A call for a WG21 managed chat service

• Introduction
• Motivation
• Requirements
  • Client Requirements
  • Administrative Requirements
• Proposal
• Acknowledgements
• References

Introduction

WG21 has historically used two distinct chat services. IRC channels hosted on freenode have long been used for coordination between rooms and meeting attendees at face to face meetings. In more recent times, channels on the Cpplang Slack workspace funded by The C++ Alliance have been used by WG21 work groups (WGs) and study groups (SGs) for informal collaboration between meetings and for coordination at face to face meetings. Neither of these services is maintained by WG21 adminstrators, nor are they moderated in accordance with the WG21 code of conduct^[WG21_COC], ISO code of conduct^[ISO_COC], or the IEC code of conduct^[IEC_COC]. The possibility of a WG21 managed chat service was raised during the Autumn 2020 pre-meeting telecon^[WG21_N4871] and Tom Honermann was directed to submit a paper to be discussed at a future administrative telecon. Contained herein is a proposal to establish a WG21 sponsored and maintained chat service governed under existing WG21 practices and procedures to be used for informal discussion within WGs and SGs, and for coordination at face to face meetings.

Motivation

Slack has been a useful resource within SG16 for collaboration, informal sharing of ideas and news, and discussion of controversial topics. The author of this paper believes such use has been instrumental in creating unity, engagement, and cohesiveness within the group. Slack has also been used by SG15, and continues to be used by many WG21 members for language and library design discussions of C++ features such as ranges and concepts.

Concerns over the lack of enforcement of a code of conduct (CoC) within the Cpplang Slack workspace prompted several prominent SG16 attendees to deactivate their accounts. Discussion in the Slack workspace has reduced precipitously since then and has not resurfaced elsewhere; the real time nature of chat services appears to promote strong engagement that is hard to replicate elsewhere. SG16 is now in the position of having to migrate to a new chat service in order to restore the engagement previously enjoyed. While several options are available, a WG21 managed service that requires compliance with the WG21 CoC is preferred.

A WG21 managed service would address the current adhoc use of both IRC and Slack during face to face meetings thereby simplifying collaboration. New attendees at face to face meetings that feel intimidated by the prospect of voicing their ideas and concerns in front of a room full of experts may feel more comfortable asking for clarification, elaboration, or confirmation of their thoughts on a chat service before speaking up; a common chat service may help to facilitate increased participation by new attendees. Since both IRC and Slack are open to people that are not committee members, use of a WG21 managed service might help to reduce the possibility of unintended information leaks during face to face meetings. A discussion on the committee chairs mailing list suggested that at leat two WGs and several SGs would make use of a WG21 managed service if provided.

Examples of anticipated usage:

• Meeting reminders:

  Antoine Assistant: @all Reminder that today's telecon starts in ~2 hours. For those of you in central Europe, this meeting is starting an hour earlier than the last one due to daylight savings time changes!
  

• Meeting updates:

  Carmen Chair: Discussion of [P0990R0] is starting now. [P0989R0] is up next in about 30 minutes.
  npaperbot: [P0990R0]: [EWG] Rebuttal of Implementation Concerns for Bit Entanglement (by Tony Van Eerd) (2018-04-01)
  npaperbot: [P0989R0]: [EWG] Standardizing Extended Integers (by Tony Van Eerd) (2018-04-01)
  

• Meeting summons:

  Shaggy Rogers: @ScoobyDoo where are you? We've got your paper to review now!
  Velma Dinkley: I just saw him by the snack tables on break!
  

• Informal discussion within a WG or SG:

  Amber Ambitious: I'm writing a paper that proposes adding a yitz facility and am thinking of calling it fazoozle. Is there a better name?
  Peter Pedant: Fazoozles do not equamber, I think what you are describing is a zasnitch.
  Cora Correcto: Whether they equamber is conditional on their rux; @Amber Ambitious has it right.
  

Requirements

The following features are requirements to be used for evaluation of proposed solutions. Those listed with (M) are mandatory features that must be provided in order for a solution to be considered viable. Those listed with (A) are advantageous features that may be helpful to select from a set of viable solutions.

Client Requirements

• (M) Desktop: Linux, macOS, Windows
• (M) Mobile: Android, iOS
• (M) Browser: Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Safari
• (M) Accessibility features for those with physical or visual impairments (e.g., works with common screen readers).
• (M) Support for encrypted communications (encrypted communications need not be required, just possible).
• (A) Support for browsers that have Javascript disabled.
• (A) IRC bridge.
• (A) Jabber bridge.
• (A) Custom emoji support.

Administrative Requirements

• (M) Product cost must fit within WG21's budget.
• (M) Maintenance and administrative overhead must be manageable for the WG21 system administrator.
• (A) Integration with the account management system used for isocpp.org/papers, the WG21 calendar service, the recently added electronic polling service, and/or the mailing lists.
• Moderation capabilities:
  • (M) Per-channel moderation delegation.
  • (M) Per-channel blocking of users by moderators.
  • (M) Deletion of comments that are perceived to be offensive or to violate the WG21 CoC by moderators.
  • (M) History or audit log (to enable review of alleged CoC violations). Such logs are expected to be append only and to include deleted messages for the purposes of CoC review and review of moderator actions.
  • (A) In-app reporting of CoC violations by users.
• (A) Administratively defined channels and the ability to prohibit adhoc channels and/or private channels.
• Bot capabilities:
  • (A) Paper reference elaboration like npaperbot on Slack; a bot that observes text like [P1000] and responds with a link to the paper and the paper title, author, and date.
  • (A) CoC assistant; a bot that observes and reports use of offensive language that may violate the CoC.
• (A) Open source.

Proposal

Assuming the identification of a product that meets the requirements listed above, the following configuration is proposed for deployment of an environment that can be managed in accordance with the WG21 CoC. This configuration is intended to encourage maximum participation by offering an appropriate balance of free expression and expectations of privacy while ensuring that CoC violations can be identified and acted on in a timely and appropriate manner.

• Participation will require authentication with a WG21 managed account provisioning service such as that used for isocpp.org/papers.
• Participation will be limited to WG21 members and selected outside experts similarly to participation in WG21 mailing lists. Authorization of outside experts will follow the existing protocol used to authorize membership in non-public WG21 mailing lists.
• All channels will be administratively defined; users will not be able to create adhoc channels. This is intended to ensure that each channel has an appropriate moderator assigned.
• Private channels and correspondence will not be enabled. This is intended to ensure that all communications are observable for CoC purposes. Assuming a product that supports threaded messages like Slack, users will be permitted to engage in discussions that are not broadcast to all users within a channel, but those discussions will still be accessible to all members of the channel.
• Chat messages will be subject to the same expectations of privacy as statements made during a WG21 face to face meeting or telecon. Users may not be quoted outside the chat service without explicit permission.
• Channels will be provided for each WG, SG, and advisory group (AG) subject to request by the respective group chair and the availability of at least one moderator as delegated by the chair. A chair may serve as moderator.
• Moderators serve at the pleasure of the group chair. Concerns with actions taken by moderators may be raised with the group chair or, if the group chair is acting as moderator, the admin chair or the WG21 convener.
• CoC violations will be reported as described in the WG21 code of conduct^[WG21_COC].
• Assuming a capable product, users will be able to report CoC violations from within the chat service. Such reports will not be anonymous, but the reporter will only be known to the moderators that receive these reports. Moderators will only be authorized to share the identify of the reporter as required for administrative purposes.
• Use of the chat service will not be required for participation in any WG, SG, or AG face to face meeting or telecon. The service will be used only for informal communications and discussions and does not displace use of any existing services. Formal communications will continue to be conducted via the existing mailing lists. Any new information discovered while using the chat service that is relevant to a paper is expected to be replicated in a revision of the paper for the benefit of those that were not participating in the chat session.
• The chat service will be used in preference to the existing IRC and Slack workspace previously used for coordination at face to face meetings.
• Assuming a capable product, a service that mimics the npaperbot bot on Slack will be provided.
• Assuming a capable product, users will be able to register and use custom emoji. Custom emoji will be subject to CoC concerns in the same manner as other text.

Acknowledgements

Thank you to the C++ Alliance for funding the Slack Cpplang workspace for the last several years.

Thank you to Ville Voutilainen, Peter Brett, and Peter Bindels for their kind review of early drafts of this proposal.

References