Taking Notes for Social Web CG taskforce meetings
Technical Discussion
11
Posts
2
Posters
0
Views
-
Hi all,
I've recently had some questions about what tool to use for note taking during taskforce meetings, personally I've been using hedgedoc from social.coop, but it's a private instance and you need an invited account. I've also used hackmd in the past. I've seen other taskforces use Google Docs, and I think one even used CryptPad.
Officially the W3C way of scribing meetings is via an IRC bot: https://www.w3.org/2006/tools/wiki/WebExBestPractices#Meeting_Record_(Minutes)
However, this isn't necessarily the most approachable to many members of the Social Web CG.
At the end of the day, the most important part is that taskforce leads capture meeting notes and preserve them, e.g., in the taskforce github repository on swicg or swicg/meetings. (I could also automate taskforce to swicg/meetings sync)
I currently own the socialcg.org and swicg.org domains, and I'd be happy to spin up a hedgedoc server on a subdomain there that taskforce leads can use for creating and taking meeting notes. However, to do this I'd need to figure out some funding for it (not particularly a lot, but some amount of money — somewhere in the range of €60-180 a year, I'd guess).
What tooling would you like to use for taking meeting notes? Would having a hedgedoc install for the CG be valuable?
(I am also in the process of hosting the Activity Summary Bot on a VPS, which produces these emails to the mailing list weekly: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swicg/2025Oct/0028.html — it was running on github actions but kept failing there due to GitHub restrictions, so I've had a VPS on a server sponsored by one of the large fediverse hosts to replace GitHub Actions for more reliable delivery)
Yours,
Emelia -
julian since you asked!
-
I'll need a bit more than upvotes here
-
thisismissem hah yeah, I was doing dinnertime and didn't have the bandwidth to answer, one sec 🙂
-
thisismissem hedgedoc or hackMD worked surprisingly well. Before I had a Google Docs sheet and participation was low because of the access control barriers.
I would not be opposed to an AI scribe, and I actually have access to one with my Google Workspace sub, but I think that comes with a lot of baggage that precludes its use.
The worst part of scribing your own notes is that you can't participate. All my notes for sections I lead don't ever get captured fully, and I have to do it post-meeting... about half the time it doesn't happen at all 😦
As mentioned offline, perfectly fine to use dmitri@social.coop's HedgeDoc instance.
-
Yeah, in the past I've gained consent to record a call & use a local model to transcribe which I then edited, but it was time consuming.
In the T&S taskforce grant I've applied for money to pay a scribe for their time
-
I think I'll give it a try. I did some light research and am going to give Whisper.cpp and some Ollama models a try. I'm not sure whether they'll have the ability to summarize and distinguish voices, but let's see... I'll report back in this thread.
-
I have been informed that there is an (outdated?) Etherpad instance at https://pad.w3.org that you authenticate with via Basic Auth using your W3C Account credentials. Unfortunately it needs that auth just to view or contribute to documents, which probably isn't helpful.
-
Okay, I spent the better part of an hour playing around with it (after compiling
whisper.cppand going down a weird rabbit hole — thanks Gemini!)I recorded some test audio, had it transcribed, and passed it over to ollama running llama3.1, with a prompt to summarize the meeting into bullet points and action items. It seemed to go over well, although I don't quite know how it will handle digressions, asides, and hour-long meetings :)
It might be we can adjust the prompt so that it isn't summarizing so much as efficiently condensing meeting discussions.
Definitely worth a shot if only to reduce the burden of scribing while chairing a meeting!
-
Okay, I spent the better part of an hour playing around with it (after compiling
whisper.cppand going down a weird rabbit hole — thanks Gemini!)I recorded some test audio, had it transcribed, and passed it over to ollama running llama3.1, with a prompt to summarize the meeting into bullet points and action items. It seemed to go over well, although I don't quite know how it will handle digressions, asides, and hour-long meetings :)
It might be we can adjust the prompt so that it isn't summarizing so much as efficiently condensing meeting discussions.
Definitely worth a shot if only to reduce the burden of scribing while chairing a meeting!
julian I used vibe.app when I did transcription, and it kinda butcher audience a few months ago and "fediverse" became like "fetty verse", but otherwise was okay.
-
julian I used vibe.app when I did transcription, and it kinda butcher audience a few months ago and "fediverse" became like "fetty verse", but otherwise was okay.
Whisper.cpp is surprisingly good. It is getting 99% of it... missing things it doesn't know about (like
PyFETinstead of Piefed), but it definitely knows what activitypub is, so that's handy.Thanks for pushing me (even if indirectly) to do this. Looking forward to trying it out for real.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@julian @rimu @nutomic @silverpill essentially the difference between the two actions only exists internally, not externally.
whether to use a Delete or a Remove is a separate issue of semantics and authority.
whether to use an array of objects is a separate issue of batching and partial failure. semantically, there is no issue. "john deleted 10 posts" makes sense as a statement.
-
@julian @rimu @nutomic @silverpill put another way, there is no difference between a link that doesn't resolve because the resource was deleted and a link that doesn't resolve because the server was down or a link that doesn't resolve because you don't have authorization to see it. it's just a link that doesn't resolve, as far as you're concerned.
the same thing applies to moderation, not just deletion. a direct link might resolve, but the link is omitted from a curated view.
-
@julian @rimu @nutomic @silverpill well, you typically have no authority over "children", so you can't actually delete them. you can treat them as deleted locally (equivalent to garbage collection for orphan references), but as far as the outside world is concerned, you just deleted one object.
i think people should be more aware that orphaned references can and will happen. i'd personally leave them be. link rot is a thing, and those links aren't necessarily invalid, they're just stale.
-
@julian @mariusor @helge
fwiw, letterbook is fine with that
https://github.com/Letterbook/Letterbook/blob/6bf60b1b3d37a8b5d49a1d2554bfd5e4468f00de/Source/Letterbook.Api/ActivityPub/ActorController.cs#L309
-
The thing I'm adding to FIRES is the ability to label data as you import it.
-
trwnh@mastodon.social it's less so that I want receivers to do what I want (the ship has sailed on that), but rather that we have the opportunity to provide some guidance on preferred behaviour.
What's clear here is that there are going to be two separate actions, "Delete object and all children, recursively", or "Delete object but retain children".
We're discussing the best way to represent those two actions.
cc rimu@piefed.social nutomic@lemmy.ml silverpill@mitra.social
-
Since it's the end of the week, you might be wondering: where's FediMod FIRES 1.0.0?
It's coming, I just decided to add some more features, and most of my week was:
- meetings (7 of them!)
- sorting out things for the ActivityPub Trust & Safety Taskforce
- setting up some infrastructure for SWICG taskforces to use since one thing broke & I needed to update it.So I didn't get to work on FediMod FIRES as much as I wanted to.
-
@julian @rimu @nutomic @melroy @BentiGorlich the complicating factor here is not what other people do, but that you would be using the terms incorrectly or imprecisely according to their definition. this happens all the time in natural language where people sometimes use words they don't fully understand or use them with definitions not matching consensus. it's how we get people saying "literally" for things that are not literal, and other such slang.
