Should this be specifically a steering commitee vote since it’s a tag only used by the steering committee?
My other thought - it can’t be #meeting-topic because any meeting might start using it and that would clutter what the Steering committee needs to look at.
You have a point there. My thought was that:
. You think we should clarify it above?Yeah, it’s a bit generic, we have the “community” umbrella term in the WG name and the “topic” umbrella term for the topic at hand, and it’s for meetings, so choosing something that’s clear but doesn’t overlap has proven to be quite hard 
, hence my other option with a CWG prefix (for Community Working Group), but we are open to ideas!
@Leo, can you clarify what exactly the issue was with the community-meeting tag? My understanding is that we were going to use it to tag topics for discussion in the Community WG Meeting, similar to how the next_meeting tag is used in the community-topics repository.
The pending PR to change the SC policy to conduct our discussions and votes on the forum states:
Any user can created a topic [sic] tagged with
steering-committeeunder theProject Discussionscategory in the Ansible Forum. A steering committee member can tag the forum post withcommunity-meetingto put it on the meeting agenda.
This implies three things:
community-meeting. If we’re changing that, we also need to change that document.@SteeringCommittee (and probably also @CommunityTeam).I think 1. and 2. are made clear by the name community-meeting. I think #meeting-topic is more ambiguous than community-meeting. Maybe #cwg-meeting-topic is better, but what cwg stands for isn’t immediately obvious. As for 3., that’s a change that a mod would need to make once we decide on the tag name.
Be careful here @Leo, or you’ll sound like we’re making decisions in secret 
It’s true that we’ve been discussing this in our team, but that’s because we haven’t restricted the use of the tag yet (as per point 3), and it is getting used by other people for their community meetings (we’ve had to remove it from a number of events). We now have (I think) 5 working groups running their agendas here, which is illustrating that everyone else thinks this tag applies to them. I don’t really blame them either, since the name is quite generic - we only chose it to match the “Community WG” and it’s meeting - but that’s a historic name and we shouldn’t keep making that mistake, we should address it.
Part of the problem is that the Wed meeting usually covers (a) SC things to do with the Ansible package and Collections, and (b) community-wide things that need discussing somewhere. So we’re really mixing two meetings into one, which is why we’re all getting confused. We can solve (a) with a sc-meeting tag, which I hope is not controversial. For (b) do we need a second one? I’d actually like the big discussions to stay here on the forum, as they usually require wide input. The SC is of course welcome to discuss such things in their meetings and could apply the sc-meeting to the topic - but so could, say, the Docs group, the IaC group, DevTools, and so on. What are your thoughts here?
However, I want to be clear that we’re not going to go making changes that aren’t agreed (I know @Leo didn’t mean that, but it does feel implied by his post above), as that would be an abuse of our admin power. I said in September that I was OK with it as a bandage for now - @gotmax23 if you genuinely want to keep community-meeting then I’m still OK with it for now while we transition away from GH - but I’ll want to revisit this in a month or two as part of a wider discussion around the WG name
I didn’t know this. It’s an important point, I think!
I kind of like this, although AFAIR we never used “SC meeting”; it’s always been the “community meeting”.
Sounds reasonable. That is, if we agree to rename the Community Meeting to SC Meeting- where, of course, the whole community is welcome to join and discuss things, just as it is now, not just SC members.
Do you think that others should be able use sc-meeting, too? I’m not sure about this, I think it should be restricted. Although it might make sense if some other groups, like maybe the Docs Group, are allowed to use it in order to put things on the SC / Community Meeting agenda.
Personally, I think it would be better to agree on a tag to use before we move too many things from GH to the forum. Might be better than changing tags in a month or two. But I don’t feel too strong on this.
I am not a huge fan of sc-meeting. The meeting has always been called the Ansible Community Meeting, as the meeting is open to everyone and not just the steering committee. If community-meeting is too confusing, I’d also be okay with #community-wg-meeting. Either way, I’d hope that locking the tag to @SteeringCommittee and adding a tag description would assuage the confusion we’ve been seeing up until now.
Also, to be clear, we don’t make major decisions in meetings. We might decide when to start a vote or have general discussion, but we always (try to) summarize discussions in the ticket, and votes always happen asynchronously.
I agree.
This also sounds good too me. Not to put too fine a point on this, but cwg-something is a little bit cryptic… I needed some time to understand what cwg stands for.
Thanks everyone for chiming in and @gwmngilfen for clarifying the confusion around the proposal, the point of the post was to get your feedback and although we are missing quite a few of the SC yet, @gotmax23 @mariolenz I think your suggestions are valuable and on point.
For some reason, I thought that #community-wg-meeting exceeded the character limit for tags, but just tried it and it doesn’t (it’s actually the limit, 20 chars), I think your suggestion can replace the cryptic #cwg-meeting option I put forward.
I can’t update the poll once it’s going, so if needed we can do a new one after the rest of the SC and those interested comment on the topic. The poll was to jump-start the conversation anyway!
Yeah, I didn’t feel anyone was trying to pull the wool over my eyes, just that the post was missing some context 
.
Not to put a rush on this too much, but I’ll note that the vote to change the policy to conduct our discussions/votes on the forum and make use of the community-meeting tag closes on Wednesday. In hindsight, such a major change should have had a longer voting window, but it would be nice to lock down on community-meeting, community-wg-meeting, or whatever else by then.
I’d prefer to continue the discussion in the Github issue. Bringing this up in the issue that we’re already using to discuss the SC’s forum adoption instead of another topic that most of us aren’t already following should lead to a more productive discussion .
Should the poll be closed now?
Yep! Let’s close the poll.
. There are some more open polls that we could close (see open_polls).
I closed most of those as well. Not sure how long it takes for the open polls list to update thanks!
IIRC it runs once an hour
DaWGs, and now CoWGs — scratches a subconscious itch. I like it way more than it warrants.