17:30:27 #startmeeting Mindshare 17:30:28 Meeting started Wed Jul 10 17:30:27 2019 UTC. 17:30:28 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 17:30:28 The chair is bexelbie. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:30:28 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:30:28 The meeting name has been set to 'mindshare' 17:30:28 #chair jsmith sumantrom robyduck nb x3mboy bt0dotninja bexelbie bt0 relrod 17:30:28 Current chairs: bexelbie bt0 bt0dotninja jsmith nb relrod robyduck sumantrom x3mboy 17:30:28 #topic Roll Call 17:30:28 .hello bex 17:30:29 bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' 17:30:44 hi 17:31:13 o/ 17:31:39 o/ 17:31:46 .hello2 17:31:47 nb: nb 'Nick Bebout' 17:31:59 .hello2 17:32:00 x3mboy: x3mboy 'Eduard Lucena' 17:34:23 #topic Agenda 17:34:23 Proposed: Tickets: 146, 145, 138, 139, and then Open Floor 17:34:23 Any suggested additions or modifications? 17:35:10 All good for me 17:35:21 ok 17:35:45 +1 17:36:26 #topic https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/141 17:36:27 #link https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/141 17:36:27 Votes on latest probably final proposal. It'd be nice to get the majority of people to vote by next week. We are currently +4 (of 8 possible voters) 17:36:47 we don't have a formal policy on policy chagnes, so I think majority in two weeks is what we've worked on, iirc 17:37:57 not sure there is much to say on this one - moving on with a fwe more like it 17:37:59 #topic #146 Devconf IN 2019 17:37:59 #link https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/146 17:37:59 Votes close tomorrow as it is passing right now 17:38:10 Count me as +1 17:38:17 actually only one more 17:38:38 @jaredsmith to devconf.in or to the proposal on #141 (which I jsut realized screwed up the topic link on) 17:39:27 Voted 17:39:33 * bexelbie will mark jared's vote when he calls it 17:39:42 moving on to the first non-announcement 17:39:43 #topic #145 Identify role of Fedora Ambassadors in 2019 and best use of resources/time/energy 17:39:43 #link https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/145 17:39:43 Continue the conversation in ticket ... and here now if we wish 17:39:43 Note: this blocks #137 Ambassadors Emeriti proposal 17:40:19 I was +1 to 141 17:40:23 There are a bunch of conversations going on about what ambassadors does today and for the future 17:40:29 @jaredsmith - got it! 17:40:35 @x3mboy can you post the ambassador mailing list about this and the other tickets encouraging participation? <. Is this still a thing? 17:40:43 @x3mboy can you post the ambassador mailing list about this and the other tickets encouraging participation? <- Is this still a thing? 17:41:11 yes, I think it should be 17:41:16 we need the input of active ambassadors here 17:41:30 or we need to know that there are none or that they are unsure about what is going on with them 17:41:42 Ok, I'm on it then 17:41:47 woo! thank you 17:41:48 Can you action me? 17:41:59 since it sounds like we will get more input I suggest we keep this in ticket 17:42:09 #action x3mboy to post about this ticket to the ambassador ML 17:42:19 I think is worthless to discuss it here, we should wait for input for Ambys now 17:42:27 * nb is kinda conflicted about this whole proposal 17:42:27 from* 17:42:38 I see the point of "why do we need to have the title ambassador" 17:43:23 but yet, it seems like advocate is a path to becoming ambassador 17:43:28 at least i though that was the original idea 17:43:52 Agreed 17:43:57 sure, it was 17:44:01 nb I agree that was the original thought - but if ambassadors isn't being active then what is the point of hte path? 17:44:10 hmm 17:44:17 perhaps that is true 17:44:21 I am not on a mission to end ambassadors 17:44:30 I am on a mission to end spending energy arguing about ambassadors 17:44:51 They aren't active because we've made it so hard for them to get anything done that it's just not worth the effort 17:44:59 That doesn't mean that the idea isn't still a valid one 17:45:00 and right now the whole ambassadors thing is feeling like stop energy 17:45:18 @jaredsmith I agree with you - but we ahve also created an "get things done" process and we aren't seeing it used 17:45:24 by ambassadors 17:45:26 I'm +1 to dissolve all type of title that encourage people to believe they have any super special power because they have a title 17:45:44 x3mboy, I don't see it as "power" but rather as a recognition for their service 17:45:58 x3mboy, funny you would say that ... I was having a sidebar with someone else and we actually talked ourselves into eliminating the advocate title too - as it just existed to balance against ambassadors 17:46:17 bexelbie and I will be +1 to that too 17:46:21 nb I'd love to see us donig more in general to recognize contribution here - I am not sure that title is doing it though 17:46:33 @jaredsmith yes, I think we need to figure out how to overcome the inertia into figuring out how to get more people to organize events 17:46:35 Just do what you have to do, and gain trust because of the thing you actually do 17:46:36 it'd be great, for example, to have people called out and praised in a blog post or something similar 17:46:52 some of the NA ambassadors wrote a bad event proposal a while back and so they think mindshare is out to get them 17:46:54 which is not the case 17:46:56 And if you stop doing it, be brave enough to recognize you're not doingit anymore 17:47:04 s/bad/not in line with our goals/ 17:47:05 (driving for a few minutes) 17:47:14 nb if there is a path forward to achieving that that includes having ambassadors I am +1 - but just keeping a title around for stop energy is not useful 17:47:33 bexelbie, I think this may be a good topic for our mindshare workshop at flock 17:48:31 I wish we could get some of the NA ambassadors there, I think relrod and I will be the only ones 17:48:39 but maybe we could have a bluejeans during some of our workshop at least 17:49:22 the bandwidth should be good enough for a conference 17:49:30 just remember timezones :D 17:49:32 My mind now is on: Can you do what you do (evangelism, publicizing, mentoring) without the ambassador title? 17:49:46 true 17:50:02 I feel like we are covering our previus conversation again ... I wonder if we should table this for response from x3mboy's email and for the workshop? 17:50:06 x3mboy, that is a good point 17:50:06 continuing in ticket 17:50:14 bexelbie, I agree, table it for his email and the workshop 17:50:18 * bexelbie will reopen if we table if @jaredsmith wants to add things after he drive 17:50:20 drives 17:50:39 Agree with continuing iin the ticket 17:50:52 we can always circle back ... moving forward 17:50:53 #topic #138 Determine ownership of Fedora social media responsibilities 17:50:53 #link https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/138 17:50:53 react to strawman proposal 17:51:15 not sure we have much new to say here - the summary is a new page or addition to an existing one about getting social media coverage for your event 17:51:32 this is based on the idea of "if we get content, then we should solve the management problem" but solving management first doesn't get us content 17:51:38 I'm going to pass as ignorant, What is strawman? 17:51:42 kind of parallels the ambassador convo in someways 17:51:57 Like a gatekeeper or UPOF 17:51:57 a strawman, in this case, is an argument that has been put forward that can be destroyed, but it starts the conversation 17:51:59 ? 17:52:20 this is actually a misuse of the term .. I just realized 17:52:20 :D 17:52:27 so in this case this is a real starting proposal 17:52:43 technically a strawman proposal is one that is deliberately set up bad to fail - often used to force better ideas 17:53:01 there is also a logical fallacy called strawman 17:53:03 ohhh 17:53:07 sorry for misusing the term here 17:53:11 more clear 17:53:19 What's a UPOF? 17:54:41 Unique Point Of Failure 17:54:49 ahh 17:54:52 I really like that 17:55:06 "no one expected the gasket to blow .. it was literally hanging on a hook in the junk room" ... a UPOF 17:55:07 :D 17:55:12 I don't, I have too much of that in my job 17:55:15 :'( 17:55:20 although I suspect you mean Unique as in Single 17:55:25 :( 17:55:26 Sure 17:55:27 ok , back tot he meeting 17:55:34 please read this ticket and react 17:55:43 #topic #139 Add contributors to @fedoracommunity Twitter account for Flock 2019 17:55:43 #link https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/139 17:55:43 Needs a next action, imho 17:55:58 this is highly related to the last ticket and to a ticket in Marketing 17:56:10 I think this needs a next action because people +1'ed something I didn't think was a solution 17:56:30 unless we are saying, we don't think the big problem is contributors to this account as much as getting that content echoed 17:56:51 I think people is voting +1 to add more people 17:56:54 Just that 17:57:15 But I really didn't have enough time to dig in the ticket and think about the problem 17:57:54 well, yeah i vote +1 for add more people, but we need a plan 17:58:23 * nb is glad to help with that account 17:58:28 and +1 to add more people in general 17:58:43 sounds like we need a real next action here 17:58:54 It sounds reasonable to add more people during flock, since being a big conference, a lot stuff are happening at the same time 17:58:56 I asked jwf about it - but if someone else has one I am sure he would be happy 17:59:04 Fast enough for not being able to follow all of them 17:59:10 * jwf reads up 17:59:18 So next step should be recruit people 17:59:43 And honestly this account should be managed by CommOps, so, CommOps should do the Head hunt 17:59:45 :D 18:00:07 😅 18:00:07 I need to step away a moment - can someone else drive us -- after this is open floor 18:00:21 The reason I am hesitant to act is because of the management question. If I received Mindshare blessing, I could take initiative on this towards bringing in some new folks for Flock on @fedoracommunity Twitter 18:00:32 If I recall, I have permissions to add more folks but I need to confirm that 18:01:02 I was hoping for #138 to take more form before driving #139 forward 18:02:06 jwf, I think ultimately Mindshare would be responsible for the social media 18:02:20 but the question is, do we want to make the decisions directly or delegate it to marketing, or to the existing admins, or what 18:02:32 I'm sort of back in the meeting now 18:02:37 nb: All accounts, even primary channels like @fedora? 18:02:41 (Trying to do two meetings at once) 18:02:45 Wait! 18:02:46 nb: It would be helpful to get your perspective in #138 :) 18:02:56 That is why I am conflicted about #139 18:03:03 jwf, I think it would fall under mindshare's scope 18:03:05 even @fedora 18:03:06 In the case proposed: @fedoracommunity the management should be done by CommOps 18:03:49 x3mboy: This is more @bt0dotninja's area and defer to his opinion, but from my POV, CommOps needs time to re-define itself first before taking on new responsibilities 18:03:59 jwf, I would agree 18:04:06 That is True 18:04:26 * nb would propose for now that mindshare manage the social media accounts (i.e. making major decisions) 18:04:47 but I think we could say "jwf can add people to @fedoracommunity" and not have to vote on each person 18:05:24 I am happy to lead the charge on that leading up to Flock. I would appreciate an affirmative vote on that by Mindshare since there is no formal management structure currently for Fedora social media. 18:05:40 nb, I'm agreed with that, but there is a previous step to that, that is: list and contact social media account managers and tell them the decission and why 18:06:01 x3mboy, yeah 18:06:07 Works for me 😊 18:06:12 x3mboy, I thin kwe should tell them we don't intend to make a lot of changes 18:06:24 nb, sure 18:06:26 Maybe some outreach here: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/social-media.lists.fedoraproject.org/ 18:06:26 we are just defining that we see ourselves as the ones ultimately responsible for the accounts 18:06:43 since IIRC commops and marketing all fall under the mindshare umbrella 18:06:51 jwf has a holistic view of the project +1 (at least for @fedoracommunity) 18:07:07 Ok, so, how we move on? 18:07:10 * bexelbie is back 18:07:19 And it was bexelbie's fault 18:07:35 agree 18:07:59 So, my first proposal is: It is the view of the mindshare committee that we are ultimately responsible/in charge of social media accounts for Fedora. 18:08:14 do we want to vote? and then put it in the ticket for other votes? 18:08:18 * nb not sure how to proceed 18:08:32 I could offer a suggestion from my POV 18:08:38 jwf, sure, please do 18:08:47 two things: 1) As FCAIC I would love to see a complete list of access for our social media accounts - so no matter what happens we need docs on this 18:08:59 2) nb I think we can just say that and make sure council doesn't disagree 18:09:07 then we can delegate as we see fit to get the work done 18:09:08 bexelbie, true 18:09:16 * bexelbie thinks Mindshare voting on individual admins is not a good system 18:09:20 bexelbie, I agree 18:09:21 I was going to suggest the same for #138 18:10:00 For #139, I would like to have delegation to recruit some folks on my own without folks being angry or surprised at me if the account has a few more tweeters :) 18:10:11 jwf, +1 18:10:17 can you actually write that into the ticket jwf? 18:10:22 that we can vote on 18:10:33 bexelbie: Yes. I can't take action immediately but write me an action and I will do it 18:11:09 #action jwf to update #139 with a specific proposal for him to take action adding people and keeping reporting in place about it (work with FCAIC) 18:11:14 I amended a bit - we can work out the details 18:11:19 big thing is I need the access list 18:11:28 * jwf nods 18:11:31 Thanks. 18:12:37 This is still the best we have 18:12:41 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing_social_networks 18:12:56 ^^ AFAIK, is still mostly accurate 18:13:01 * jsmith wraps up his other meeting, and is now fully engaged with this meeting. 18:13:09 x3mboy, I'd like to see that expanded some and ideally moved under mindshare docs, assuming this is our responsibility 18:13:41 bexelbie, as nb proposal, it should be, and I'm agreed as lead of marketing 18:14:15 I can write it in mindshare docs, but I still need confirmation of ownership of account 18:14:18 And also access 18:14:32 x3mboy, you shuld have access to our docs, if not a PR is good - but I'll check pagure 18:14:41 we do PRs anyway to ensrue review 18:14:45 s/Google+// :D 18:14:53 nb do you want to take point on asking council? 18:14:54 cool 18:15:02 bexelbie, ok 18:15:04 I was talking about the ownership and access to the SM accounts 18:15:06 A ticket should be easy, barring there actually be objection 18:15:08 Not to pagure or docs 18:15:10 xD 18:15:29 x3mboy, let's start with affirming mindshare then work out what marketing is actually able to take on successfully, imho 18:15:31 I think that list doesn't reflect for example, that bt0dotninja and me have access to upload videos to YouTube 18:15:36 as I know you're donig work over there 18:15:42 * jwf needs to head offline - I have my action item in my todo 18:15:45 o/ 18:15:52 something I can sum up in council meeting ? :) 18:15:52 Bye! 18:15:59 #action nb to confirm with council that we have the "ownership/management" responsibilty for social media and can sub-delegate 18:16:14 #action x3mboy to move the social media list to mindshare docs and to scope what marketing can take on 18:16:17 those look right? 18:16:27 YEs 18:16:36 Looks good to me 18:17:11 cool 18:17:21 any other conversation here right now? 18:17:26 Yes 18:17:31 Sorry, No 18:17:32 on this topic or open floor? 18:17:41 That yes was to other meeting 18:17:50 I have an item for the open floor 18:18:31 My Mindshare-centered talk was accepted for Flock... Not sure how many other Mindshare members will be there, but I'd love your help making sure I cover all of the relevant information 18:18:53 It's a year-in-review plus what-we-have-our-eyeballs-on type talk 18:18:57 #topic open floor 18:18:58 * sumantro will be happy to help! 18:19:11 Great, thanks sumantro 18:19:34 * bexelbie will probably not be at Flock this year (personal reasons not realted to my post today) - but I am happy to review and edit on this 18:19:53 jsmith, np :) 18:20:09 I'm not attending flock, but I'm willing to help and participate remotely if possible 18:20:14 jsmith, ok, good, both of our talks were accepted, then 18:20:19 my workshop and your talk 18:20:32 I'll start clearing up my outline, and share it with the group then :-) 18:20:42 EOF :-) 18:20:45 jsmith++ 18:20:46 x3mboy: Karma for jsmith changed to 2 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 18:20:47 nb++ 18:20:49 x3mboy: Karma for nb changed to 6 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 18:20:53 i will be happy to help too 18:20:59 I have another topic to Open Floor 18:21:41 Go ahead, x3mboy 18:22:13 Google+ is dead now, and we have a limited ammount of time to download the data that was stored 18:22:35 x3mboy: I think someone else already downloaded that data. 18:22:44 puiterwijk, ok, cool then 18:22:46 Nevermind 18:22:47 xD 18:22:56 :D 18:23:01 I think so too 18:23:14 puiterwijk do you have a clon or something? 18:23:16 I remember an infra ticket ab out the ability to store them 18:23:16 LOL 18:23:19 eof 18:23:29 x3mboy: I think there was an infra ticket asking us to store it.... Can't find it now though 18:23:53 I remember seeing the ticket as well 18:23:58 I was thinking Paul filed it 18:24:09 brb again 18:24:12 and i think he said he had the data 18:24:27 Cool 18:24:31 yes, https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/7678 18:24:59 nb++ thanks for the Paul hint... "Google" or "Google+" are neither in "G+"... 18:24:59 I was to make sure the data was obtained. I didn't want to obtained because is out of my scope of responsability 18:25:06 apparently bproffit has it 18:25:35 x3mboy: thanks for bringing it up, good to be sure :) 18:25:38 but isn't responding to the ticket 18:25:42 x3mboy, are you able to download the data? 18:25:52 Yes, I'm able 18:26:03 x3mboy, can you download it and get a copy to puiterwijk? 18:26:07 I didn't notice unil now 18:26:11 until* 18:26:16 back 18:26:25 x3mboy: can you email it to puiterwijk@redhat.com? Thanks! 18:26:37 I'll store it in our backup, and close the ticket afterwards. 18:26:47 Just get any and all data you can get regarding the account. 18:26:55 puiterwijk, is ok if I uploaded to my fedorapeople and you take it from there? 18:27:22 x3mboy: sure. But then keep it out of ~/public_html, and email me the path :) 18:27:35 Ok 18:27:50 just confirmed bproffitt is 99% sure he has it somewhere too 18:27:55 but lets get an additional known copy 18:28:10 +1 18:28:21 Ah well, once we have a copy, we're fine. I don't care that much who proxies it to us :) 18:28:24 I just trigger the process to generate the file 18:28:29 Thanks! 18:28:32 x3mboy++ 18:28:32 puiterwijk: Karma for x3mboy changed to 4 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 18:28:37 x3mboy++ 18:28:38 jsmith: Karma for x3mboy changed to 5 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 18:28:39 Once I get the confirmation from google I will share it 18:28:40 :D 18:28:53 Cookies!!! 18:29:05 Great 18:29:58 x3mboy++ puiterwijk++ bexelbie++ 18:29:58 nb: Karma for x3mboy changed to 6 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 18:30:00 jaredsmith++ 18:30:00 nb: Karma for bex changed to 3 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 18:30:10 EOF 18:30:10 jsmith++ 18:30:10 nb: Karma for jsmith changed to 3 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 18:31:09 I need to go. Food places on campus close in 30 minutes 18:31:13 * nb has not had lunch yet 18:31:41 we're at time 18:31:45 I am gonig to call it 18:31:47 thank you all! 18:31:50 #endmeeting