Our team has been using a social agreement for our team meetings, and we have seen other teams using them recently as well (web & apps, ambassadors).
Our social agreement:
- Focus on listening
- Stay present as much as possible, refrain from email/chat/etc
- Let everyone have a chance to speak, be aware of how much time you are talking
- Be mindful of the meeting schedule and help to move the dialog forward
- Use the raise hand function
- Stay on mute when you are not speaking
In our last DEI meeting the content of our agreement came up, as there was a change suggested, to remove or change "Assume good intent". This phrase is problematic, so we removed it for the time being, but we would like to make an addition to replace that.
Beyond that change, we would like to do some further research, potentially make more changes, and publish as a recommended social agreement for any Fedora team to take on for their meetings and team dynamics.
What is the reason behind removing this? Can we get some more context here please? Just wish to understand this.
Hi @amsharma we are keeping the social agreement in place, we are only removing the line "assume good intent". It has been pointed out that this phrase is not as inclusive as it might seem at first. See:
Discussed in 2022-12-05 video meeting.
We revisited this issue with the intent of getting it published in the DEI Team documentation. We are opening a final call for revisions and feedback to the social agreement, and then we can codify it in our team docs. This extends to the end of 2022, so we could add this into our docs in early 2023.
I suggested we publish this either a new section or a new page in the Recommended Resources section of our team docs. Once the documentation is updated, this issue can be closed.
Metadata Update from @jflory7:
- Issue priority set to: waiting on assignee (was: awaiting triage)
- Issue tagged with: good first issue, help wanted, new change, type - docs, type - inclusion
to comment on this ticket.