San Francisco
Menu

Cyn Wang

Commission vice president, Urban Planning Representative, San Francisco Entertainment Commission

We identified Wang’s voice at five meetings.

5 of 16transcribed meetings with their voice identified
3 of 3present at roll calls through Dec 16, 2025, from the clerk

Next Entertainment Commission meeting: Tue, Nov 3, 5:30 pm · Agenda

Every roll call, and Wang’s other bodies

Present at 3 of 3 roll calls at the Entertainment Commission, roll call through Dec 16, 2025

From the clerk’s own record. We don’t compare members on it.

PresentExcusedAbsentOldest first, 1 square per roll call

Absent 0. Nov 4, 2025 to Dec 16, 2025. The clerk’s record covers 3 of the 17 meetings we hold, through Dec 16, 2025.

Official roll call, from the clerk →
Meetings

Every meeting where we identified Wang’s voice

Five, newest first. The date opens the meeting; the time plays the video at Wang’s first remark.

  1. Sep 1, 2026Entertainment Commission2.8 min7:45
  2. Jun 16, 2026Entertainment Commission2.8 min3:38
  3. Feb 3, 2026Entertainment Commission1.3 min1:51:07
  4. Dec 16, 2025Entertainment Commission3.4 minVideo
  5. Nov 18, 2025Entertainment Commission2.0 min3:35
How we identify who is speaking · blind check, pooled across five cities: of 340 commission lines drawn, 260 right, 4 wrong, 1 unclear, 75 couldn’t be judged

A meeting missing here means we couldn’t attribute the voice, not that Wang was absent. Claude and Gemini each read every transcript with that day’s roster. A voice gets Cyn Wang’s name only when both agree and a code check finds the name said on, or just before, their turn. Voices our transcripts merge with someone else’s are never attributed, so every count here undercounts what Wang said. For commissions, of 340 lines drawn, 260 were right, 4 wrong and 1 unclear, and the checkers couldn’t judge 75. We have since removed the voices behind 64 of those lines (3 wrong, 0 unclear, the rest we had already held for other reasons). Of the 276 lines we still publish, the checkers could judge 228: 226 right, 1 wrong and 1 unclear (90% lower bound 0.97). They couldn’t judge the other 48. The check is one sample pooled across the five cities, not of Wang or of San Francisco alone.