Synthesize TTW Core Team meeting questions about Governance

[AlexandraAAJ]

Structuring questions under subsections

Following the feedback received from the meeting on 09 June, we have synthesize all the questions and comments in 9 groups:

• Book
• Book dash
• Communications
• Community participation guideline
• Funding
• Github
• Governance / Core team
• Project wide
• TPS

Each group will answer the following question:
"is the answer in the book" with options YES or NO.

• If the answer is YES: a link will be shared
• If the answer is NO we will add a line with next steps

Book

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
What content ends up in the book	- [ ] Yes	Ways of working section - Project members - review, assign and approve content. Here are also ways to contribute Community members, contributors and co-authors
Who designs fun new things like a new landing page?	- [ ] No	Design suggestions have happened on an adhoc basis, with more experimental ideas usually being acted on at Book Dash
Who decides if an edit should be a new chapter or just an edit?	- [ ] Yes	Ways of working section - Project members - could be more clear but it is there
Who to consult if you want to revise or restructure a chapter?	- [ ] Yes	Ways of working section - Project members - could be more clear but it is there
How long can sections/chapters etc be?	- [ ] No	The Chapter Template Folder contains lots of relevant info but not exactly the lenght of the chapters/sections
How to represent whose opinion's is reflected in a subchapter/chapter (not even resolving, just showing)?	- [ ] No	(No idea) Other team member's answer: Enhancement Proposals? democratic mediums. It should definitely be a simpler process than JEPs 😅 Django
What is and is not appropriate content for the book? +1+1	- [ ] No	Project members review and approve commits,issues and PR. They can identify NOT appropriate content for the book or raise it for discussion - Make it more clear? Ways of working section
Who decides if content is out of scope for TTW?	- [ ] No	The community monitors and adapts the content of the book and the project members review, guide and approve changes
How do we avoid becoming overly broad?	- [ ] No
How to manage citation/giving credit to the pulling together of ideas	- [ ] Yes	Citing The Turing Way section

Questions that are repeated in some way in this section:

• What content is appropriate for TTW
• TTW will never be finished - but how do we define when things are out of scope and should not be added to the book? is there a point where we have all the themes or guides that are necessary and we keep building on those?

Book Dash

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
Who comes to the bookdash?	- [ ] Yes	Who should apply to join the Book Dash
Who sets the timelines for bookdash?	- [ ] No
Who designs the structure of the bookdash?	- [ ] No
What projects get accepted to bookdash? What is the overall objective of the Book Dash?	- [ ] Yes	Book dash Objectives
Who approves images (scriberia drafts)?	- [ ] No
book dash acceptance +1+1 (accountability to the line manager)	- [ ] Yes	Selection of book dash participants

Communications

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
Who gives talks about the turing way	- [ ]
Who applies & who is given the opportunity to talk at conferences	- [ ]
Who represents TTW at conferences/events in an official capacity	- [ ]
What events/training etc we run	- [ ]
How long is too long to leave a post unasnwered in TTW Slack	- [ ]
What talks and event opportunities are available	- [ ]
slack is a lot - important messages can be lost quickly (many people are in multiple workspaces)	- [ ] No	We have a slack policy, which will be added to the book

Community Participation guideline

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
How are conflicts between members resolved?	No
Who writes the CoC?	Yes	It is at the end of the section, however should the CoC Committee be updated? Points of contact should be updated & training done with core delivery staff
Who makes decisiosn on potential breaches of COC?	Yes	There's a CoC Committee
Who enforces the CoC?	- [ ] Yes	CoC Committee
Who can bring a topic to a collaboration cafe?	- [ ] Yes	Collab Cafe Topic proposals
Who can bring a guest to a collaboration cafe?	- [ ] No
Who joins coworking on Monday?	- [ ] Yes	While Kirstie has sent this by email, it is not in the Weekly Coworking calls section

Funding

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
How to get funding to go to a conference	- No	We don't have a policy in place
Who decides to apply for funding for The Turing Way?	- No
Which events does TTW sponsor?	- [ ] No	TTW has no funding available to sponsor
How do I get further information of the funding (past, present, future) of the TTW?	- [ ]
How funds are spent?	- [ ] No	This should be connected to the Turing Institute participation and how they pay core staff salaries
Who can apply for funding on behalf of the project?	- [ ] No

Repeated questions/ reflections:

• funding allocation
  • TTW team will take this on

GitHub

Comment from Alex to Anne (and all), some of the questions here are very similar to "the book" ones, what about merging these 2 sections into "Github content"?

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
What tools do we use?	- [ ]	?
How do we utilise GitHub?	- [ ]	?
Who should review a PR*	- [ ] Yes	Project members - review, assign and approve PR. The name of the section could be changed for better understading? Ways of working section
Who do I nominate to review a PR	-[ ] Yes	Project members - review, assign and approve PR. The name of the section could be changed for better understading? Ways of working section
When a piece of work is "done" enough to submit a PR +1	- [ ] No	This is not explicitly mentioned. The contributor can decide it and the reviewer will approve or add comments.
Who should fix a broken link if it is urgent (eg, the home page doesn't load)?	- [ ] No	There's a get in touch section.. We could specify urgent issues.
Who should fix a broken link if it is not urgent?	- [ ] No	The Get in touch section could include this type of issues
Who resolves differences of opinion between the author of a PR and the reviewer?	- [ ] No	This sounds like something that officially should be in the remit of the CM as a mediator, but may be very context dependent
Who merges a PR?	- [ ] Yes	Project members - review, assign and approve PR. The name of the section could be changed for better understading? Ways of working section

Governance/Core team

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
What roles people have	No	Contributor roadmap could help
Who is in charge +1+1	No	Pathway - Roadmap to be developed
Who becomes core +1	No	Pathway - Roadmap to be developed
What it means to be on the core team +1	No	Pathway - Roadmap to be developed
What makes you a core member? How much time you should give away as a core member?	- [ ] Almost Yes	In the book we call them Project Members, we have the list and how much time they should be giving
Who is in the working groups	- [ ] No	Pathway - Roadmap to be developed
Who decides when working groups meet?	- [ ] No	Working groups are not mentioned in the book, but groups have decided when to meet as needed
Who is a working group accountable to?	- [ ] No	Pathway - Roadmap to be developed -> Suggested: chairs, co-chairs, core?
Who creates a working group? what is expected from working group?+1	- [ ] No	So far, groups have been created with help from CM, identifying already existing workstreams in the project. A template needs to be developed for working group creation
How autonomous is a working group	- [ ] No
Who governs the working group, can we just join a different one that aligns with our work better	- [ ] No
When to change a policy, process, tool (e.g. if we think something new is better)	- No	Contributor roadmap could help
How to participate in decision making / what is appropriate to be fully open and democratic and what isn't - many decisions are very transparent. But difficult to know where to find/be in the room for. +1	- [ ] No	Pathway - Roadmap to be developed
How can a regular community member have decision making power? should they?	- [ ] No
How to agree consensus from the community ?	- [ ] No

Questions/Reflections that are repeated in some way in this section:

• Is anyone in charge? (should anyone be?)+1
• Is there a pathway to decide who's in charge? +1
• Who decides how the volunteers are recruiting to the core team? +1
• How do other working groups operate? Do they need to consult the community?
• how are people held to account?
• • how to participate in decision making / what is appropriate to be fully open and democratic and what isn't - many decisions are very transparent. But difficult to know where to find/be in the room for. +1
    • Pathway

Project-wide

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
Who decides things in TTW?	- [ ] No	Work in progress (Governance)
What the direction of the Turing Way is - what is the vision, how are we moving towards it +1	- [ ] No	Work in progress (Governance)
Relationship between the Turing Institute and The Turing Way +1 million +1+1+1+1	- [ ]Yes	In our Communiy section, it says: "Although The Turing Way receives support and funding from The Alan Turing Institute, the project is designed to be a global collaboration." It could be better explained
What an external collaboration with ttw could look like	- [ ] No	Very interested to hear how to guide people here, I guess we could use The Practitioners Hub as an example(?)
What are the goals of the project? What is our manifesto? Are we still/just a "reproducible, ethical and collaborative data science"? +1	- [ ] No	Has been noted a few times in different contexts - work in progress
who do we consult for big changes e.g. Jupyter	- [ ] No	Get in touch could include this or we could add a contributor roadmap for big/simple changes (Anne, I think I've seen something you prepared)
transparency vs not being able to find things	- ?	Should we include a Q&A section in the book
Power of relationships & connections as a means of acquiring information	- [ ] No	The information should be easy to find to avoid structures of power. Should this be in the onboarding process ?

Questions/Reflections that are repeated in this section:

• acessibility vs transparency are different things
• don't want lists of lists to find things
• user experience of community contribution
• difficult to manage hardcore transparency with importance of building relationships
• what's the difference between being 'community-led' and being 'community-inspired' or 'community-informed'
• turing way core delivery staff will draft a version of the document to share more widely with the core team
  • role of core team is to hold the core delivery staff accountable to reporting out and listening to feedback
• Meta point: There is a difference between not being transparent and information not being known (hard to find, not promoted, not consulted, etc.) +1 (this was our b/o room's EXACT point) +1

TPS

Question	Is the answer in the book	Link / Comment
How much contribution is expected from TPS team members?	- [ ] Yes

Other comments that are already included in the above groups.

• turing people in general say please cut down on emails
• most visible issue mentioned above is the relationship between the turing institute and the turing way (especially regarding funding allocation)
  • how can we make this relationship more clear?
• is Kirstie the BDFL? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictator_for_life)
  • emergently, KW is, but written into founding documents of TTW that this should not be the case
  • upcoming governance documentation should include information about this
  • design of the turing way should be that it should be able to exist within the turing institute
  • important to tease apart the relationship with tps & staff members
  • when should a coup happen???? (lol - jk for the reader)
  • role of power dynamics & hierarchies, and teasing out these relationships
  • up to what point does the turing way have a specific vision (that comes from the turing) and the community-led vision (coming from)

[aleesteele]

@AlexandraAAJ - is there a reason why this is locked? It's great to see these questions formatted as tables!

[AlexandraAAJ]

Not that I remember, I think we wanted to centralised the Governance conversation in this issue (#3215) and therefore didn't used this format.