Attendance of the AI Assist Committee on Tuesday 2022-03-22

[Ian Kelling]

"Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn at sfconservancy.org> writes:

> Ian Kelling wrote:
>> Who attended this meeting? It is normal for minutes to explicitly say
>> who is in attendance.
>
> Meanwhile, to answer your underlying question of why the minutes are
> anonymized:
>
> Frankly, more than one committee member asked that the minutes not include
> any account of which points were made by which committee member.  While
> perfect transparency at the level of detail you're asking for would be
> ideal,

I wouldn't expect the minutes to include anything about who said what
and I didn't suggest that.

The reason I asked about who attended is that as a reader, I wondered:
was this a meeting of the full 11 members, or just 2 or 3 or what? What
is the context of these minutes? I didn't even think of anonymity as an
issue. I can imagine some circumstances where it would make sense for
the committee to include someone without announcing their name.

Anyways, most of the context I wondered about could be provided without
disclosing any names, for example you could write: "5/11 committee
members and 1 guest attended", and if it was 10/11 or 11/11, you could
say , "at least 10/11 committee members attended". I suggest something
like that at least.

Also, you are disclosing your own attendance by disclosing that you
wrote the minutes. I suggest that the other public members be asked if
they want to disclose their attendance in minutes or not. If they do, it
would only be confirming that they attended a meeting they publicly
announced they planned to attend.

-- 
Ian Kelling | Senior Systems Administrator, Free Software Foundation
GPG Key: B125 F60B 7B28 7FF6 A2B7  DF8F 170A F0E2 9542 95DF
https://fsf.org | https://gnu.org