I submitted a request for a new privacy statement for this year's workshop. We should have it later this week.

After discussing with Martin and Pablo and looking at last year's documentation, I would like to release the registration form sometime in early April.

@ELescak can you expand the reason behind this delay? that will help me understand if we can find alternative pathways for the problem you're trying to address by a ~2 month delay. There are a few things to consider on my end:

• We used to benefit from continuity in the past years: the repeated participants knew that it would almost surely get organized as part of WWW. This has changed this year.

• In 2018-2021 we opened it earlier for registration, sometimes as early as March (mid-late). Admittedly the WWW conference's workshop days have also changed between late April to mid-May throughout the years.

• We have a target of 500 registrants, so starting early to get people's registrations in intuitively make sense to me, at least for the people who have participated in the workshop in the past years. For the first timers we need more content up before we can push for my registrations and raising awareness.

I was looking at last year's workflow. Last year, we released the registration form on March 16 and the workshop was April 25. It would therefore follow the same workflow to release the registration form in early April for an event in May.

Pablo would like to add a question about the developer track to the registration form. I will circle back with him about when that might be ready.

In T328333#8620356, @ELescak wrote:

I was looking at last year's workflow. Last year, we released the registration form on March 16 and the workshop was April 25. It would therefore follow the same workflow to release the registration form in early April for an event in May.

yes. clear.

Pablo would like to add a question about the developer track to the registration form. I will circle back with him about when that might be ready.

They don't need to rush imo. We can always email the registrants and ask that they optionally provide input. I highly recommend we separate the two processes for now so Pablo and Evelin don't have to rush and we don't have to do many decisions in a short period of time which increases the risk of making mistakes. (we have template, cfp, etc. as well:)

Here are the updated privacy statement (https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal:Wiki_Workshop_Privacy_Statement) and release form (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WhRtqy9JI_6Bszqr1zA_RGmreEsBTwP674cvzaEor5I/edit)

In T328333#8620619, @leila wrote:

They don't need to rush imo. We can always email the registrants and ask that they optionally provide input. I highly recommend we separate the two processes for now so Pablo and Evelin don't have to rush and we don't have to do many decisions in a short period of time which increases the risk of making mistakes. (we have template, cfp, etc. as well:)

I appreciate that Evelin and I don't have to rush and I understand the need to open registration as soon as possible to maximize the number of attendees. However, the reason for including the information on the registration form was to ensure that all attendees were aware of the developer track contents in order to foster collaboration. It is true that an email can be sent later, but by definition it would not reach attendees who register after that email is sent.

In addition, I would propose having a code of conduct for Wikiworkshop or, as is done in the Research Showcases, adding a statement in the web that we expect all presenters and attendees to abide by our Friendly Space Policy.

Thanks, Pablo. After you meet with Evelin again, could you give an estimate for when you might have enough information about the track to include in the registration form?

Given that there is already a Friendly Space Policy and UCoC, I don't think we need a separate CoC for the Workshop. I agree that we should explicitly mention our expectation for attendees to abide by them. We'll include this again in the intro to the Workshop as we did last year and I'll also make sure that it's on the registration form.

Thanks, Pablo. After you meet with Evelin again, could you give an estimate for when you might have enough information about the track to include in the registration form?

We still need to digest the feedback provided yesterday by @srishakatux (thanks!), so let's discuss it in our next coordination meeting.

Given that there is already a Friendly Space Policy and UCoC, I don't think we need a separate CoC for the Workshop. I agree that we should explicitly mention our expectation for attendees to abide by them. We'll include this again in the intro to the Workshop as we did last year and I'll also make sure that it's on the registration form.

Great, thanks!

Here is the draft registration form for this year: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1k7SK5VMd69VGxLGqbD_Bv4kvP9E413BmlheJy6JMdCE/edit

In T328333#8624778, @Pablo wrote:

In T328333#8620619, @leila wrote:

They don't need to rush imo. We can always email the registrants and ask that they optionally provide input. I highly recommend we separate the two processes for now so Pablo and Evelin don't have to rush and we don't have to do many decisions in a short period of time which increases the risk of making mistakes. (we have template, cfp, etc. as well:)

I appreciate that Evelin and I don't have to rush and I understand the need to open registration as soon as possible to maximize the number of attendees. However, the reason for including the information on the registration form was to ensure that all attendees were aware of the developer track contents in order to foster collaboration. It is true that an email can be sent later, but by definition it would not reach attendees who register after that email is sent.

We can always add a question to the registration form to capture input from those who register after a certain point. Is that sufficient for your purposes?

! In T328333#8626336, @leila wrote:
We can always add a question to the registration form to capture input from those who register after a certain point. Is that sufficient for your purposes?

That's would be another option. @Scann, let's add this issue to the agenda of our meeting tomorrow.

@Pablo I am documenting the ideas here that we concluded in our meeting last week around connecting WikiWorkshop & Wikimedia Hackathon.

• Promote the developer track of WikiWorkshop through the Hackathon channels. For example, mention the developer track in the next batch of emails sent to Hackathon participants.
• List projects that will emerge from the developer track of the WikiWorkshop under the Hackathon's project ideas list and promote them via the call for projects/sessions.
• List the developer track of WikiWorkshop as a meetup on the Hackathon's satellite events page.
• Hackathon team to share with the WikiWorkshop organizing team, a list of talk pages of developers who will attend the Hackathon (and have already revealed their info in public) and might also be interested in contributing to the developer track. Research team can then get in touch w/ these folks.

I will soon get in touch w/ you about about each of these bullet points privately.

Thank you @srishakatux for sharing these notes from our meeting! Looking forward to more details privately.

• EasyChair is setup to receive submissions

• The registration form is updated

• The website is updated to include links to the template, privacy statement, and EasyChair

• Announced on Twitter that the submission instructions and link are now available

Received feedback from Leila and Bob on the unconference proposal.