 the right. Thank you. Hello everyone. This is the TSC call. This is a public call. Everybody's welcome to join, listen in, contribute. There are two requirements though. The first one is to live by the antitrust policy, the notice of which is currently displayed on the Zoom meeting if you're online. And it's good for everybody to be aware of it and live by it to stay out of travel. The other condition is the requirement is to live by the code of conduct, which basically asks everybody to behave in a decent manner. So with that being taken care of, we can get started. Are there any announcements anyone wants to make at this point? I don't have any on the agenda. So, okay, if not, then we can move on to the quarterly reports. We got two reports. The first one is Kaliper. The second one is Iroha. We are missing Indy. So anybody is part of the Indy project? Please think about it. So Iroha. I mean, I looked, I just looked before the call. I didn't see any questions that need to be addressed per se. But if there's anything, either the team wants to, the Iroha team wants to bring up to our attention, or if there's any questions or comments from the TSC members, please. Now is the time to speak up. Hi, my name is Sarah. I'm from Iroha team. You probably know me, I usually. So, yeah. First of all, I wanted to say that we've a little updates on the report after we published it, because, you know, things change in a week. So, yeah, we managed to resolve the issues with internships. So everything's on track now. Also, we added a little bit of information on the HSMs. So the HSM modules, sounds weird. Okay. So, yeah, we have some little bit more information about that one. So, yeah. So everything that was as an issue in there, everything seems to be in order at the moment. And I think that one of our developers had a question about a CI. Who can we contact about CI stuff? There's the architecture. There's a question if you go a little bit. Yeah, a bit. Hi. There is like a CI for S398X architecture. So, I mean, when I was putting this report together, I had this question from one of the developers. Is it possible to resolve it somehow? Is it even possible? How can we do that and stuff like that? So, yeah. That's our question, I think. Yes. Thank you. Rai? Well, I see that they've already gone the route that I would have gone, which is to do the Linux one servers. You can jump on the CI CD channel and chat and let's talk about it. Okay. Okay. Got it. Thank you. So, but so there is a solution and you can get help. Well, I'm not sure, but I make it sound like there is, I was surprised, but okay. Well, it says, unfortunately, the results are satisfactory, right? So, yes, chat with me. Let's work on it. Okay. So, Rai is your man. Yeah. Awesome. Okay. I'll tell them to go to the chat and to contact you. Thanks. Thank you, Sarah. Anybody else? Any questions? I know. This is Dave Huseby. I just wanted to point out that the Tervora security audit of Aroha has been wrapped up as of last week and the report delivered. We're debriefing tomorrow and there should be a follow-on blog post of finance coming up soon. Very good. Yeah. Also, one thing more. We've had some questions about Aroha 2 that we mentioned in this report. And if there are any additional questions to the ones in the comments, we have a Aroha 2 developer here as well. His name is Nikita. So, he'll be able to answer some of your questions if you have any specific questions. Just in case you have any, I mean, you can also contact us anytime if you have the questions, but we have one of the developers right here. So, just in case you have questions. I think the question was from Tracy, if I remember correctly, right? Yeah, I think so. I've sent all the links to the documentation we have on this. And yeah, but if someone else has any other questions, I mean, that's kind of a big thing. So, yeah. We want to be open about it and, you know, answer all the questions. Absolutely. That's very good. Thank you. All right. Any more questions? Otherwise, we can move on to the next one. Katy Purr. Yeah. Thank you for like allowing us to present. Thank you. Sure. You're welcome. Thank you. So, any questions or anything the Katy Purr team wants to bring up to our attention? There's nothing in the comments, but I never know. Sometimes people haven't done it, but they still have something they want to ask. So, all right. If not, we can just leave it at this. Thank you. Let's move on. So, we have two main agenda items. The first one is DCI Working Group Report. So, Dan, Adisa, Layla, I don't know who's going to lead this. I will kick this off and then sort of hand around as we go here. So, as you guys probably recall, we started the DCI Working Group about a year ago. Some of us have been working for about a year before that on DCI related issues. And one of the main deliverables in the initial charter for the Working Group was to measure the community, figure out where we were weak in an objective way so that we could start to focus on those areas. And a couple of the main findings from running the survey probably going to sound a little bit obvious, but it turns out people don't like doing surveys. And we heard this from another LF organization who encountered the same thing. So, I think in the coming year we probably want to revisit whether or not we try to do another survey. However, from the data that we did get from doing the surveys, there was nothing that would jump out and say, hey, we actually have some diversity where we wouldn't have guessed that we had it. If anything, I think from my assumptions, we were even less diverse than that. And we've got some of the a few selected statistics I paced it into this page. But we also have Layla from Accenture who works with Elisa. And she has put more of that information into a visual form. And so, Layla, I don't know if you want to share off of your screen or we can have. Sure, let me. It feels like, okay, let's see. And if I could just add, this is Elisa. So the survey that we did of the Accenture, excuse me, the Hyperledger community is aligning to interviews that we had done more broadly on this topic. And we've aligned that up to information that we already had on a broader level on what's happening within technology in general. So we wanted to be able to look at this from, how do we compare to an overall technology element? How do we compare kind of in people's experiences and get kind of verbatims on how people are experiencing working within blockchain technology and then dive in more specifically to what are we seeing within the Hyperledger community? So we had a basis of comparison. Great. Can you all see my screen? Just want to make sure I'm not used to. And it's the powerpoint or the the findings, correct? Just want to make sure. It is. Great. No, it's your. It's your Anazaz stopping page. We're used to using MS teams with Accenture, so just want to make sure. Well, thank you, everyone. So I'm a manager with Accenture Research Practice and primarily dedicated to supporting our blockchain and multi-party systems practice. And as Dad mentioned, I work with Elisa Worley on a variety of our POVs and thought leadership, which includes some, you know, our inclusion and diversity efforts in this space. I'm also currently supporting some of our research with our talent and organization practice as well, but a pleasure to meet everyone virtually. So I'll start off with a high-level summary and then go through some of the detail slides for additional color before I transition to Dan for the recommendations, as I know that's where the meat of the conversation will be. But believe you all have referenced this document, but happy to answer any questions that we may not be able to get to at this time, either via chat or email. So the survey was deployed, as most of you guys know, earlier this year to sort of understand the state of DCI across the hyperledger community, as well as, you know, obtain feedback on the points of collaboration and communication channels as well. So there were about 98 responses in total, of which 85% were made up of men. So that's by 83 total and 13% women. More than half of the respondents were wider and a third Asian and about 9% were made up of sort of Black and Latinx Hispanic respondents. So overall, limited responses from underrepresented groups. So not sure if that's too surprising, but majority of respondents, regardless of demographic profile, experience, civility, and inclusion. However, diversity, particularly gender diversity, was not sort of always experienced by majority of respondents. Additionally, hyperledger events and meetings were not always seen as inclusive or diverse with the caveat that this sort of varies by demographic profile. And respondent side of that, you know, events were less diverse and inclusive, followed by meetings. Another key insight is that respondents appeared to be engaged with majority contributing to code and communicating via chat and emails. However, there were challenges cited with, you know, finding the right agenda or meeting information or the right channel. And then I think no surprise here, but majority of the community members were concentrated across sort of three major time zone clusters. America is largely US representation at 42%, Europe 25, and India 21%, which is likely one of the reasons why majority of respondents cited difficulties with meeting times. So when asked, you know, if, you know, a respondent had experienced the following types of diversity, global diversity certainly led the way followed by racial gender diversity. Overall gender diversity occurred about 41% of the time overall. But when you look at the respond, the woman respondents, they felt that it was represented 38% of the time. So not too much variation there. Racial ethnic diversity occurred about 58% of the time, but for underrepresented groups that being sort of black and Latinx, this was experienced 33% of the time. And the slices of data you can find in the appendix to have the sort of cross-tab view. So certainly variation with a cross-tab view. But as I mentioned in the executive summary, the sample size of these groups are very small. And then majority respondents were unsure about disability and LGBTQIA diversity. I mean, one contributing factor is that, you know, these diverse profiles can be hidden or not reported. So civility slightly exceeds inclusive experiences across hyperledger. So overall majority of respondents usually are always experienced civility, you know, 80% of the time and inclusion 73% of the time. But certainly room for improvement. Women experienced it 77% so comparable to the overall number with respect to civility. But inclusion is less than the overall number at 61% from the woman respondents perspective. So a 16% difference with the overall number. Other underrepresented groups such as black and Latinx, Hispanics experienced civility and inclusion 70% of the time. Again, small sample size for those groups. With the exception of events, the majority of respondents have been engaged across a variety of modalities with the community. Attendance and sponsored events however had been shy about 50%. But this, you know, could potentially increase given the push for sort of virtual conferences or events or hybrid of sorts going forward as a result of COVID. 63% of respondents agree or strongly agree that hyperledger events are inclusive and diverse. 50% of women respondents and 44% of underrepresented groups agree or strongly agree. It's important to know that that percentage of those attending hyperledger events is actually lower in this question than the previous, but it could be from observations of agendas or speaker report outs from events or perhaps varying interpretations of what, you know, consists of a hyperledger event. Any comments so far? No, I was just going to say, Laila, you're presenting such good information. I just didn't want to overwhelm people. We have a wait till the end to weigh in on some of the things we're seeing. Why was that you? Would you prefer I wait? No, please. Oh, sorry, Mark. I couldn't tell who was speaking. Oh, that's okay. So when you refer to certain slices of the of the respondents as underrepresented, is that because you feel people in that category did not respond enough or just that statistically there weren't a lot of them, even though it could have been 100% of that community in hyperledger? Yeah, I mean, I guess I just in tech, generally, those groups are underrepresented. So and the fact that there were only a small, small size slice of the survey respondents, I it was just another way to sort of categorize, categorize that group. But just generally, the groups are seen as being sort of underrepresented in tech. And so, yeah, because that makes sense, there's certain groups that I mean, clearly, we see as dominant in the space. And then there's there's a large underrepresented demographic in women. And then it gets down to, like, Latinx, for example, it's hard to actually even get data on some of those demographics. In individuals with disabilities, it's really hard to get, it's even hard to get statistics on how many, what percentage are we seeing, even participating in technology in general, let alone in blockchain. So we've just defined that broader category as underrepresented demographics. Does that make sense? Yes, I just wanted to make sure it was clear in my mind that we could have had 100% of the woman respond, but we would still refer to it as underrepresented potential, because of the percentage in the community as a whole. Right. Any other questions? This is Angelo. So I must admit, I'm sorry, I really appreciate the effort of putting together all this data. But as you highlighted the multiple times, the sample is so small that this doesn't have, to my understanding of statistics, doesn't have any significance. So are we sure that we are analyzing data that from which we can draw meaningful conclusions? Because I know I'm aware of the law of the big numbers. But I think there's no law of the small numbers. Yeah, I mean, certainly this isn't statistically significant. We don't have this the proper sample size. And I think that's why there's sort of analysis going on is how do we want to continue with surveys going forward? That being said, it could bring some insights or at least allow us to speculate what some of the challenges may be to further investigate in other ways. But agree, it's not sort of statistically significant where we can say this is true for various demographic profiles. But it does line up in general with the industry, right? Yeah. Yeah. And I think that was what the point I was trying to make earlier. While this data is specific to what we what we saw in the hyperledger sample, we've got a broader data set that we can align it to both from a broader lens and interviews that we've conducted with folks that are from underrepresented demographics and beyond, as well as the data that we've been collecting historically, not only at Accenture, but clearly as an industry, there's a there's a lot of available information that we've been collecting and research that we've been collecting, just to get a better understanding of not only what's happening more broadly, but what's happening specifically within blockchain and what's happening most specifically in hyperledger. And sorry, but still, I mean, even if that can be just a fluctuation can be just an error, the fact that he's aligned now, because the numbers are very small. I mean, just to inform everybody and that should be in fairness. So we can even now say though, this data is better aligned, but this is not, I mean, I would ask, what's the probability that this statement gets true? I mean, you will not be able to assess this probability because the sample is so small. Well, I don't want to completely minimize the sample size. So we estimated that the total population is about 1000 participants. And we got 100 respondents. So that can give you it's not in that 10% respondents is not insignificant. Agreed. So what would be the so how far are we from significance? I don't I don't actually, but I'm not the researcher here. But in research that we've conducted historically, I don't think a 10% response rate is we clearly we'd love to have 100% that 50%. But we've got to start somewhere. So we have we had 10% respondents to give us a baseline and guidance on what are we seeing in diversity, civility and inclusion in in within hyper ledger. And again, we're looking at this as a baseline for us to build upon. On this, that's understandable. It's a baseline in the construction. Understand. Yeah, we can get better and better. Certainly, we wouldn't think that this is like, hey, we're done, and we're going to stick a pin in it. The reality is what we're trying to do is is initiate a conversation, bring some some of these elements to life, let people debate it, you know, people disagree or think that that this perhaps isn't the way things are, then we can certainly discuss that. But I think it's really to to directionally start a conversation to say, Hey, this is what we found, we're going to continue to evaluate this over the course of the next year, do another survey, and it could perhaps now that people have seen the value of it, and what we can do with it, we'll get a higher rate of participation, and we can just track how we do. This is this is something that we as an organization, and I mean, hyper ledger are committed to, to make sure that we are, you know, our goal, and certainly with the working group, and we're aligned, I think I would imagine that everybody on this call and the institutions that they represent are aligned to the mission to say, we can do better and create a more diverse and inclusive and civil environment. This is just to provide a little data to show, Hey, this is what we're starting at. We know that we can improve upon that. So let's see how we do. Well, the goal is very, very interesting. I really appreciate the effort. Can I ask you just one more thing just for my personal understanding here? What's the population? So who are these 1000 people? So that estimate is based on the contributor population that we sized for the last election. Understood. Okay. Thank you. And just to your question early about probability or significance, that generally the minimum is n per group, n equals 30 per group as the minimum. And obviously, as you increase that, that improves sort of the robustness of the findings, but usually poll surveys such as this can still be helpful to provide an opportunity for people to provide feedback and get a sort of a pulse of the culture of the company or organization or open source community. And the soon. Thanks much for the clarifications. So let's see. So as I mentioned, the exact summary, majority of respondents cited community meeting times as being difficult. So in 45% found it difficult to actually find the agenda and meeting information and 15% cited technical difficulties. So certainly room to perhaps consider simplifying the wiki UI or improve messaging and communications ahead of meetings. 38% of women responded to not find meetings to be inclusive for new respondents compared to 27% of the overall population. More than half of respondents cited that the asynchronous nature of hyperledger chat allows them to participate. 87% of respondents did not find recipients to be rude or unwelcoming. About half did have challenges, did not have challenges finding the right channel, although 40% found it challenging usually or sometimes. So again, opportunity for improvement there with respect to sort of simplifying perhaps the UI. 81% indicated that questions were usually quickly answered, but this number is about only 46% when you kind of slice the user always viewpoint. So certainly room for new strategies to sort of encourage responsiveness of chats. I already kind of went through sort of the breakdown in my executive summary, but again, this is sort of what it, the visual of what I kind of mentioned. Obviously a large chunk of respondents were also from the US. Well, I've already talked about race, but majority of respondents were, you know, millennials or followed by the sort of the Gen X population as well. So there's some more visuals there on the demographics. And then I will actually move into open responses in just given the time. So the last slide just provides a high-level summary of the open response question that was provided at the end of the survey. So there were about 37 open responses, which is 40% of the total responses, some more expressive than others, but just wanted to kind of bring some of those open responses to sort of the forefront here. So as meeting times were a major challenge, folks expressed the desire for more convenient times and requests for more asynchronous times at different time zones to sort of enhance inclusion and diversity globally. You know, some respondents felt welcome and included by the community indicate that leadership does a good job to enable DCI, but there were other respondents who felt that there were issues with respect to sort of inclusion and civility or not always feeling welcomed or perhaps some issues with treatment with maintainers by hyperliterous staff, such as feeling ignored, and the general perception that the community can be hard to break into. Again, these were just responses from the open response. So just wanted to bring these sort of cultural insights to the forefront. There was a desire for more resources and training. So training maintainers on expectations to sort of help uphold community accountability, as well as develop more central resources to, you know, support and help technical folks build solutions. And then lastly, some acknowledge the need to improve diversity and note pipeline challenge and noted pipeline challenges, but recommended reaching out sort of underrepresented groups or organizations dedicated to diversity to learn about best practices for potential application to the hyperelectric community. So I'll pause right there because I do think it's a good it's a good time to transition to some of the thoughts about recommendations that both align to some of the findings, but also sort of other sentiments from the community. Okay, should we switch back to rise for you for that? Yes. All right. Well, thanks for doing the the analysis on the data. It's helpful to see a lot of that graphically and get the summary of things. And those those last points, when you look at the data, the course with data, you don't get the free form answers. So it was nice to be able to extract the free form answers that people did provide. And so we've tried to incorporate some of that into into the recommendations. One of the things we we heard last week, or sorry, last meeting from the folks at the DTC was the importance of having executive sponsorship and executive leadership. And since, you know, we don't hire people directly, this is just an open source organization where we sort of rely on on companies that are sponsoring people to contribute here. One of the top level observations is that this activity kind of needs to go up to the board. We need the board's engagement. And we need their help to work with the contributing companies to make sure that they're contributing diverse resources into hyperlensure. And that that for me is probably one of the one of the biggest points here. But that of course doesn't necessarily absolve us in the TSC and in the maintainer community from continuing to take action before the the board can engage in those ways. And so some of the things that that we've called out for the the TSC is to take a look at some of those free form answers and and what kind of things can we come up to to help resolve some of those issues that were raised. And sort of the the wordy first bullet point there goes to something that came from a discussion with with one of the other LF projects where they found that they were getting better success by incorporating their DCI activity directly into sort of the the main day-to-day there. And there's a risk that by having this DCI working group we we kind of shutter off the DCI work into a corner where it doesn't get the same kind of visibility and so not as many people are engaged. So one thought was to bring DCI regularly into the TSC calls. So there's one example recommendation about how you could do that in there but that's just sort of one one way that you could go about doing that. There might be other ways that we can do it that wouldn't be quite as prescriptive as that. Uh when it comes to maintainers so if we think about analogs in between being in a company and being in an open source organization for most of us that have been in corporate environments you have regular annual training and in different topics. So the the analog for that with the open source community is probably very specifically the training that's um that was put together for Global Forum this year by Tracy and Swaytha. And the benefit of that training isn't isn't necessarily just exclusive to DCI but the same things that you would do to encourage DCI are the same things that you would do to increase contributors in general and make sure that the people that come in feel valued and so that's probably a good idea that that all maintainers get familiar with with those best practices because that'll just help their project overall. There's also a training by by the Linux Foundation on inclusive speakers and there's probably other trainings that would go out and find that would be applicable to open source. And I think rather than just sort of running through everything and making people listen to me at nauseam here I'll just point out one one or two other quick things. One of the other takeaways from the presentation from from the DTC was about having sponsors or coaches or other people to help guide somebody through the career path within a company and again that analog in the open source space is probably getting people into maintainer positions and so having us as maintainers recognize the need to when we see a regular contributor take the initiative to to you know help coach them into into the position where they they can become maintainers and then the the last thing that I'll point out is is there's inclusive terminology that the Linux kernel project is adopted and it's a pretty easy thing that we can do in each of our projects to avoid to avoid wording that's that's not inclusive. And so I think I'll stop here and get reaction from from from everybody on what we've got listed here. So any other thoughts or ideas on what we might be able to to do in the short term? So is the goal to just make sure we're as inclusive as possible and if we build it they will come or is the goal to explicitly go out and try to get underrepresented communities more involved? I would think it's all the above. Dan sorry I didn't mean to jump in but to me in instances like this there there's it's a multi-layered approach. We as individuals have responsibilities and accountability to how we act, behave, recruit, think about the structure and the aspiration of what we want this community to be. And then it goes all the way up to I think a lot of the things that Dan has been pointing out that there's a more systematic element of how we as a is you know the hyperledger organization and its member communities pursue that vision. So I guess my point is it can be anything and everything and and you know just making sure that we're kind of aligned on on what those steps might be. To me little the reason I keep talking about the individual is little things add up so the more that we the more that we can do on that level to have impact is a good thing as well as kind of like these higher level programs that are more formal. Yeah I think that that is a good question Mark and a slightly different take than what Lisa said is I feel like we've been doing a lot of if they build it they will come and I think that's going to have limited returns and that's my goal with the governing board point is that they're sort of our main source of talent not necessarily the board but the companies that are contributing people and so if they're not contributing diversity then it's it's really hard for us to get that in a grassroots sense because that's I don't think where most of our developers come from. So what are you proposing there Dan I mean I get it I mean I think I mean this Gary I mean I think there's a couple of things I think we tend to conflate what community means here right a majority of the community are people who use stuff we've been we've been we've been struggling for five years or however many years we've been doing this to actually which is not uncommon in open source so I don't blame anybody for that right typically projects that are started by people generally when companies start using it or people start using it maybe a few stragglers out there will you know start and become contributors but in general for big large project to get used you have more way more users than you have contributors so all those stuff Lisa said about communities rocket chat helping totally makes sense I get the fact that you're I guess you're you're saying you want the governing board to recommend try to help have a discussion by the way most of the people on the governing board don't even have people that contribute so I guess I'm just confused as to what the ask is there yeah so it is to for the board to work with the contributing companies not necessarily just the the premier companies that are represented on the board but for them to take the the leadership position with with the companies that are contributing people or maybe the the companies that aren't contributing people and get them more engaged I think Gary I think in that level and certainly going to that last point I'm sure IBM and others you know we do have massive initiatives on how we do outreach into communities on campus and beyond and we've certainly done this already with Hyperledger I know you guys have two that which is this idea that when when we engage and in hackathons or other things kind of making sure that we're raising the profile of Hyperledger as well I think in this instance and this is certainly my own opinion we're not necessarily just going after pipeline and universities for this technology because I think it's going to grow so rapidly we've got to be looking at a pipeline that goes into experience professionals in that respect I think you're looking at people who have a certain type of skill sets that you're trying to bring to the table that to me isn't necessarily something that is just pure targeted outreach I think you really do have to get down on the and the community level and let people experience what we're talking about here let them see that the opportunity is is rapid massive etc and to me that there is that that is from a pure advocacy point of view that's a there's a little bit more grassroots there so sorry I threw out a lot of ideas in the same in the same thought but I do think that the element is we've got lots of member firms that are doing a lot of different things we need to figure out how to align to those as effectively as we can and I think as a community and by that I mean the entire entity structure how are we bringing hyper ledger into those conversations so that we're raising the profile and how are that we then you know bleeding in these thought processes into hyper ledger only events that make any sense yeah yeah I think it makes sense I think I mean look I mean everybody's hearing this all everywhere right and I think you're going it's going to be a hard time right I mean I'm it's I just get into it when we talk about like really really my comment comes around like contributors and whatever because I think we have a much larger problem than a diversity problem with contributors we have a problem that we don't we don't actually get contributors at all which again again I've researched tons of open source projects and it's not unlike we were going to have a much greater community of users than we are of people who are actually going to contribute code right and most people most companies don't have the luxury of having people do huge amounts of open source right so it's just kind of an odd thing to say you know contributors right because we well we contributed 20 25 people right you know IBM 25 people maybe something like that developing code on here right we have 350,000 people in the company you know there yes we have diversity initiatives but it's not like it's going to trickle down and say oh we need to focus on HL you know a hyperledger as the one where we're going to do our show our whatever right I guess that just seemed I was just trying to figure out like it's a really fair point and I think that's that I think what you've said needs to be factored into to your point there's a we need to pull the lens out about just bringing people into the mix in general and then looking beyond that scope because that was something you know again I'm not a technical person but the I thought that was a fascinating stat that currently it's roughly five percent of contributors are women and how that impacts then their their longer term prospects so we just kind of had that statistic in mind of okay so we we need to do better here um so you know I but I I agree with you Gary I think that there's there's a lot of complexity in the in you know across the board here that we're trying to unwind yeah I mean this seems to be a bit of a challenge setting goals is you know is fine but we don't have as much control as you have within a company where you have you know hiring processes and and you can control that at a larger scale as Gary was pointing out I was going to say something about you know along the same line as you know typically this is not managed at the micro level of a given project so it's I don't know if it's really achievable to to have goals that you expect to be able to to reach but I think that's why that's targeted at the board because the board has said that the diversity and inclusion are very important to them so here's here's the the thing that we hand back to them and for me this is an optimistic thing this is saying all right you've said that this is important all right here's how you fulfill it we need you know more people we if if each of these companies is going to say that these that this is an important goal well it's it's satisfied in a pretty direct way so if you're not contributing people well here's your opportunity contribute people you've got a diversity initiative in your company make this part of your diversity initiative in your company but it's it's uh I think we have to avoid giving the board a free pass on this just because we know it's a hard problem and and I think there's it's worth there's an adage that says you get what you measure so there is benefit simply to having the conversation and putting the challenge forth um whether we succeed or not I guess it's you know to be determined but I do think that there's there's a benefit to saying we're going to try all right that makes sense so do people see like a tsc action could be that we change well we add criteria to a project going to some certain point that it has to have a certain diversity or are we not is that that not something people we barely made the contributor requirement right right I mean from from diversity of number and diversity of even company right right we do company so if the company pulls out but I mean I think the concern here is that it would end up acting as a filter step instead of a increasing the pipeline we really need things that increase the diversity of the inputs on the pipeline not things that filter what ends up coming out at the end of the pipeline that's a really good point I don't think anybody is looking for this is supposed to be more inclusive not excluding people by by setting a number criteria that would that would so you're looking to get a certain percentage versus really because that's the goal isn't to keep people out it's actually to just make sure that we're making bringing more people in okay and I'm not proposing we do that I'm just asking try not understand that question right yeah I mean that would be something practical we could do but I think there's challenges in that no it's a question of you know the box it would be a way to force projects to go out in and you know the underrepresented things but at the same point it acts as a filter to Gary's point you know we're not swimming in contributors right now so I don't know that we could apply any forcing function there yeah and I think that's where I was kind of getting at right I was like I mean I get the fact I'm making like statements of doing something right but maybe there's more that it's more like the community that's why you know the statistics were that the stuff was pretty interesting right and I always look at things also like as as there's the proactive stuff there's one making sure that you're not doing anything that is perceived as not being inclusive or promoting this stuff like that you literally have whatever I'm just gonna like you clearly have racial sexist whatever bias right or you're just mean right I mean inclusion means a lot of things right I know we overuse the word right I mean technically technically inclusion just means that somebody should feel comfortable that they can participate in something right regardless of whatever right so I think you know those types of stuff make make sense but then there's what what can you do you know what can the organization do right you know I don't know is it you know how we recruit you know interns right is it scholarships is it processing stuff is it actually you know not having huge you know wine and dine events right and actually spending some of the funds that people contribute to this thing so you do other things right those seem like more things that the the hyper ledger membership could control and do yeah I think one of the great things is one for somebody right we don't have to necessarily figure those out ourselves part of this putting the impetus on the the governing board is you set some goals you figure out how to execute on those we've already started down here at the grassroots level we see limitations in what we can do and we need you guys to pick that up at your level meanwhile what we do at our level are our list captured in some of those maintainer recommendations and the TSC recommendations so if you've got other thoughts whether they're questions like what mark had put out you can go ahead and add those to the comments section down there and maybe after a month we can bring this topic back in for just for further discussion in the TSC there's probably some other things that that we should decide whether we want to just recommend that the maintainers follow some of those recommendations or whether we require the maintainers follow those things it's another thing to consider over the the coming weeks here all right sounds good thank you all for this leila anisa dan yeah it's a starting point so we'll see where we go from here so thanks thanks for the discussion it was really helpful and looking forward to continuing the presentation sounds good so i would like to move on now to the next agenda item i you know it was not an accident that led this discussion go on i don't think there is much to discuss yet for the last item this has to do with the plans for the TSC election i prompted the staff to you know on that email saying hey you guys are supposed to you know come with the plan presented to the TSC and have the TSC approve it and the timeline being that you know the election is sometimes in october we need the plan to start being executed in september so we basically have one month left to get the plan set and everybody agreeing to it so i figured it would be good to get the discussion going and so in response div and rye worked on putting together a plan that's on the wiki and it has already raised some questions some of us have made some comments in the comment section at the bottom of the wiki page and it's pretty clear that this is not quite right yet so davie you're on i am i'm here so what can you tell us about this what's so i mean how much is it appropriate for people to start during this support well i think the first point to make is that i don't you know never mind we'll talk about that offline um so rye and i have been discussing this ever since about may we started early on this and been slowly making progress um your email reminded us that we hadn't yet published it although we brought it up several times in past tsc meetings um this is all largely you know the q&a was largely lifted from the plan for the 2019 2020 election last fall um the eligibility criteria hasn't really changed much the timeline was updated to reflect the tsc decisions that have been made this spring such as moving the election into october um to better dodge you know summer vacations and uh school years starting up and all that kind of stuff um you did point out that we are doing self and third party nominations this year but through the tsc mailing list so that they can be confirmed before so that nobody gets surprised right um like we had last year we have already discussed there's a new tool that people can use this up this eligibility check site that i put together over the summer where you can go and uh enter in an email address that you think you may have used for hyperledger and it'll tell you whether you show up in the list of eligible voters that has not been updated with um recent data yet so if you use it um right now you may or may not show up but that doesn't mean you cannot vote uh you look at the timeline the second half of august um ryan i will be running the the scripts to gather all of the eligible contributors and populating that site roughly on a daily basis so it should be a pretty up-to-date by the time the first of september rolls around so that's about it i i see that there was comments there um tracy's comment about the google form not sure how that would be not inclusive i would love to hear her comments on that the google form was what we used last year for nominations i am going to propose that we have a standard email form since we're going to be doing nominations through the tsc um i can publish a standard nomination form here on the wiki that you can just copy and paste into an email and fill out the questions that would be my proposed solution for that um that's it questions let's tear this apart because we want to get this right sooner rather than later yes that was basically my motivation for bringing it up and kind of prompting you guys and i may have put you a little bit because i put that on the agenda we didn't have really time to to think on this but uh we were prepared arno it's no big deal so so i think last cycle we had an issue with people nominating others who did not actually want to be on the ticket so um i don't know if it's better to only make itself nominations or if you need a process so that people who had been nominated by another can opt in so dan there was a the tsc took up that question um let's see october 3rd of 2019 and the outcome it's already been resolved it's actually linked to from this page but then the outcome was that nominations shall be posted to the tsc mailing list and confirmed by the nominee in case of nomination by someone else that's the official decision great yeah so if it's not confirmed it doesn't exist exactly and we're going to build that list from the the official confirmed um emails on the tsc list the the the problem about the google form's inclusivity was that google products are not available in asia yeah so that's basically anything that's google is that's like basically a third of our user base of our participant base right so i have an interesting proposal since we're going to try to use or if we go with my idea of having a standard form for an email sent to the tsc list should we translate it into mandarin and into spanish and portuguese and french i mean should go out in many different languages so that people who aren't necessarily native english speakers can potentially nominate people where our development collaboration language is english i'm not sure how far to go there i mean it seems like a bit of a slippery slope because you know we're representing the technical community that's doing its work in english right yeah i was this is a questions post yeah i think you're right i think it's a fair question but i agree with nathan and in fact i mean the tsc conducts his business in english and if people can't even get through the nomination process i mean they are kind of not yeah they're not going to be able to function unfortunately that's just the way it is right okay all right so we're out of time but i wanted to bring that up to everybody's attention i encourage people to follow up in in the comment section and let's iterate over this and try to make progress so that we can get that settled down pretty quickly so arnaud we're set as it is we're set to enter the timeline on the 16th of august that gives us exactly two more tsc calls yeah so i thought it would be a month but you're right so it's even faster than that so i'm glad so let's argue and an email right now and then try to make some decisions next week and finalize the week after yep all right with that being done i think we can close the call on this just on time thank you all for joining we'll talk again next week