Universal Code of Conduct/Drafting committee/Phase 2 meeting summaries

Other languages:
Bahasa Indonesia • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Yorùbá • ‎català • ‎español • ‎français • ‎italiano • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎العربية • ‎नेपाली • ‎বাংলা • ‎한국어
Universal Code of Conduct

This page contains meeting summaries for the Phase 2 Universal Code of Conduct Drafting committee.

Session 1 - May 13Edit

The drafting committee, Wikimedia Foundation staff, and the facilitator for the process came together to create a safe space to build alignment, learn about goals and processes, and start setting the stage for the committee to be able to draft guidelines for the enforcement of the Universal Code of Conduct for the Wikimedia movement.

In this first drafting session, the committee got to know each other better, learned about the work done in phase one, the research and consultations done with communities so far in phase two, but also about ongoing work. They also explored rules and expectations for their own work on the committee.

Session 2 - May 18Edit

The drafting committee discussed and asked for final amendments to the safe space agreement for their future collaborations. As some members offered further suggestions, they will be implemented and the members will vote on those amendments again in the next meeting.

The committee members also discussed the provided reading materials that will help them to draft enforcement guidelines of the Universal Code of Conduct.

Learning intersectionality and its influence on UCoC was a large part of the second meeting. The members learned how intersectionality influences their own behavior and their behavior towards others. How challenges and privileges regarding gender identities, location, socio-economic status, and other factors like education connect and influence UCoC enforcement was the last part of the discussion.

Session 3 - May 27Edit

The attending drafting committee members have unanimously agreed to the amended safe space agreement for their collaborations and also on a way on how to include those members not present in the call. The members also discussed how to prevent the violations of this agreement and what can be done in case of such violations.

The committee members discussed implicit biases and how it impacts the decision-making process as well as the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement mechanisms. They recognize that implicit biases may lead to discrimination and accepting biases does not prevent objectifying. In an interactive decision-making module, the committee members participated in experiencing how different decision-making styles operate and how they can be used in the drafting of the UCoC enforcement guidelines.

Session 4 - June 1Edit

The drafting committee members participated in an informational session followed by a Q&A period with Maggie Dennis, the Vice President of Community Resilience & Sustainability. In the session, Maggie shared her thoughts about various aspects of the UCoC, gave a broad overview of the legal and professional landscape zoning in on the needs and expectations of enforcement from her professional perspective.

In the second part of the meeting, the drafting committee was introduced to different templates that can be used to help draft the enforcement guidelines and evaluation procedures. The committee members discussed various templates and made comments and suggestions on them. They were also encouraged to come up with their own suitable models as well.

Session 5 - June 10Edit

The drafting committee members were given a broad introduction to asynchronous tasks they will perform in subgroups in the coming days. They were also informed about the expected workload and time commitment for future sessions. The committee members also discussed the scheduling of inter-member collaborations in their subgroups and what the suited platforms and tools for working together are best.

In the last part of the session, the members discussed different drafting templates in their own subgroups. After the session, they have shared their inputs with other group members and presented their preferences on different drafting templates they want to use to draft enforcement guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct.

Session 6 - June 15Edit

Drafting committee and staff member Claudia Lo briefly presented the Targets of Harassment research to the participating committee members. She talked about the research method, the knowledge obtained from it, the privacy and transparency concerns of those who participated in the survey, and the main takeaways. She also responded to the questions and comments asked by other members.

Civvì, a member of the phase 1 drafting committee, was invited to share her experiences in the committee and talk about how their process went and work challenges. She shared how the committee started drafting the UCoC code and prepared the final draft to be presented to the community.

Based on the shared experiences from the first half of the meeting and recommendations on drafting topics from the facilitator team, the drafting committee members agreed to start drafting with their chosen topics in their own subgroups.

Session 7 - June 24Edit

During the week the drafting committee members did some asynchronous work in subgroups, during the meeting the members started to read and comment on the work of the other groups. At the end of the meeting the members decided to merge the documents every subgroup worked on in one document and to work collectively on the draft of enforcement guidelines of the Universal Code of Conduct.

Each group shared the working method, issues and results so that the members of the other subgroups have a background about the work done in every group.

Session 8 - June 29Edit

During the week all documents from the subgroups were merged in one document, the drafting committee members worked collectively on this merged document adding comments in the sections written by the other subgroups.

In the second part of the meeting they split up again in subgroups in order to address and discuss the comments and questions left during the collective work on the part of the document they originally worked on. Some questions or comments have to be addressed by the committee as a whole, they agreed to list them and discuss them in the next session.

Session 9 - July 8Edit

At the beginning of the meeting, committee members discussed questions about enforcement that had come up as crucial in previous meetings and had not been resolved in the asynchronous work. This included the question of how Wikimedians can be educated about the UCoC, how a projects and its volunteers can be best protected in cases where an external body, be this a group, a government, or activists tries to influence the project and how different enforcement bodies can collaborate and what data can be exchanged between them if necessary. The committee also discussed the term local in relation to global affiliates and cross-project online collaborations.

In the second part of the meeting the committee members started to work on the merged document, resolving comments and moving text into a new structure. It was decided that one member of the group would create a new document without comments and additional material, in which committee members could highlight those areas, where the group has consent already, those that need more discussion as well as gaps that need to be filled.

Session 10 - July 13Edit

In the first part of the meeting the members of the drafting committee organized their participation in the following steps of the process deciding who is going to take care of different activities in order to have a draft ready for community review.

The rest of the meeting was spent addressing some parts of the document which need some more discussion. One important point is the level of “universality” of the enforcement and how different communities could or should deal with violations of the code of conduct.

Session 11 - July 22Edit

The members of the committee went in detail through the text of the draft, facilitators highlighted in different colors parts which need more discussion and parts which seem more complete, the parts with higher priority were discussed thoroughly.

Another theme of the meeting concerned the best ways to seek community feedback and how to organize the phases of collecting and summarizing the feedback and incorporating it into the enforcement draft.

Session 12 - July 27Edit

The main part of the meeting was spent addressing some last questions and resolving some controversial and complex issues.

The committee started to list some specific questions which they think should be discussed by the community. The members agreed to meet again during the week for some additional group work in order to complete the draft for community revision.

Session 13 - August 5Edit

The drafting committee spent the whole meeting resolving the last comments in the document, looking for better wording in parts which they did not consider clear enough and adding details to some difficult sentences.

They also discussed and reorganized the questions to leave open for community discussion and how to better incorporate community feedback into the draft.