Kaliya Young - Identity Women - IIW and 'Human First Tech' - advocating for more of these types of conversation, have threat model analysis paper .  Naming harms of Web 1.0 & 2.0 Event 

Bart Suichies - No affiliation, active in SSI for 5-6 years, joined ToIP through SICPA.  Interest in SSI in public sector, and use where active governance.  Interested in figuring out where the lines are for what we can do as a community for solving societal problems.  Paradox of powerful tools for dual use good / bad

Kalin Nicolov - joined also as SICPA, currently co-chairing the HXWG - focused on connection point of HX design, interactions of ethics, incentive structures, points that are grey areas.

Darrell O'Donnell - part of ToIP from beginning - focused on making it real and understanding harms.  Affiliation - small boutique consultancy

Shireen Mitchell - Here to have the conversation about harms - statelessness is only identifier we find racism, part of Human First Tech with Kaliya.  Moments where we sit on the security line thinking about finance, but ignoring the impacts on 'real identity'.  Some concerns with the white papers problem in defining people's identity by their vulnerability attributes

Jacques Bikoundoublockchain developer, member of ToIP for 2 years, mainly involved in drafting GF documents, participated in CCI, interested because keen to understand how the technology can impact people

Phil Wolffhere to contribute to the threat analysis & mitigate harms, possibly from a product management lens.  Privacy advocate for 15 years, originally Oakland and now Pacific Northwest, consult for Wider Team on ID of things in healthcare. Led "Death to NSTIC" sessions at IIW to brainstorm and characterize threats to initiative success. 

Nicky:  Freelancer

Judith Fleenor, Director of Strategic Engagement for ToIP

Jon Pinkes, technologist linked via Kaliya & IIW

Notes to ensure we include dissenting voices by having some outside sessions later on in the process

• Reviewed the Purpose. - As well as white paper - a practical self-assessment tool so that developers can 
• Additionally - consider a self-assessment matrix as well.
• TIMELINE - likely a "get it done and move on" style of TF. Long-running "SSI Harms Department" (casual analogy) isn't the goal for now. Focus on the deliverable for now, and consider what happens later then.
  • Additional Deliverable - what are the enduring needs (Phil) and report back to HXWG & Community.
• Mapping risk in the wider ecosystem and assigning mitigation strategies that might be implemented by another group (e.g. a standard)
• We should be aware that tech will only ever be part of the solution (follow-up work)

Open as to what happens once initial deliverables are provided

Agree to focus on IIW for StoryBoard, and the stuff we are stuck on - where we have need for other views and help

Keep the narrative - the tech won't save us!!!  This is about humans, they are the builders of the good and bad stuff. 'No tech fix for the human condition!'