Meeting — June 19th, 2020

  • Attendees from last week: Adroit, msiep, salt, smichel, wolftune, alignwaivers
  • Attendees (current): wolftune, Adroit, msiep, smichel


Discourse (over past week):

  • Signups: 1 -> 0
  • New Topics: 3 -> 3
  • Posts: 9 -> 10
  • DAU/MAU: 27% -> 27%

Snowdrift patrons: 121

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 you have something to say and puts you in the queue
    • “c/” or “?” means you have a clarifying question and jumps you to the top of the queue
    • “d” means thumbs up, encouragement, agreement, etc.
    • “>” mean you understand someone’s point, please move on
    • “d>” indicates feeling complete on an agenda item, ready to move on to


  • timebox each topic, rounded to nearest 5min., settled during agenda confirmation
  • format is
  • at topic beginning, convert the :mm to expected end time
  • at timebox end, “thumb polls” may add 5 minutes at a time
  • hand symbols
    • “^” approve, extend the timebox
    • “v” disagree, move onto the next topic
    • “.” neutral

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 means something missed, please help capturing what was said
  • aim for shorthand / summary / key points (not transcript)

Review previous meeting feedback

  • smichel: timeboxing could be done sooner, at the agenda building, not one-off as they come up
  • Adroit: I appreciate the facilitation.
  • wolftune: thanks everyone, appreciate the engagement. Glad to keep iterating
  • alignwaivers: I got here late and felt a bit scattered.
  • salt: thought it went pretty well¸covered a lot, this meeting reinforces my sense of how much this matters

Last meeting next-steps review

Embracing the voluntary-tax framing / pitch / messaging

  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): Capture this somewhere? Open gitlab issue [MOVED TO NEW AGENDA]
  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): Capture the idea of targeted messages, relating to website content and direct outreach [MOVED TO NEW AGENDA]

Consider updates to current roadmap phase: governance roles? pitch / how-it-works update plans?

Reevaluation of timeboxing, based on last meetings feedback

  • NEXT STEP (salt): add voting options to the pad [DONE]

Grant applications and documenting

  • NEXT STEP (alignwaivers): create a private repo for fundraiser (temporary) and put mozilla application there [DONE]
  • NEXT STEP (alignwaivers): add gitlab issue to transfer to civicrm when possible?
  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): Collect other records and put them there. [DONE]

Getting funding needs more specified

  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): capture the need to talk to contacts who can give insights / ask for help [CAPTURED]

Current Agenda

Tracking work on highest-level concepts / pitches etc. (wolftune)

  • where in GitLab to put high-level conceptual issues such as:
    • overall messaging / mission (governance?), for example the mention of taxes as how public goods generally are funded
    • targetted messaging (applies to design, outreach, blog, and more?)
  • these will have specific tasks, but the initial question is how to even organize the ideas and decide what to do about them
  • wolftune: This isn’t about a specific topic but about how to handle this type of topic in general.
  • msiep: Is this just about where to put in GitLab, or how to define this type of topic?
  • wolftune: Could put in forum but nicer to have one place to track everything. How do we track this type of thing?
  • smichel: Only actionable task I see from this type of discussion (e.g. last week re taxes) is maybe if we have a messaging wiki page, then we could add it to that, but going through and trying to find places to make work based on this doesn’t seem what we need right now.
  • smichel: If it’s that nebulous, just use the forum. Then when we get a driver statement, we can put it somewhere tracked.
  • wolftune: Willing to see if this tension resolves over time.
  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): Post something on the forum about the tax framing

(Lack of) team responsiveness on the forum (wolftune)

  • wolftune: why have I been unable to get acknowledgement from the team on the forum. I mentioned @team, only one person marked anything. What’s going on?
  • msiep: Mainly a bandwidth issue for me. Last week, I looked through email from the forum, had thoughts (it took me some time to process), but didn’t get around to replying.
  • msiep: Async decisions are hard for me, especially since they’re not timeboxed — I don’t know how long it will take to engage and understand a topic.
  • msiep: This is hard for me during the week.
  • msiep: Specifically on that: We’re already saying people agree to respond within 48h, how is this different? (unclear request)
  • msiep: Overall I am skeptical of async decisions, requires frequent availability.
  • wolftune: Lack of visibility of engagement is a problem, e.g. would have been helpful to know that msiep had looked at it and didn’t have time to think it through, e.g. TDLR response or “I don’t have time to look at this” message.
  • wolftune: Agreed that the decision-process concern is covered in existing agreement about responding, should just drop this amendment.
  • wolftune: this topic is the tension about getting the 48hr response
  • msiep: Even saying “I don’t have time to look at this” is harder than it sounds, because I have to process and figure out how long it will take me to respond.
  • msiep: The one time it felt like I could engage like that was just “appreciate”-ing a reply that expressed what I was feeling
  • wolftune: Seems similar to saying if you won’t be able to make a meeting. Just a message like, “swamped, can’t look at this now” would help.
  • msiep: If I knew that would be helpful, I could have done that.
  • wolftune: don’t want forum filled with such posts, but we could err that way and see if it’s a problem
  • wolftune: Consent process doesn’t currently have a way to say “I don’t have time to express my objection but I’m not consenting”.
  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): Capture: Consent process doesn’t currently have a way to say “I don’t have time to express my objection but I’m not consenting”
  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): Close “participate in consent decisions” on the forum as not accepted
  • NEXT STEP (wolftune): Check in with others on 1:1 basis to ask why they didn’t respond to @team mentions

Final full week of Q2, pushing on goals (wolftune)

  • wolftune: We set goals for the quarter:
  • wolftune: I want to review them, since we ’re nearing the end.
  • wolftune: The board has been meeting about bylaws, don’t think we’ll finish but we’re making good progress, driven by the goals
  • wolftune: Updating decision procession: doubt we’ll get to it
  • smichel: Site dev path unblock, unsure (will know early next week, see my topic below)
  • wolftune: Moving to OSUOSL is out of our hands, but it’s on track I think
  • wolftune: Civi probably won’t happen, Salt is moving and so will be really busy right now

Meeting time into summer (wolftune)

  • wolftune: I assume people’s availability will change for the summer. Should we prompt people to update?
  • adroit: My availability will change in July.
  • NEXT STEP (smichel): Ask people to update their availability for summer once it’s known

Consider updates to current roadmap phase: governance roles? pitch / how-it-works update plans?

  • NEXT STEP (msiep): Add how-it-works update to the roadmap in some fashion

Fundraising, needs, clarity, working-in-the-zone (wolftune)

  • smichel: I will be taking next week off from work to focus on Snowdrift
  • smichel: If you want to do coworking or have anything you’d like me to do, next week is a good time, please let me know!
  • wolftune: thanks, and please have no hesitation asking for any useful help, encouragement, etc
  • NEXT STEP (smichel): Post this on forum so others can see this & respond

meeting evaluation / feedback / suggestions / appreciations round

  • adroit: Felt meeting was slow to start (lots of dead air), then got going later. Maybe to do with number of people here?
  • smichel: Please remove authorship colors from pad meta-information. Get to point faster, Aaron — what is the topic, define it at the start; missed Salt for facilitation. Notetaking easiest for people not actively talking (so I took over when msiep was engaging otherwise)
  • msiep: thanks for helping w/ note-taking (maybe should have backup note-taker?), agreed on other counts, timeboxing is helpful
  • wolftune: I had push-to-talk issues, should consider changing that setting; I used sand-timers on my desk, just getting into the habit of using them. It’s nice to have an actual time-keeper (person) — I (unofficially) held that role today. I noticed I made formal topic for what could have instead been better as open-discussion, maybe we should consider noting less-defined tensions or topics as for open-discussion so that we purposely take less agenda time and thus have open-discussion where those items can be brought up casually (of course, no expectation of necessarily getting to them)