Working Group Minutes/MWG 2018-03-20
- Heather Leson (heatherleson)
- Steve Friedl (SJFriedl)
- Michael Spreng (datendelphin)
- Paul Norman (pnorman)
- Jonathan Witcoski (jonwit)
- Joost Schouppe (joostschouppe)
- E-Mail rejected as spam on email@example.com
- Member self service area
- Membership fee waiver program
- missing reminders
- Survey engine
Minutes of last meeting
New working group member
Heather Leson joins the MWG
missing reminder emails
Steve looked into this in some detail, determined it's across the board, not one particular type of reminder. Asked TomH to capture some potential output from the scheduled task process, but it didn't show anything actionable yet.
Joost has been talking about it for some time: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2018-March/005106.html It was on the agenda of the last board meeting, but not discussed SotM working group bought an externally hosted solution, but it would be more logical if MWG would manage this for now, given that some of the use cases would requiere special access to the membership data or OSM communication channels Joost is volunteering to take on any work associated with it.
Any other business
- Membership strategy plan - does it exist? In the meeting, we were advised that this is embedded in the minutes. If there is no stand alone planning document, perhaps this is an item for the next MWG - to draft and review?
- mailman or civicrm for an osmf-announce informational channel. Best to use civicrm because syncing the mailinglist is hard
19:06 < datendelphin> here the link for etherpad for the minutes: https://etherpad.coredump.ch/p/Cyfg4cKrBA 19:06 < heatherleson> check 19:07 < datendelphin> 1. last minutes: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/MWG_2018-03-02 19:07 < pnorman> +1 19:07 < datendelphin> does everyone approve of them? 19:08 < heatherleson> yes please 19:08 < heatherleson> though, I was not at the last meeting, so maybe someone else 19:08 < heatherleson> do you follow roberts rules of order? 19:09 < datendelphin> I don't know what that is but probably no. We are quite informal 19:09 < heatherleson> ok 19:09 < datendelphin> SJFriedl has voted by proxy, so that should be enough 19:10 < datendelphin> 2. heatherleson as a new member of the working group 19:10 < heatherleson> Thank you. I care deeply about community engagement and hope to contribute once I learn more. 19:10 < datendelphin> what are you interested in working on? 19:12 < datendelphin> I usually process the bank payments and the occaisonal question to the membership mail address. Some are interested in "growing the membership" 19:12 < heatherleson> I think that there are many members of OSMF and the wider OSM community. IT seems to me with some research and planning, we might be able to have small, medium and larger asks to support all the working groups. OSM is amazing global community but I would like to know how we engage other parts of the world and how we might build a pathway 19:12 < heatherleson> exactly 19:13 -!- Mutter [~Mutter@2600:380:4076:dbec:6de2:7060:3989:1e91] has joined #osmf-membership 19:13 < heatherleson> so what I need to know is more about the TOR of the membership working group. 19:13 < datendelphin> what is TOR 19:13 < heatherleson> am I, for example, the first woman to join it? 19:13 < heatherleson> terms of reference - mandate - goals/objectives 19:14 < datendelphin> you mean this? https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Membership_Working_Group 19:14 -!- Mutter [~Mutter@2600:380:4076:dbec:6de2:7060:3989:1e91] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:14 -!- Mutter [~Mutter@188.8.131.52] has joined #osmf-membership 19:14 < heatherleson> yes, this is what I meant 19:14 < heatherleson> but I do think it needs a refresh if possible 19:15 < heatherleson> what if “increasing OSMF Membership” also included “increasing global membership and leadership in working groups” 19:15 -!- Mutter [~Mutter@184.108.40.206] has quit  19:16 < datendelphin> Ah ok. This is I think the third iteration of this WG 19:16 < heatherleson> or “increasing and supporting the global membership” with “supporting “ meaning - encouraging leadrship 19:16 < heatherleson> tell me more 19:16 < datendelphin> I don't know much about previous instances 19:16 < heatherleson> paul? 19:17 < heatherleson> er /pnorman 19:17 -!- Steve_ is now known as SJFriedl 19:17 < SJFriedl> hi folks, just got home, reading above. 19:17 < datendelphin> I guess there are lots of people with ideas, but very little gets actually done. 19:17 < datendelphin> hi SJFriedl 19:17 < heatherleson> Hi Steve 19:17 < heatherleson> SJFried 19:18 < pnorman> I'm not sure off-hand. I do know there's been previous work that has failed because people had ideas, but didn't follow through with working on them. 19:18 < heatherleson> Ok, this is good info though. what you have said is - we get inquiries, but are missing the pathways 19:18 < heatherleson> Tell me more pnorman (if possible) 19:18 < pnorman> No, I'm not sure what that means. 19:19 < datendelphin> no we have ideas, not inquiries 19:19 < pnorman> People believe things are important, but not to the point of helping work on them. 19:20 < heatherleson> community management speak - it means - we have ideas, there is interest, but we have a break in conversion to action. For other open communities, there are items called ‘small asks’, ‘medium asks’ and ‘big asks’. This means what is the 1 minute, 30 minute or larger thing to be done 19:20 < heatherleson> i hear you 19:21 < heatherleson> how about i park myself for now. I think there is potential to increase osmf membership and leadership. 19:21 < heatherleson> for now, I have just joined and want to respect your process and learn 19:21 < datendelphin> To get back to your general direction stated above, I think "leadership in working groups" does not really fit. We do not govern working groups. We just keep the register of members tidy 19:21 -!- joostschouppe [~firstname.lastname@example.org] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:21 < heatherleson> ok - noted. 19:22 < heatherleson> who promotes community development and is accountable to support the growth of working groups 19:22 < pnorman> Ya - increasing membership is in our scope, getting members more involved is, but leadership is outside our scope. We'd need to define what leadership means to add it to the WG's scope. 19:22 < heatherleson> i would nto want to govern working groups. It is more that I thought ‘membership working group’ would help OSMF community develop. 19:22 < heatherleson> terms 19:23 < heatherleson> pnorman - that is super helpful 19:23 -!- jonwit [~email@example.com] has joined #osmf-membership 19:23 < heatherleson> maybe we could add that to our next agenda while people think 19:23 < heatherleson> involved to me = a road to leadership. 19:24 < jonwit> hello everyone sorry im late. this is jonathan witcoski 19:24 < heatherleson> i should say that I use leadership in an equal open way not a hierachical way 19:24 < heatherleson> Hi jonwit 19:25 -!- joostschouppe [~firstname.lastname@example.org] has joined #osmf-membership 19:25 < datendelphin> I don't know, you speak a different language. I have a really hard time to figure out what that all means. 19:25 < pnorman> Likewise. 19:25 < heatherleson> ok, may i try again then 19:26 < heatherleson> community management and community development are key to membership engagement 19:26 < SJFriedl> I sort of get it: it loks like trying to cultivate leadership interst in the members. Most folks doing mapping will just do their thing, but *somebody* has to step up and run the place. 19:26 < SJFriedl> when I was a hike leader, I was always looking for new folks who I thought would be good hike leaders themselves. One-man-shows are not great for organizations. 19:26 < heatherleson> if the MWG mandate is to grow OSMF membership, would it not follow that we should also encourage engagement across all the WG and help support that type of engagement. 19:28 < joostschouppe> I was talking about this kind of stuff with Ben Abelshausen (xivk), and we thought about a -it needs a name- strategic working group, which would specifically target tasks that don't really fit any working group 19:28 < heatherleson> nice. Hi joostschouppe 19:28 < joostschouppe> because it does make sense to me to have focused working groups 19:29 < heatherleson> the membership and the community are close cousins. 19:29 < joostschouppe> but I've already seen things slip through the cracks (like Ilya's contribution in the last meeting) and myself trying to expand this WG with the social survey engine 19:29 < heatherleson> and if OSM is the supporter community and OSMF is the membership, then we are here to support the growing needs, especially in the other parts of the world 19:30 < heatherleson> What was Illya’s contribution in the last meeting? 19:30 < datendelphin> recurring paypal donation button 19:30 < heatherleson> ah 19:31 < joostschouppe> details: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/MWG_2018-03-02#Transcript , at 22:09 19:31 < heatherleson> that is a decent idea, which would require some specs 19:32 < datendelphin> why specs? he had a prove of concept. Just no time to test it properly 19:32 < heatherleson> hmm, that is an important item. 19:32 < heatherleson> is there a github account for this? 19:32 < heatherleson> how do you manage inter-meeting items? 19:32 < datendelphin> https://github.com/osmfoundation/donation-drive/pull/13 19:33 < datendelphin> we keep an Open issues list. see the top of the current etherpad 19:33 < heatherleson> ok, so this item is or is not on teh MWF agenda 19:33 < SJFriedl> which is at https://etherpad.coredump.ch/p/Cyfg4cKrBA 19:33 < heatherleson> i don’t see it 19:33 < heatherleson> i mean I see the etherpad, but the item … 19:33 < joostschouppe> well no, that was my point exactly 19:34 < joostschouppe> because it didn't really seem to fit this WG 19:34 < heatherleson> hmm, but it is growing the membership with modern tools 19:34 < datendelphin> no id is fund raising, not growing membership 19:34 < joostschouppe> which is OK for me, it just bothered me that we couldn't really give an alternative course of action 19:34 < heatherleson> agreed 19:35 < pnorman> Writing software isn't our job normally, and it's donations, not membership. 19:36 < joostschouppe> I though Zverik was asking for help on how to move forward, not writing software 19:36 < pnorman> The PR identifies some unfixed issues, and testing is part of writing software 19:37 < datendelphin> no he said someone needs to test it 19:37 < heatherleson> ok, so which Wg would manage it 19:37 < heatherleson> honestly we can find testers. 19:37 < heatherleson> how do other changes get tested? 19:38 < pnorman> The development community. The OSMF explicitly does not manage software development. 19:38 < heatherleson> of course. so then would he just ask people to test with him via osmf-talk 19:39 < datendelphin> no he can do that himself 19:39 < heatherleson> it seems to me if it is going to help the membership donate money that we have a stake in seeing it done well. however, if it is outside the WG, then I understand 19:39 < pnorman> The donation page is slightly odd since it's more of an OSMF thing than an OSM thing, but if we're all agreed it's a donation issue, not a membership one, and not within our scope, should we move on? 19:41 < joostschouppe> If I understand right, no working group should work on this because it's software dev? 19:41 < datendelphin> yes. So heatherleson would you like to help with the growing membership part? 19:42 < heatherleson> yes 19:43 < heatherleson> “growing and supporting” 19:43 < heatherleson> if it is just about numbers, then there is less value 19:43 < heatherleson> people before data 19:43 < SJFriedl> +1 19:45 < heatherleson> is there a strategy document on membership growth from the MWG 19:46 < heatherleson> if not could we do this together? 19:46 < datendelphin> which document are you referring to? 19:47 < heatherleson> usually if there is a mandate to grow something, there is a plan or an archive of plans 19:47 < datendelphin> ah that would be in the minutes 19:48 < heatherleson> so, there is no standalone doc, I would need to go through all the past minutes? 19:48 < datendelphin> To sum it up: currently we focus on making it easier/possible to pay the membership fee 19:48 < heatherleson> ah 19:48 < heatherleson> which is super important 19:49 < pnorman> Just a reminder on time 19:49 < SJFriedl> also the fee waiver program for places that have a hard tie with that 19:49 < datendelphin> yes as SJFriedl that is the only thing we acutally managed to do some progress 19:49 < datendelphin> so lets go to that item? 19:51 < datendelphin> joostschouppe: have you got anything yet for a procedure document? 19:51 < joostschouppe> sorry, no 19:51 < joostschouppe> this meeting was a bit sooner than I expected 19:51 < joostschouppe> I'll do it by this Friday 19:52 < pnorman> I haven't gotten to reviewing the form. The meeting crept up on me. datendelphin, can we set up a time to go over it together? 19:52 < datendelphin> sure 19:52 < heatherleson> joostschouppe - I can review it when ready if this helps 19:52 < heatherleson> (on annual leave march 28 - april 9 19:53 < joostschouppe> great 19:53 < heatherleson> email@example.com. 19:54 < datendelphin> pnorman: can you add heatherleson to the mwg@ address? Then joostschouppe can post it there and all see it 19:54 < pnorman> datendelphin: yes 19:55 < datendelphin> Next topic 4: missing reminder mails. 19:56 < datendelphin> SJFriedl would you like to give a summary? 19:57 < SJFriedl> Sure. I went through all the lapsed members to see which reminders had been sent. The CiviCRM platform records all this stuff, so this is a matter of the emails not being sent *rather than* getting lost in the ether somewhere. 19:57 < SJFriedl> the pattern is that every type of reminder: first and second, expiration #1, etc. had missing items, so it's not a matter of one setup being wrong. This is across the board with no obvious pattern. 19:58 < pnorman> It was found that one of the email addresses set for errors was set to jon bennet, who was involved with past membership work, but isn't active. The admins fixed that, so it's possible we might get some new error notifications, but I haven't seen any, so doubt it's related 19:58 < SJFriedl> We saw that too. 19:58 < SJFriedl> Tom H started having them sent to himself (or a related address) and I believe got nothing actionable. 19:59 < SJFriedl> so this means digging more into CiviCRM software more directly to find out what's going on, perhaps to turn on some verbosity or something. 19:59 < SJFriedl> It's all PHP so how hard could it be? :-) 20:00 < SJFriedl> nothing actionable for the group, it's all on me right now. 20:00 < pnorman> Is that the sound of you volunteering? ;) 20:00 < SJFriedl> the sound of me volunteering was last meeting :-) 20:00 < SJFriedl> yes 20:00 < pnorman> When you get farther into it if you feel it's not something you're going to be able to solve and we need outside expertise, don't be afraid to say so. 20:01 < SJFriedl> Right, I understand that. It's not a good use of my time to spend 40 hours learning this stuff, but so far that's not necesary yet. 20:01 < heatherleson> can we ask someone to help? 20:01 < heatherleson> surely others know civicrm 20:01 < datendelphin> It is a big issue, because it potentially means losing members. So thanks for stepping up, and what pnorman said. 20:01 < heatherleson> +1 20:01 < SJFriedl> we'll engage CiviCRM consultants, but I want to do a little bit of digging first. We've already taken steps and believe that datendelphin and I have a handle on it for now. 20:02 < pnorman> We've discussed going to a consultant but haven't felt it's at that point yet. Even if we can clearly identify the problem then need to bring someone in, it's good to do that identification. 20:03 < datendelphin> I believe Joost added 5: Survey Engine 20:03 < joostschouppe> correct 20:04 < datendelphin> joostschouppe please explain 20:04 < joostschouppe> we can keep it for next time if needed. It's just that it's already been on the board agenda 20:04 -!- jonwit [~firstname.lastname@example.org] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:04 < joostschouppe> well I wrote a summary on the etherpad 20:05 < joostschouppe> I guess I just want to know how you all feel about this 20:06 < datendelphin> Do you have any plans for surveys to make? 20:06 < SJFriedl> vi versus emacs? 20:06 < SJFriedl> :-) 20:06 < pnorman> Board hasn't asked anything of us with it yet, and no one has started writing any surveys which need a platform, so there's nothing urgent. I'm inclined for either limesurvey, that OSM-specific one that was mentioned, or something within CiviCRM. DWG considered their survey with hosted LimeSurvey a success. 20:07 < joostschouppe> it's almost a PR thing. The idea would be to use this for our own needs, but also as a way to encourage researchers to go through the community when thinking abut surveys 20:08 < heatherleson> especially if metrics exist 20:08 < joostschouppe> that way, we don't get twenty small surveys on the same subject, but one proper survey 20:08 < SJFriedl> it would be super if we got actionalble information, even if for some other WG 20:08 < joostschouppe> so if we decide we do this, we can start advertising its use 20:09 < pnorman> The main special needs we'd have would be tie-ins with OSM user names or with OSMF membership info 20:09 < joostschouppe> also, I consider this already up-and-running, as I'm managing the survey for SotM right now (which isn't social science but community participation) 20:10 < joostschouppe> SJFriedl, if you have things you want to know and think can be measured, we could work on an OSMF member survey 20:10 < SJFriedl> I don't have anything to ask, but others who are more about community engagement *cough* Heather *cough* might :-) 20:10 < pnorman> I did have an AOB too 20:11 < heatherleson> yes, I can help 20:11 < heatherleson> joost, maybe we should set up a time to cowork 20:11 < heatherleson> I added my strategy doc question to AOB 20:11 < joostschouppe> before we move on, what actions should we do as a WG? 20:11 < heatherleson> for the survey? 20:11 < datendelphin> what action do you propose? 20:11 < joostschouppe> can we just continue on the course I set, or do we need to get the full board attention? 20:12 < pnorman> I don't think there's anything that needs board approval 20:12 < joostschouppe> ok, great 20:12 < heatherleson> honestly, we should be a data-driven org, so have at it 20:12 < joostschouppe> I'll consider this up and running then, and suggest SotM hand over their account to us 20:13 < pnorman> DWG has a limesurvey account too, for the hosted solution. But it's not active. 20:13 < datendelphin> pnorman: AOB? 20:13 < joostschouppe> thanks pnorman, I'll get in touch with them too 20:14 < pnorman> Did we have anything else to do on the question of getting out announcements to members? re. mikel's question about osmf-announce@. I got the impression he was looking for more, but wasn't sure exactly what 20:14 < datendelphin> ah mikel I forgot 20:14 < datendelphin> The thing is, Dorothea already asked that some months ago 20:14 < heatherleson> i think osmf-announce would build much good will 20:15 < joostschouppe> (AOB=any other business; today is strong on the abbreviations) 20:15 < datendelphin> I answered that probably the best solution is to use civicrm, because keeping the mailinglist in sync is really difficult 20:15 < heatherleson> as in - if we are not sending renewal notices and are investigating, we should post to osmf-announce 20:16 < heatherleson> to let people know to renew just in case. That is what I see osmf-announce for - major announcements, administrata 20:17 < SJFriedl> renewal notices are spotty. Short term we can probably just watch it manually to see what's been missed and follow up with an email to the member 20:17 < heatherleson> ok 20:18 < heatherleson> ok let me try again 20:18 < pnorman> osmf-announce@ effectively doesn't exist right now, it's been shut down, and we don't want to bring it back, because keeping a mailing list in sync with membership is a pain. 20:18 < heatherleson> is the question - should we (the MWG) start the osmf-announce list 20:18 < SJFriedl> We would need a way to sync it with actual membership. 20:18 < heatherleson> if yes, we should because people want headlines 20:18 < heatherleson> some people are ok monitoring osmf-talk 20:19 < heatherleson> some people just want to urgent membership details. 20:19 < SJFriedl> there might be some kind of API with CiviCRM that would extract this list to let it sync with whatever is used for mailing. 20:19 < heatherleson> i would recommend bringing it back. 20:19 < heatherleson> what are the reasons for not bringing it back? 20:19 < SJFriedl> syncing mailing list with actual membership 20:19 < datendelphin> heatherleson that is not the question. It is a purely technical one 20:19 < heatherleson> honesty, i am getting feedback that the osmf-talk last is hard 20:19 < heatherleson> oh 20:19 < heatherleson> tell me more 20:20 < SJFriedl> who do we use for mailing now? 20:20 < SJFriedl> for (say) osmf-talk ? 20:20 < datendelphin> if we send it through mail man or civicrm 20:20 < pnorman> civicrm and mailman don't talk to each other, so it's manual work every time someone joins or leaves. 20:20 < datendelphin> mailman SJFriedl self hosted 20:20 < SJFriedl> ok. 20:21 < joostschouppe> mailchimp then? 20:21 < SJFriedl> that would trade one problem for another 20:21 < joostschouppe> it has an api 20:21 < SJFriedl> we have to see if CiviCRM does too. 20:21 < pnorman> We can send emails from civicrm, I thought that's what we were recommending? 20:21 < SJFriedl> if we can, that's a great way to handle it. 20:21 < SJFriedl> though I wonder if the communications working group would be the peeps for the content? 20:22 < pnorman> ya, content isn't our job. 20:22 < datendelphin> yes we can send through civicrm and Dorothea has done it a couple of times I assure you 20:22 < SJFriedl> well then that solves that problem. If osmf-announce works, then the comms working group could own this with content 20:23 < joostschouppe> SJFriedl do you mean civicrm mailing or a mailing list? 20:23 < SJFriedl> civicrm doing the mailing. This would be a one-way blast, not like a mailing list people could chat to. 20:24 < SJFriedl> osmf-talk would be for discussions I suppose. If we have to do it through mailman to allow conversations, it's a lot more work to keep the email lists to sync 20:24 < heatherleson> announcements are set up for lower volume, strategic messages 20:24 < joostschouppe> ok, so we send that answer to mikel again then? 20:24 < datendelphin> I would propose to drop the forced subscription (like many others have) 20:24 < heatherleson> eg. board elections, 20:25 < datendelphin> just inform them that they can subscribe as a member 20:25 < heatherleson> bylaws, 20:25 < heatherleson> urgent things 20:25 < pnorman> Ya, we don't need a list that supports discussion. We do need a way for them to unsubscribe from announcements, except legally required ones. 20:25 < heatherleson> annual fundraising, SOMT 20:25 < heatherleson> SOTM 20:26 < heatherleson> ok, it is 1.5 hours and late. I need to go. 20:27 < heatherleson> i will read the notes.and try to find back documents on ‘growing the membership’ 20:27 < heatherleson> night all 20:27 < SJFriedl> Thanks for joining us. 20:27 < heatherleson> thanks for helping me on ramp 20:27 < datendelphin> ok, we can pick up your any other business item next time then 20:28 < heatherleson> we started to talk about it but i think it is a matter of looking for old docs 20:28 < datendelphin> Then we close the meeting for today. Thanks all for joining.