[###style:css-sparse] [###style:css-dyntoc]

HACC proposals

← back to HACC index

< RFC >

Open-editable page, curated by @dcht00.

HACC decides on proposals collectively, via consensus. (The format of putting proposals forward, and handling them afterwards, is currently itself a matter discussion).

Main revisions:
    20200822 "basic form" proposals <dcht00
    20200824 stub <dcht00
    xxxxxxxx review/comments by +blipp
    20210419 full review <dcht00 →D
    20210422 <dcht00 →D+
    20210806 full review <dcht00 →D++
    20210807 full review <dcht00 →RFC

Table of Contents
2 *** CHARTER (accepted proposals)
2.1 * Channel is international, language is English
2.2 * Re-distribute channel moderation, to represent the existing international group & past initiative
2.3 * Regular monthly calls on 10th & 25th
2.4 * Coordinate people & projects via "HACC Directory"
3.1 _[!!!] D: HACC is governed via CONSENSUS via PROPOSALS DOCUMENT
3.2 _[!!] D: HACC follows, reproduces and extends its original logic: must be heterodox, non-discriminatory, transparent & actively prevent exclusion
3.3 _[!!] D: HACC oversees & maintains common collaborative infrastucture, to function online
3.4 _[!!] D: HACC coordination & representation only within consensus-confirmed tools
3.5 _[!!] D: HACC adopts a code of conduct & moderation, both for online and offline
3.6 _[!!] D: HACC organizes forums: regular meetings at events
3.6.1     (preparation)
3.6.2     (at meeting)
3.6.3     1) GENERAL FORUM (opening session)
3.6.4     2) META / COORDINATION
3.6.5     3) WORKGROUPS
3.6.6     4) CONSOLIDATION (closing session)
3.7 [!!] D: HACC gives mandates
3.8 _[!] D: HACC WGs (Workgroups)
3.9 _[!] D: HACC LCs (Local chapters)
3.10 [!!] D: Control any use of "HACC" name by consensus
3.11 _[!!] D+BLIPP: Make HACC more enabling and inclusive
3.12 [!!*] L: @INDEX— "How to read this website?"
3.13 [!!*] L: @INDEX/USERTEST— Missing intro!
4.1 _[!!] D: Q/DISCUSS— Outside contact: Full transparency & Delegated mandates
4.2 [!] D+HACC: TAKEOVER— HACC is more than just HACC MUC & and always was
4.3 _[!] D+HACC: TAKEOVER/Q— HACC MUC outside of consensus: "hacc.earth" website & "HACC ev" German formal body
4.3.1     [!!] hacc.earth site in 2021
4.3.2     [K] hacc.earth's "contact@hacc.earth" as postal interception
4.4 [!] D: Q/META— What is HACC? How do groups within it relate & consolidate their work?
4.4.1     A) Weak: "HACC as directory"
4.4.2     B) Strong: "HACC as ecosystem"
4.4.3     C) Whatever: "HACC can be anything anyone wants it to be"
4.5 _[!] D: CATALYST/PR— Make outreach to existing HACC cells
4.6 _[!!*] D: CONTENT— Develop a core HACC statement
4.7 _[M!] D: INFRA— List all infrastructure, discuss stewardship
4.8 _[!] D: COMMUNITY/CATALYST/CONTENT— Review mailing list, document, make a plan, restart
4.9 _[!] COMMUNITY/CATALYST— Ping and activate lurkers
4.10 _[!] BLIPP+D: DISCUSS/ADMIN— HACC domains & subdomains
4.11 _[!] D: CONSENSUS/META— Adopt a form of meritocracy-assisted consensus
4.11.1     (consensus of different voices)
4.11.2     (individual merit)
4.11.3     (consider "do-ocracy", if agreed to be fitting)
4.12 [!*] L: @PROPOSALS— explain symbols
4.13 [DUP-!!*] L: @DIRECTORY/WG— represent WGs in Directory
4.14 _[!!] D: CONTENT/PROJECT— Wiki->pad migration
4.15 _[!!] D: ADMIN/DEV— Make separate E2h pod for HACC
5.1 ↗↗↗ add ↗↗↗


* How to practically organize a HACC FORUM (= a participative work meeting/session) at events?

* How to make PROPOSALS about how HACC should work? How will they be evaluated?

* What is, how to start a, HACC WG (workgroup)?

* What is, how to start a, HACC LC (local chapter)?

* What is, how to start a, HACC PROJECT?

* What are our common resources and HACC INFRASTRUCTURE? How are openly and transparently given a mandate, managed, and maintained?

<------------------------------ (new) MAIN QUESTIONS ↑

*** CHARTER (accepted proposals)

* Channel is international, language is English

~2020-08-21 <d

"if languages are used that are not understood by all:
    this ostracizes people & makes them less capable of participating == makes them unwelcome", then please go ahead and ask me for more explanation

_________ <<<blipp (2020):
    I support having #hacc:matrix.org as an English-speaking group by default. However:
    I think we should be fine with people who do not speak English to come into the channel and ask something in a different language: There could be language-specific channels, like #hacc-fr:matrix.org, #hacc-es:matrix.org etc. Then someone asking « Parlez-vous français ? »could be pointed to the French room. It might be problematic if too many discussions only happen in a language-specific room and the main room does miss on information updates. So this should be well-organized such that things being discussed in a language-specific group and that are interesting for HACC-INT flow back there (I guess this is the same challenge as with local groups and working groups)

* Re-distribute channel moderation, to represent the existing international group & past initiative

~2020-08-22 →here

### [!!] discuss how to continue in this direction

* Regular monthly calls on 10th & 25th

    "Hi! One thing I thought about, but obviously did not start yet, was a monthly international mumble/jitsi/bbb call. Maybe always on the 10th of a month (so the day of the week changes)."
Friday August 21, 16:43

D later proposed making it also every 25th.

* Coordinate people & projects via "HACC Directory"

Was: "Haccer seeks" / "hXs"
This was confirmed at DIVOC 2021.

A main frame for the HACC forums:
    * self presentation in front of a large group
    * ideas archival
    * offer & asking for collaboration
    * ###

More on project site:
    → https://hacc.pad.space/directory

<-------------------------------- (new) CHARTER ↑



_[!!!] D: HACC is governed via CONSENSUS via PROPOSALS DOCUMENT

HACC establishes a governance model to reach a widening consensus of who it represents, evident from its own name.

Proposed: a system of named proposals (=this document).

These have been called "mini groups" (as early as the first 35c3 session):
    opt-in deliberation groups, deciding on proposals,
    then reporting to the main forum, to reach a more general consensus,
    with some sort of a minimal representation / quorum

Proposed <dcht00 ~ 2020-08-22; Revisions 2021/04
"HACC" is the main, international group:

Seth wrote on 2019-01-04:
    """With regard to decision making within our group, we would like to try out a 'vetoed consensus' strategy in the vein of the Premium collective:
    (german only, sorry)


_[!!] D: HACC follows, reproduces and extends its original logic: must be heterodox, non-discriminatory, transparent & actively prevent exclusion

Facilitating mass hacker meetings (previously, at end-of-year CCC events).
    * The operation of the group evolves organically.
    * The culture is intuitive to anyone that previously attended HACC.
    * The practices of inclusive participation, equality, encouragement and representation are binding to all.

_[!!] D: HACC oversees & maintains common collaborative infrastucture, to function online

    1) Chat → Matrix group
    2) Collaborative documents → Pads
    3) Static website → via Pads:
        Absolutely, must be a clear process of making changes (no gatekeepers!)
        If there is a reason for a privileged-edit site, it needs to be clearly justified & made a limited exception.
        (This has so far not been the case with neither pads or wiki.)

_[!!] D: HACC coordination & representation only within consensus-confirmed tools

We recognize, also from HACC experience, that starting new channels (etc) is a form of weakening the community.

We do not start and promote new tools & domains with HACC name just because a subset of people feels like that's a good idea.

_[!!] D: HACC adopts a code of conduct & moderation, both for online and offline

* HACC mandates a Moderator, responsible for overseeing this

* We recognize online communication can turn unneccessary heated by misunderstanding, cultural difference, and momentous circumstance, but also possibly by coordinated attacks. Public tensions weaken the network and are evaded if solutions can be found possible. We ask to resolve differences:
    1) directly in private messages, with the people involved
    2) if needed, refer to the Moderator
    3) lastly, take it up into a general channel

_[!!] D: HACC organizes forums: regular meetings at events

(We need a protocol that makes sure we don't mess up, as we did on cccamp19 & 36c3.)


* Mandate an Event coordinator:
    responsible to oversee it all goes well, is registered in time, tec
### event coordination & online PR are two sub-tasks for two people

* Announce:
    * mailing list
    * matrix channel
    * social media ###
    * mailing lists
    * ###

* Make sure:
    * there is sufficient space (100 people min)
    * at least 2 dates (day 1/2 & day 3/4)
    * speakers ready:
        * people to represent WGs and LCs
        * [...]
    * [...]

    (at meeting)

1) "Is it okay for everyone that I take notes and in what way?"

2) "Let's keep in touch - please write your name & contact (email?)":
    ### figure out how to do instant forwarding [!!], give "hacc" addresses:
        "many will block/stop following mailing lists"
    ### separate announce / discussion list

3) Route to other talks:
    (point to a list we curate + expose some immediate & bigger ones)

4) General rules:
    * whoever has not spoken yet always gets priority
    * ###
    * let's not push services that don't have consensus (like wiki or mumble)



At every CCC:

    1) GENERAL FORUM (opening session)
    general round of presentatons
    most suitable for people who've never been to HACC before
    includes presentations by delegates from all WGs and LCs
    about half of the time is a free discussion, a moderated maximizing general and diverse participation (with pads)
    pads are later processed by the editorial team

    meet & greet for existing HACC, in 🔗hacc-directory
    review past year developments
    review, decide on, shape new proposals
    appoint new stewards
    oversee new WG & LC formation

    WG work on specific topics

    4) CONSOLIDATION (closing session)
    special format for:
        connecting, crosslinking, consolidating, and internationally replicating groups
    expert mediated, to try reaching strong results 

_______ <<<dcht00
    The main historic problem of HACC session organization was: it was unclear who was supposed to do what:
    "at all of camp, 36c3 and rc3 there was this idea that something was being organized, but then it kind of wasn't really - was not announced, promoted, prepared, etc. (just to make sure it's understood correctly, I'm not blaming, i'm just pointing out it did not work. at camp it failed, at 36c3 moep and I managed to save it after realizing it was about to fail again. rc3 didn't work again, but that was a pretty obscure one. Divoc, RW, we did together, and I found it good again.)"

[!!] D: HACC gives mandates
### to "stewards" (?)

This should happen via consensus.
(this is the missing part)

1) To prevent perceived problems in self-appointment
you were never given a mandate to admin the HACC channel and control the power dynamics there 

2) To encourage and catalyze - to give mandate - to efforts:
    * giving support to projects
    * supporting politcal positions
    * supporting delegates in contacts with other structures
    * [...]

_[!] D: HACC WGs (Workgroups)

Workgroups are for specific topics & projects.

Appoint a WG steward to catalyze:
    1-year mandate;
    mandate starts arond August (so we don't miss preparation for next CCC).

A WG can be proposed by anyone:
    at first, they work freely in incubation
    must relate to all other groups, and establish overlaps, topic borders, and coordination
    confirmed at earliest yearly general meeting

    * present activities at a general HACC meeting for this purpose
    * prepare physical artefacts for the HACC booth (for "CCC about:future" or similar)
    * organizes own meetings and workshops:
        (following guidelines on how to document & publish them)
    * maintains & links own documentation
    * coordinate "shared programme":
         basically: HACC contact two-way presents what other groups are working on

    * coordinate two-ways with steward
    * have their own matrix channel.
    * use common collaborative infrastructure

_[!] D: HACC LCs (Local chapters)

Actively make space & encourage new local cells to self-organize.

Use existing groups (hacklabs, etc) & encourage forming groups within them.

Prepare a kit.

Report activities at special coordination meeting, reserved for this purpose.

    * what we deem as a "minimum" to start & keep being a group
    * group attributes:
        * active (and regularly represented) OR sleeper
        * offers infra global? (virtual infra, etc)
        * offers infra local? (media support, in-person consultation, etc)
        * does field research?
        * writes (and presents to other groups) common documentation?)
        * active in WGs ...?
        * [...]

[!!] D: Control any use of "HACC" name by consensus

### We can't trademark & sue, but [!!] @@collectivity — WHAT IS THE LEVERAGE?
The spirit is that,
without a mandate,
you do not:
    * start new channels,
    * launch new websites,
    * start formal bodies,
    * represent yourself as HACC at some event, grant, etc
    * ###

To use "HACC", you respect the common work, the meaning of the name, its history, and seek a widest consensus confirmation / a mandate.

________ <<<blipp:
Depending on how you decide what determines if a group is a “hacc” group, there might be a contradiction here: If everyone who accepts the HACC statement can operate under the name of Hacc (like XR seems to handle this), as it has been proposed somewhere above in this pad, then this seems to be a contradiction. I am not taking position for one of the two proposals, just pointing out the possible contradiction.
Questions to ask:
- should a local group need a mandate for every local event?
- should a local group need a mandate for their own local group website?
  or is this proposal about the main website of HACC-INT?

_[!!] D+BLIPP: Make HACC more enabling and inclusive

### do we agree?

1) HACC has so far not been succesful at this, at all.

2) We need to commit, and remain committed to this.

What to do:
    * mandate Catalysts
    * ping people actively
    * guide new people, who hit the channel to a possible participation
    * make it easy to add chapters to the documentation
    * [...] ###

________ <<<blipp:
I think I agree that there has not been an “enabling structure” for this. Like:
    1) guiding new people who hit the channel to a possible participation etc,
    2) making it easy to add chapters on the wiki, etc

[!!*] L: @INDEX— "How to read this website?"
        ("we use open editable documents, and share all our plans, if you visit the website you are as much a potential contributer to this project as any of the historic people. ###")

[!!*] L: @INDEX/USERTEST— Missing intro!

________ <<<L
Though I follow the idea of having an open platform in which no-one is "but a visitor at the sideline", if i currently visit the website from the eyes of a non-HACC person (or even a non-hacker!):
    I just get lost in what looks like "internal notes and (project)plans"
    ... without actually getting any clear idea of what HACC is doing, or of what HACC actually is, for that matter

→ The site should enable them to understand and join that logic!
    * What is HACC...
    * HACC history?
    * Why HACC is important, and not just to join an existing "movement", like XR? Why do hackers need to organize seperately?

<---------------------------- (new) PROPOSALS #1 (PRIORITY) ↑



_[!!] D: Q/DISCUSS— Outside contact: Full transparency & Delegated mandates

Consensus is often endangered by people taking, or being assumed to be in representation roles, with outside partners.
In that way, they position themselves as somebody who directly makes decisions, and can (accidentally) bypass consensus, or establish a privileged position.

Two important concepts are:
    1) delegated mandates
    2) a high attention to transparency of external contacts
Example / explanation:
    (D perceived RW was not being transparent about contacts with about:Freedom , about representing HACC)
also @room , I have to ask — this maiiing list (https://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/aboutfreedom/) looks quite relevant, and I never saw it mentioned anywhere around HACC. Did I miss something?I don't think we were at that stage before, but in the consensus models I have experience with, and I suppose we are attempting to build,
two important concepts are:
    delegation, and
    a high attention to transparency of external contacts
In my experience, consensus is often endangered by people taking, or being assumed to be in representation roles, with outside partners — sometimes without anyone in the community knowing that anything's up, or a passing "mention" somewhere. This all will mostly happen without any bad intentions, but for that reason, we need to have some guidelines. I think a really simple one is to ask everyone, but especially any HACC mods/organizers, in which groups they are participating. If they're public, it would be great to share so others can join this. For semi-public, to an clearly delimited internal circle. But especially if they are private, and they are or might be perceived as representing HACC, I suppose there should be some simple guidelines about that.
I thought @RW I heard you mention a few groups in which you're coordinating, or recently, have been invited kind of in the HACC role. At some point it would be good to figure out how to do this.

[!] D+HACC: TAKEOVER— HACC is more than just HACC MUC & and always was
(Confirmed by limited consensus 2021-04-25).

We must not let MUC anull & claim the work of others:
    Even though "HACC MUC" was the largest (by number) HACC-identified local group that consistently met in 2019/2020, local chapters & out-of-congress activity was *never* understood to define what HACC is. This understanding — activity as "in-year meetings by a fixed local group" — was not consensual, but specific to MUC. MUC arrogantly used this idea to claim HACC after 36c3. Meanwhile there were consistently other forms of work done by others, and there was never any consensus for MUC's actions.
We must work towards making this work visible.

__________ D:
    I was very happy to see the Munich group forming and taking the HACC name.
    The question is to think, or perhaps rethink, how that works formally:
            A) HACC == HACC MUNICH
            B) HACC == international initiative centered at CCC events, and HACC-MUNICH is a local chapter, somehow coordinating with HACC-INT
Is there anyone here that believes A, or wants to believe A?
I think there must be unequivocally no doubt that HACC is B.
In terms of number of locally engaged people,
HACC MUC is a success,
the answer is NOT a single local group deciding "they are the only one doing things" and "not interested in organizing internationally" taking the helm,
but to continue improving the structure of "HACC" towards a functinal international network, as we have done together from the beginning on 35c3 & 36c3.


    My explanation & rationale of it is that HACC became inpenetrable by non-Germans because of a lack of good organisational separation
    I'm happy the Munich group took off and went off to do things, but I hope what I said is clear
    Last congress I went around trying to figure out what was going on with HACC and people told me stuff like:
        "yeah, it's now replaced by Bits & Bäume" and so on.
        that simply CANNOT be the case
        HACC is essentially an international group, with chapters.
        If it is to survive and be successful, it needs to go in this direction.

    Well not because of missing organisational separation,
    there never was someone actively doing it.
    I mean investing time and that over a longer period, staying in contact with others and so on. We have a lot of other stuff to do. So please don't blame us. :-) If you would like define hacc in a different/broader way be and stay active! As I said earlier, I don't care about names. If you have a great project concerning climate change and/or sustainability under your own name or in other groups, tell about it. If your project is to make hacc more international: Do it! :-)
D perceives this as talking down:
    RW has no right to call who did what and trying to take over a name they did not create.
    ### After 35c3, RW's "work" has actually prevented, not opened up, for others (outside of MUC) to contribute, and this is easily evident.

    This argument reminds me of "if women want to be in politics or tech, they should just make those decisions!"
Well establishing this, I am concerned that you are not taking what I said seriously enough
    somebody who contributed a lot to HACC,
    I expressed a concern about an [non-mandated, shadow] organizational structure that prevented me from contributing more

_[!] D+HACC: TAKEOVER/Q— HACC MUC outside of consensus: "hacc.earth" website & "HACC ev" German formal body
(Generally confirmed by limited consensus 2021-04-25).


* Neither plan was ever presented or discussed:
    HACC was never appropriately consulted, 
    no effort or plan was made about limits to or control over either,

* specifically about the website:
    they bought new domains & setup websites under their own control,
    this is both:
        1) against the foundational HACC consensus to have only open-editable sites,
        2) was directly delegitimised by the international meeting (2021-04-15)
    (→ 🔗hacc-meetings).

* they also claimed not only the name, but past HACC work.


from "hacc.earth":
    * Site is titled as "hacc", not "hacc ev", or "hacc munich".
    * """Who we are:
        “Hackers Against Climate Change” originated as a series of self-organized sessions at 35c3. Since then we have worked with other climate activist groups, supplying them with technical knowledge, as well as trying to raise awareness for the current climate crisis in the hacker community."""

<<< RW:
Well it is planned to make hacc.earth a landing page that wraps up the hacc activities.
All options to get active or in contact with hacc, including the wiki, are mentioned there.
    * first, i oppose the "it is planned" formulation - it is planned where and by whom?
    * the site needs to keep being reasonably editable by all HACC, as was wiki & pad:
        there was a consensus for this
needs to be git
pull requests handled by ???
____________ <<<blipp:
I think that it can be nice to have a nice-looking landing page (sorry for the word) for
hacc. The experiment hacc.earth has indeed gotten a, to me, very appealing design. I say
experiment because HACC-MUC says that they did not really use this website yet. By using
I mean, that they did not show this website to anyone yet. This claim can be supported by:
For me this website does not show up in any search results for “hacc” or “hackers against
climate change” or on hacc.wiki. So I suggest that we take a step back – no harm has been
done. If hacc.earth (and it is a nice domain indeed) were to become the landing page,
I believe it is a must that there is an accessible process to change the contents of the
website: be it sourced from a wiki, a pad, a Git repo that automatically merges mergerequests if
some amount of reviewers have given their green; some process like this.
(update 2021: MUC indeed founded a formal body in Germany, claiming HACC name & history)

_______________ <<<RW (2020):
### Suggests a "core team" as "light gatekeeper", and to make a Verein
Of course probably some people will be part of a core team of hacc but we don't want to be some strong gatekeeper. As we most likely will become a 'eingetragener Verein' (registered association) in the future there probably is also a legal part involved.

_______________ <<<dcht00 (2020):
    I propose the Verein is limited to the HACC-MUC LC
    it can perform roles for HACC-INT but only under strict and specific mandates - consensus from other groups
    reason for that includes the typical problem if not done so:
        the Verein board opposes democratic mandates, since "they have a personal legal responsibility"
        so in that way, situations happen when they (self-)selectively advance and block HACC-INT initiatives

    all of this should be simulated with TEST CASES!

    also discuss:
        * presentation ("this is our wiki" or "this is the wiki of a global organisation we are a local chapter of"?)
        * use of funds (if for example HACC CANARIAS gets significant local funds, do they

____________ <<<blipp (2020):
    - as far as I know, this Verein _is_ indeed already meant to be limited to HACC-MUC LC and more
      specifically to have a legal framework for their infra4future project (to be confirmed with them)

Update: This turned out to be untrue later.

    [!!] hacc.earth site in 2021

https://hacc.earth has been kind of eased in, without a consultation of the wider community, or a consensus.

As late as August 2020:
    questions about what it will be, how it will be edited, or what role it will play to other sides, were sidelined, and called "drama".

At some point, it has became a de-facto landing page, as demonstrated by chat room topic, and 2nd position on Google (after hacc.wiki, which refers to it).

    [K] hacc.earth's "contact@hacc.earth" as postal interception

Among the most problematic parts of the closed-edit sites is the "contacts" part, which exposes "contact@hacc.earth" as its primary contact, well above the public mailing list, the wiki, or the Matrix channel:
    * No system of reporting to the wider community has been established.
    * This has never been debated with anyone — including the people representing and promoting HACC at CCC events.

I consider this unacceptable, and a form of postal interception. The fact it was not considered or done on purpose, does not change how serious it is.
I ask the group that presented themselves as "postmasters", when I contacted the address, to cease this activity, and some form of community oversight over the mails that may have been received at this address.

______ UPDATE:
    This was resolved with HACC-MUC after being exposed, see 🔗hacc-meetings (2021/5).

[!] D: Q/META— What is HACC? How do groups within it relate & consolidate their work?
### (protocol between nodes)

    A) Weak: "HACC as directory"
        ... of local groups and some work groups, with no clear relation, possible overlaps, etc
            Even in this case it still needs consensus control over it.
            Propose: majority at congress event + clarity on how that is organized.

    B) Strong: "HACC as ecosystem"
        ... where groups inter-relate
        * more complicated, but I would bet that it is the way to go.
        * not just for HACC, but for the other million groups spawning up! 
        * as hackers, tools & processes for organisation should be our strong, not weak point:
            so we should make this effort, and contribute something here to the genera l

    C) Whatever: "HACC can be anything anyone wants it to be"
        ... but that means, it is nothing really?
        * So, you can have acconts claiming to be "HACC" which have nothing to do with each other
        * Each of them can claim the past and current work of other groups

        support by stuebinm (HACC MUC):
            """What is "hacc"? How to start a new regional chapter?""":
                """Since there has been a lot of discussion on this, I'll attempt to give the broadest definition I can: hacc, meaning "hackers against climate change" (or "hackers against climate crisis"), is: anyone and everyone who feels comfortable being described as such, which I'd understand as "following the hacker ethics, and doing something against climate change". There can therefore be no way to make any group "officially hacc"; dcht00 : if you and the group at CHT consider yourselves as such, then you are a local group of hacc; the only point to discuss is then how these groups communicate with each other."""
                    (For somebody who never attended any of the original HACC sessions, that's a pretty "strong" opinion ...)
                    'splaining /  arrogant, 

_[!] D: CATALYST/PR— Make outreach to existing HACC cells

Make it easier to adopt some sort of a statement/chapter,
recognize & be recognized by HACC.

Examples that definitely *are HACC* but just do not carry the name yet:
    * EHF @ https://ecohackerfarm.org
    * AltPwr/EventGrid
    * many hackerspaces
    * repair cafes & "right to repair" activists
    * transparency & data activists
    * hexayurts
    * OSE
    * anti-streaming
    * crisis mapping projects

... and many other projects & groups.
### some also in part! like XR, FFF, etc

HACC serves as a way for groups & projects to express and amplify specifically the environmental understanding of their mission.

[!] Mission: Encourage & coordinate every hackerspace and project to have a HACC representative & group.

_[!!*] D: CONTENT— Develop a core HACC statement

Put it on the site; read it at every event; ask everyone joining HACC channels to opinion about it; etc.

Suggested directions:

    The climate crisis is real
    We are dedicated to be a heterodox movement, united by consensus,
    representing people who self-identify as hackers
    dedicated to oppose:
        disastrous Western political & industrial leadership
        destruction of environments
        displacement of people
        imperialism and the military-industrial complex
        continuing colonialism and global oppression
    dedicated to explore, recognize & support:
        progressive and tactically sound initiatives
        indigenous leadership
    We are aware that technology and other fields we represent are a force with transformational potential
    That does not mean we naively believe we can "solve the problems" but that there is a range of outcomes
    some much more desirable than others

[!] Collect similar statements:
    * XR:
        https://extinctionrebellion.uk/declaration/ "Declaration of Rebellion"
    * critical engineering manifesto:
    * CHT/Totalism.org:
    * [...]

_[M!] D: INFRA— List all infrastructure, discuss stewardship

After 35c3 self-organization, HACC underwent a period of self-will, where created services "to have something going", with good intentions, but without clear analysis of viability, needs, coordination or maintenance plans. Now 2 years later, it is becoming clear what and who works long-term (and doesn't).
(was) it is not clear who's running what, on whose server, if they're still around, if they're functioning, etc.

Create a pad for this.
[M!] Merge: this was discussed in the 2021-04-25 meeting

###[!!*] merge above under "common collaboration infrastructure" !!!
Example: the mailing list:
* Who admins it?
* Is it moderated or not?
* Can we have a clearer system of who and under what conditions? :)
* Why is the history not open?
so To be specific, "mailman@hacc.uber.space" came back . it's published here: https://hacc.uber.space/mailman/listinfo , with "If you are having trouble using the lists, please contact mailman@hacc.uber.space."

_[!] D: COMMUNITY/CATALYST/CONTENT— Review mailing list, document, make a plan, restart

[!] bug: mailman@hacc.uber.space leads nowhere

[!] enable archives

[!!] appoint a Catalyst with regular content tasks:
    (reporting from channel, meetings, etc)

_[!] COMMUNITY/CATALYST— Ping and activate lurkers
"ball passing" / "person of the day" / "cold call"

Most people in chatroom are lurking, which is too bad. Try to catalyze more engagement:
    * daily / twice a week, Catalyst pings somebody random:
        use pre-prepared communiques
        make sure they add or update directory etc
    * is there any point to the lurkers in the channel?:
        pros and cons?
    * possibly, use the "multiple levels" pattern (like seen on some channels/networks):
        split channels into levels, to separate those with minimum engagement from the open debate space
        this is needed to create safer & more inclusive spaces as well
        ### just remember the Mrtn Dk situations, for example
    * ###
Hi from the HACC room :)
I'm trying to increase participation a bit, is it ok to ask you some questions?

_[!] BLIPP+D: DISCUSS/ADMIN— HACC domains & subdomains
### CONTINUE on consensus from april

* mucc.* only by wider consensus
* xyz.mucc.* for LC according to protocol

my take on subdomains : what blipp said, I even like the considerations of abbreviations. i'd add that you can xyz.muc.hacc.* whatever you want, what we need though, is how it can become xyz.hacc.*.
i feel we've done some good work shaping the criteria on this at the last session.

_[!] D: CONSENSUS/META— Adopt a form of meritocracy-assisted consensus
and merit-economics
    (governance, representation, decisions making)
Proposed <dcht00 ~ 2020-08-22
### [!!→] @@governance

In situations:
    * with different positions
    * which are established to need to have a common way
... both a consensus (of diferent voices) and individual merit (within current context) are used to help resolving an impasse.

(Feel free to add more perspectives.)

    (consensus of different voices)

Decision making has to weigh, in some way, between at least the following:
    * the founder(s) / initiator(s)
    * people who have been there at the beginning
    * people who have done work since then
    * people who have stayed continuously since their arrival
    * people who have built LCs and WGs
    * random people showing up when there is a vote, evaluating the proposals at hand
    * people who were not there at a vote time, but would like to have a say
    ________ additionally
    * people who are impacted by the decision, are not present, but can be reasonably represented

    (individual merit)

Generally make it welcome & constructive for people to resolve disagreements by:
    * introducing their experience & expect their perspecitve to be weighed accordingly
    * asking (and be able to expect) of others to do the same

    * past initiative & integrity
    * past work & reliability
        "X participated and pushed organisation of most succesful CCC events"
    * experience:
        "X has studied this"
        "X has worked in this field, accomplishing something similar"
    * point made convincingly to others with merit
    * [...]

    (consider "do-ocracy", if agreed to be fitting)

If there is no opposition, consensus states you can do it.
            who controls the domains, and by what right?
            if not consulted, isn't this extractive of all the participation that was done before?

[!*] L: @PROPOSALS— explain symbols

E2h symbols (like used on this pages) are not common knowledge
Clarify briefly at main page, refer to https://totalism.org/ethering, but also mention that those function mostely for "main editors" to process content.
(ok, they are mentioned in the "Directory", but):
    should be on every page that makes use of them!

[DUP-!!*] L: @DIRECTORY/WG— represent WGs in Directory

and organize designated workgroup-specific proposals under them
they can still hold the "field tags"
there can be an "unsorted" part, so the main editor(s) can check up

_[!!] D: CONTENT/PROJECT— Wiki->pad migration

Pads simply work better for HACC, since:
    * the majority of HACC international content will be authored this way:
        both IN PERSON and ONLINE
    * any system needs an editor volunteer:
        and pads have it (dcht00),
        wiki does not and never has (that's why it failed) — except the c3sus part!
    * ### see TOTALISM🔗pad-vs-wiki
    * [...]

    * Pads>wiki proposed <dcht00 ~35c3
    * Sadly that didn't work.
    * 2021: Temporarily, hedgedoc was adopted (but unused to produce content)
    * 2021/08: dcht00 migrated hedgedoc, will migrate the wiki as well

    * E2h MUST provide downloadable exports of all content, so it will not be lost
    * anyone OUGHT TO be able to make copies
    * at least one other endpoint OUGHT TO make copies regularly
    * as all infrastructure administration, it is subject to oversight as per 2021-04-25 meeting
    * E2h OUGHT TO include features perceived as missing, especially:
        * search
        * categories

_[!!] D: ADMIN/DEV— Make separate E2h pod for HACC

(Will depend on response.)
### or ... B) just do it and don't open a vacuum again?

<---------------------------------- (new) PROPOSALS #2 (DISCUSS) ↑


Also see → 🔗hacc-next-aux

new: [...]
↗↗↗ add ↗↗↗

<--------------------------------------- (new)+ PROPOSALS #3 (NEW/UNSORTED) ↑↑