I can see Meg’s point, and agree that some prominent links in the scientist section of LSST.org can probably address it.
For myself, I keep having to remind myself that Rubin’s use of “community” differs from that of NSF and NASA, particularly in the phrase “community engagement.” If you look for that phrase at NSF.gov or NASA.gov, you’ll see they use “community” in that context to mean the broader public. I frequently have to remind myself, “When Rubin says ‘community,’ they mean science community, not the broader community.”
The new name seems doubly ambiguous to me; it suggests a group that is doing science (for the community? with the community?). The old name was a bit ambiguous about what community was being served, but the term “engagement” at least made it clear that the team isn’t directly responsible for doing science, but rather provides a variety of support/collaboration functions.
Something like “Science Community Support Team” or “Science Community Engagement Team” seems to better capture what I understood the CET to be about. I’m not suggesting changing the name (again). But although the announcement indicates the team’s function is not changing, the new name suggests a change from supporting science to actually doing science. Though for a sociologist of science, the new name might indicate this team is doing “community science” (sorry, I have that on the brain because I’m mentoring a LINCC fellow, and they have sociologists on the team actually doing, well, community science, i.e., studying how our community of scientists works).
It might also be worth noting that a number of institutions use the term “community science” as a synonym—actually, a replacement—for “citizen science.” It appears there’s a move among museums, science centers, and other community-facing science groups away from “citizen science” to “community science.” E.g., Introduction to Community Science - Community Science Initiative (that’s from an association of museums and science centers). eBird is another example; their website briefly explains why the citizen science community is moving away from “citizen” (in a nutshell, to be more inclusive): Community Science: Why we do it, and why we call it that - eBird Pacific Northwest. The British Science Association is adopting “community science” in this way, too: What is Community Science? | British Science Association. When I’ve hunted around for the term, it seems like the environmental science community in particular has gone all-in on “community science” as a replacement for “citizen science,” with quite a few journal articles on the topic. The EPA even has a “Social and Community Science Subcommittee” focused on what has previously been called citizen science.
So I’m a bit concerned that the new name will invite confusion, even beyond Meg’s concerns, due to “Community Science” being a term of art with existing meanings different from what is intended here.