►
From YouTube: CHAOSS DEI Working Group, April 26. 2023
Description
Minutes from this meeting can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MzDk84BL7FfHDxbFxJz39M72V2Hfc5Y6oCPhOl6woxo/edit#heading=h.n3rh3l1y6dv7
A
Hi
welcome
it's
April
26th.
This
is
our
Dei
call.
It's
good
to
have
you
here
welcome
if
you
could
add
yourself
to
the
agenda.
That
would
be
wonderful,
and
the
question
for
today
is
this
is
based
on
Armstrong's
piano
is
what
started
all
of
this
is
whether
or
not
you
play
an
instrument
or
have
played
an
instrument
at
any
point
in
your
life.
E
D
A
F
A
A
A
D
So
the
only
changes
I
accepted
all
the
changes
everybody
made,
but
I
did
also
add
in
what
did
I
add
in
I
added
in.
Let
me
look
here:
oh
I
moved
the
filters
up
and
I
re-worded
the
way
we
had
the
survey
instead
of
like
the
the
degree
to
which
blah
blah
I
I've
copied
more
of
like
how
we
did
it
in
the
the
burnout
metric
okay.
E
D
For
consistency
sake,
and
then
these
things
right
here,
the
number
of
communication
channels,
all
that
that
was
up
under
implementation,
with
no
description,
so
I
kind
of
felt,
like
it'd,
be
more
of
like
data
collection
like
this
is
the
data
that
you're
trying
to
collect
so
I
moved
it
under
here.
But
if
you
all
think
it
belongs
just
in
its
own
spot,
we
can
certainly
move
it
back.
A
E
A
Just
kind
of
moves
down
into
these
three,
your
tools,
tools,
providing
the
metric
data,
collection
strategies
and
filters,
yeah,
so
I
think
that's
consistent.
Okay,
sometimes
there'll
be
like
a
sentence
here
in
some
of
the
metrics.
You
know
like
where,
like
right
in
that
section
yeah
but
yeah
okay,
was
there
anything
else
that
was.
D
G
D
E
C
A
E
B
Yeah
I
think
the
I
think
the
reason
that
we
had
decided
to
add
that
date
was
actually
specifically
for
the
the
audit
that
you're
doing
or
not
that
the
audit
that
you're
doing
but
the
one
we
did
prior
yeah.
So
the
I
think
the
the
reason
that
only
10
percent
have
of
them
is
because
we
only
we
only
made
it
through
10
of
the
metrics
when
we
reviewed
them
prior
would
be
my
guess.
A
My
my
alternative
suggestion
and
I
know
that
we
suggested
to
add
it
that
doesn't
I,
don't
think
that
should
preclude
us
from
potentially
not
adding
it.
My
suggestion
would
be
on
the
chaos
dot
Community
metrics
page
to
just
have
a
statement
there.
That
says
you
know.
Chaos
metrics
are
regularly
reviewed
for
formatting
content,
whatever
else
we
might
want
to
put
in
there
and
the
list
that
we
have
here
to.
G
E
E
B
G
D
F
C
I,
don't
have
strong
feelings
either.
I
I
do
think
it's
like
a
freshness
date.
Sort
of
that
does
potential
I
mean
as
chaos
continues
to
develop.
It
does
help.
People
know
how
quote
unquote
old
metrics.
Are
it's
a
kind
of
accountability,
but
it
you
know
some
of
the
metrics
are
just
stable
and
don't
need
to
be
reviewed.
That
often
so
perhaps
that
accountability
is
just
a
lot
of
extra
work,
we
don't
need.
B
C
G
B
Yeah
we
could
actually,
we
could
do
that
for
WordPress
fairly
fairly
easily.
It
would
just
be
a
matter
of
creating
a
kind
of
a
new,
a
new
module
underneath
the
metric
on
that
page,
and
then
we
could.
We
could
pull
that
review
date
from
the
from
from
GitHub.
Basically
just
have
a
text
file
and
GitHub.
That
would
have
the
date
on
it,
but
the
the
problem
is.
B
We
have
a
lot
of
metrics
they're
not
going
to
share
the
same
review
dates,
which
is
why
the
like,
in
the
current
in
the
current
form
only
10
of
the
metrics,
haven't
that's
because
it
takes
a
long
time
to
go
through
and
and
review,
metrics
and
and
a
lot
of
and
a
lot
of
effort,
and
there
aren't
that
many
people
that
are
interested
in
doing
it.
So
the
so
I,
don't
the
I,
don't
think
they
would
ever
have
the
same
date
unless
it
was
just.
E
B
We
just
make
the
statement
that
says
that
we
review
the
metrics
over
a
rolling
period
over
two
years
or
we,
we
review
all
the
metrics
over
over
a
two-year
time
period
to
ensure
that
they
are
up
to
date,
and
then
we
just
track
the
dates
ourselves
and
we
we
don't
the
the
and
we
don't
have
individual
dates
stamped
on
the
metrics
anymore,
so
the
so.
If
they
see
the
metrics,
the
the
users
should
be
confident
that
that
metric
is
has
been
reviewed
within
two
years.
F
Yeah
I
think
that
what
that
continuously
reviewing
will
be
more
informative
than
putting
I
understand
where
Kevin
is
coming
from
is
trying
to
make
the
pool
Matrix
platform
to
have
that
look.
But
if
I
would
just
give
two
scenario.
For
example,
some
metrics
will
change
rapidly
and
some
can
be
informed
by
other
practices
that
we
might
need
to
update
without
reaching
that
two
years.
Two
years
could
be
a
long
time
for
some
Matrix
to
especially
things
that
deals
with
diversity
and
some
other
metrics
is
that
deals
with
this
kind.
E
B
It
so
I
would
like
to
I
would
like
to
point
out
that
what
I
was
talking
about
was
a
a
continuous
review,
so
the
metrics
can
be
reviewed
multiple
times
anytime.
That
two-year
date
is
just
to
ensure
that
all
of
the
metrics
get
reviewed
and
none
of
them
get
kind
of
ignored
right.
So
it
doesn't
doesn't
say
that
we
have
to
review
every
metric
only
once
over
two
years,
it's
just
it's
more
of
an
assurance
that
every
metric
is
is
reviewed
during
that
time
period.
B
F
Got
it
well,
I
mean
we
can
still
just
keep
it
simple
like
that
map
suggestion.
It's
just
my
opinion,
so
because
sometimes
when
we
communicate
clearly-
and
we
put
it
the
way,
the
brain
functions,
they
would
want
to
go
with
things
that
are
concrete
foreign
just
say
we
do
it
continuously
I
mean
then
on
the
Matrix
release
page
we
can,
where
we
choose
our
Cadence
and
I,
think
we
also
have
the
instructions
on
how
the
community
review
period
and
things
like
that.
F
F
C
B
C
F
B
E
E
B
A
A
G
C
B
B
A
E
B
A
So
maybe
Elizabeth
just
for
this
leave
this
off,
just
because
I
think
it's
something
that
we
could
add
pretty
quickly
across
the
metrics
and
whether
we
do
it
through
and
includes
or
whether
we
just
add
it
directly
I
mean
part
of
me
is
like
if
we're
going
to
do
includes.
We
probably
should
put
that
in
the
includes,
as
well.
B
B
It
would
look
very
similar
to
what
it
would
look
like
if
it
was
on
the
metrics
markdown
page.
It
was,
it
would
just
we
just
add
a
module
at
the
bottom
of
the
yeah
yeah
and
then
when
we
and
then
when
we
we
make
a
new
metric.
You
just
use
you
use
that
template
so
that
that
module
would
automatically
populate.
B
Retroactively,
we
would
have
to
go
in
for
every
for
every
metric
that
exists
now.
We
would
have
to
go
in
and
create
that,
okay,
which
would
take
a
couple
hours,
but
it's
actually
fairly
at
this
stage.
It
still
is
fairly
doable.
Does
it
and
we
could
put
that
text
in
in
GitHub
still
or
we
could
populate
it
directly
to
the
website.
A
B
E
E
E
D
I
really,
actually
the
more.
We
were
talking
about
this
I
like
that,
a
lot
and
I
think
because
when
we
like
back
in
the
day
when
we
were
talking
about
oh,
we
could
put
these
in
a
database
and
then
you
know
we
would
just
pull
the
different
pieces
but
like
that
is
kind
of
a
step
towards
that,
where
we
just
have
that
standard
blurb
on
every
metrics
page,
but
yeah
I
really
actually
like
that.
A
lot
and.
F
Yeah
I
the
data
collection
you
mentioned
mostly
the
qualitative,
but
whereas
grimola
pass
very
professional
tools
for
scrapping
other
communication
channels,
I,
don't
know
why
we
omitted
those
I
I
suggest.
We
should
include
some
of
the
tools,
even
if
we
cannot
mention
all
right
now,
but
it's
good
thing
to
use
Percival
and
some
of
the
tools.
F
F
C
No
but
I
think
the
question
is:
are
there
any
standard
visualizations
available
in
auger
or
Gamora
lab
that
provide
a
communication,
transparency,
metric
and
I'm
I?
Don't
think
there
are
because
I
don't
think
either
tool
has
considered
communication
transparency.
The
thing
to
measured
at
this
point
but
Armstrong's
right
that
a
data
scientist
could
use
data
that
those
tools
gather
to
at
least
proxy.
Most
of
the
things
that
we
have
here,
maybe.
B
E
B
C
Is
looking
at
some
of
those
things
so
I
think
I
think
what
those
tools
could
do
is
provide
a
summary
of
the
activity
level,
but
they
wouldn't
provide
a
summary
that
amounts
to
a
review
to
determine
if
communication
channels,
you
know,
there's
no
there's
no
signal
of
vetting
out
or
reducing
the
communication
channels
or
ensuring
that
others
know
where
to
look
for
communication,
which
I
think
is
the
intention
of
of
that
block.
That's
highlighted.
C
B
C
D
D
E
D
D
B
E
B
B
B
D
B
E
D
E
E
A
G
A
G
A
A
D
E
A
E
E
B
Community
handbook
so
think
of
think
of
each
of
these,
these
tiles
as
a
folder
in
the
handbook,
so
the
the
handbook
folders
should
align
with
what
you
see
here.
Oh
there,
yes
and
then
and
additionally,
those
folders
We,
don't
want
those
folders
to
go
to
go
deeper
than
the
file
level,
so
each
folder
should
have
all
of
the
files
that
are
needed
in
it
without
additional
folder
structure.
Does
that
make
sense?
It.
B
E
A
E
D
D
G
D
F
E
D
E
D
D
G
C
D
C
A
E
A
A
A
E
A
D
Because
there
are
a
lot
more
what's
the
word:
I
want
a
lot
more
fine
like
a
lot
more
granular
with
their
application,
and
it's
a
lot
more
detailed
than
we
would
want
to
do
on
our
website,
like
they're
kind
of
the
I
would
say,
they're
like
more
the
authority
on
what's
appropriate
to
be
doing
at
an
event.
Okay,.
E
D
A
D
F
When
we
collect
links
from
website,
is
it
I'm
just
wondering
you
know
some
people
they
might
be
in
minority,
but
they
have
malicious
intention,
and
that
has
also
been
reported
in
some
cases
they
submit
some
kind
of
links
that
can
expose
so
can
expose
people
to
different
kind
of
scams
or
unwanted
content.
So
I
don't
know
at
what
level
are
we
collecting
all
these
kind
of
things
collecting
these
links?