 -> 8
  • Posts: 98 -> 84
  • DAU/MAU: 60% -> 58%

Snowdrift patrons: 119

Reminders on best-practice meeting habits

  • Review previous meeting notes especially when absent!
  • “NEXT STEPS” should be clear and actionable for assignee (who should double-check this for themselves)
  • Use chat in etherpad (and add your name)

Discussion mechanisms

  • open discussion
  • call for a round (“pass the mic” style, facilitator makes sure no one is skipped)
  • hand symbols
    • “o/” or “/” means that you have something to say and want to be put in the queue
    • “c/” or “?” means that you have a clarifying question and want to jump to the top of the queue
    • “d” means thumbs up, encouragement, agreement, etc.
    • “>” as an indicator of understanding someone and the point can be concluded, please move on

Facilitation by topic

  • There is a leader for each topic (generally the person who raised the topic), and the facilitator will assist the topic leader in the discussion via the etherpad chat


  • “???” in notes measn something missed, please help capturing what was said
  • aim for shorthand / summary / key points (not transcript)

Review previous meeting feedback

  • mray: was fine with using video on bigbluebutton, a bit awkward with the tech shift
  • msiep: glad we had meeting, hope we can figure out ideal platform
  • iko: nice meeting despite initial tech problem. thanks everyone, especially our facilitator (Salt) and notetaker(s) (alignwaivers, smichel17 et al.)
  • smichel: didn’t think it was a great meeting because of tool issues, rough changing tools at the same time as changing the meeting time - should try to change one of these at a time
  • salt: sorry about lateness and tech difficulties. glad we were able to get through it, also thank you to the note takers, love having multple colors on the doc!!!
  • alignwaivers: love the 2 meetings plan, enjoyed bigbluebutton and having video at least, popcorn rounds are great but “popcorn” is chaotic, and we should call it “baton” or “mic” passing
  • adroit: hello and goodbye
  • wolftune: appreciate everyone being here and patience, would be great to get video and as-human-as-possible. my sympathies for everyone having to deal with issues. Glad to keep improving meetings

Last meeting next-steps review

Using BigBlueButton (wolftune)

NEXT STEPs quality and capturing (wolftune)

  • NEXT STEP (alignwaivers): write brief description of this on etherpad [DONE]

Help working through proposal process on team structure (wolftune)

  • NEXT STEPS (woltune, alignwaivers): schedule dedicated meeting to discuss this issue [in process]

Meetings times/carryovers (smichel)

  • NEXT STEP (everyone): Send smichel17 a short note (1-3 sentences) saying which time you prefer between Thu ???, Thu ???, Fri 1:30 (all PST) [DONE, except mray and Salt]
  • NEXT STEP (smichel17): Synthesize all feedback and decide on a time → Almost certainly Friday, 12:30 or 13:00 still TBD, depends on Salt’s availability, he’ll get back to me by the end of the day

Current Agenda

LFNW video recording (alignwaivers)

  • alignwaivers:
  • alignwaivers: prerecorded video submission, going ahead, looking for feedback
  • wolftune: do you want to do any rehearsal/run-through, go over the details of what you’re planning with other people?
  • alignwaivers: would be helpful. not necessarily a run-through. but feedback would be nice after editing
  • wolftune: from forum post, it wasn’t clear how much my feedback would be helpful
  • NEXT STEPS (alignwaivers): will post a draft sometime next week
  • salt: considering recording talk on a bicycle… would appreciate suggestions to differ from LP version

Team Agreements Follow up (alignwaivers)

  • alignwaivers: I wanted to get consensus from people who haven’t agreed — adroit and iko only people who are here
  • alignwaivers: we put it to a poll and only got 5 people to vote. seems like we should get a little more, seeing it is the initial meta agreement
  • alignwaivers: I will link it here so if anyone who hasn’t consented to please review
  • alignwaivers: it was a poll, I was hoping to get people to reply with a consent/objection even if they can’t vote at this time
  • wolftune: the other point here is, even in this case, people don’t have to be team members to state their support for a proposal
  • alignwaivers: agreed
  • msiep: I’m unclear how to access the voting part?
  • alignwaivers: I haven’t figured out how to re-open the poll after it expired, so just reply with your vote this time instead of officially clicking the poll
  • the post with the poll in it is the most finalised version (see link above, the 10th post in the topic)
  • Round request on question: should we get everyone’s agreement or just a majority for this item?
    • wolftune: Everyone, in this case
    • smichel: everyone
    • iko: whatever/everyone
    • adroit: also everyone, 11 (?) people on the team is not that many
    • alignwaivers: ask everyone, but only wait on active people
    • msiep: agreed everyone
  • wolftune: there’s a couple people who we don’t have clarity whether they’re on the team (some have offered advice, but aren’t necessarily active)
  • wolftune: two versions: “hey, you’re on team, what do you think of proposal?” vs “Hey, agree to this if you want to be on the team”
  • NEXT STEPS (alignwaivers): follow up with others who haven’t responded yet

Fix Meeting Markdown (Salt)

  • Spacing is strange, for instance attendee list, see:
  • iko: easier to use point form (hyphens, asterisks, etc.) otherwise you need the double space for line breaks, and some people’s editors automaticallly strip trailing whitespace [DONE]

Board meeting tomorrow (wolftune)

  • wolftune: we have a board meeting scheduled. Board members are Stephen, Eric and I, as well as a few advisors (e.g. Micky Metts) are involved
  • wolftune: just wanted to mention so people know this is happening and answering any questions people might have
  • adroit: Which board?
  • wolftune: This is the initial board of directors, tasked with finishing bylaws and formalising the process of bringing on board members
  • iko: are board members appointed or elected? (to include the correct terminology)
  • wolftune: That’s something that the bylaws will specify (99% sure it will be elected), but we don’t formally have members & bylaws yet
  • wolftune: for real process on Bylaws and elections, we basically need a co-op member-agreement, then any patrons of the snowdrift project who accept that agreement could potentially vote to approve (or reject) the initial Bylaws and then elect the first elected Directors according to the Bylaws process
  • wolftune: at this point, they’re volunteers I like and asked to help us with this
  • alignwaivers there’s some intros from Micky Metts & Lisha Sterling
  • smichel: does anyone have any items to bring to the board meeting?
  • alignwaivers: by the way, if anyone wants to attend and help with notetaking, that would be great too
  • smichel: it’s at 11AM pacific

Team member titles vs roles and presentation (wolftune)

  • wolftune: I wanted to mention there’s a distinction between titles and roles though maybe there’s some overlap. it’s nice to be able to tell people my title
  • (Salt) I’ve always liked the framing around self-selecting titles, but once a title is decided, what happens when the roles change? i.e. I feel like I’ve done a lot more Community Engineering
  • (wolftune) Titles vs roles distinction…
  • wolftune: I also want to formally acknowledge smichel17 as cofounder (initial co-founder helped with funding but has stepped back)
  • smichel17: for me, not much has changed. slightly different perspective in thinking about the team vs just the project
  • Salt: I’m a bit confused about this co-founder status. that’s not generally something that can change post…
  • wolftune: the core issue is we haven’t finished founding. we exist as a website but it’s not a finished thing, so you can think of smichel taking over the co-founder role since the other has dropped away. it’s also a way to honour the different roles he plays within the organisation.
  • Salt: the team member titles topic seems worthwhile
  • wolftune: yes, and I sort of wanted to go further, but I at least brought it up, and there’s more to discuss as we solidify team agreements, recruiting process, roles etc.
  • I think the issue of team titles is significant in a public-facing setting. we should have an about page that better shows who we are and maybe references the board a bit. any thoughts, msiep?
  • msiep: good idea, and it should look professional, etc.
  • wolftune: what’s the next step? open a design issue with a driver statement?
  • misep: I can do that
  • NEXT STEP (msiep): driver statement for showing team and directors on the main site about page

Optional video chat (alignwaivers)

meeting evaluation / feedback / suggestions / appreciations round

  • adroit: wasn’t active on the agenda items here but have been participating in discourse, getting lots of notifications there
  • wolftune: glad things worked out with me showing up late, well-focused on topics which was nice¸ (awkward that salt was here in text only)
  • iko: good meeting
  • smichel: it was good and we can end 5 minutes early
  • msiep: good meeting
  • alignwaivers: glad we got through items and it’s nice to be done early