Just to say that the IRC channel has taken off nicely, so my questions
here about "venues" are deferred for now.
kc
On 12/7/12 12:12 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
I agree. Everyone gets to have their opinions.
So, in terms of a place to set up a discussion about (or of, I don't
remember the wording) women in code4lib or even just women and code,
the places I'm aware of that might work are:
Google+
Google Groups
an email list (not my favorite)
IRC
However, I'm probably the least knowledgeable of most people here
about social software since I mostly don't participate. So I'm asking
for suggestions.
kc
On 12/7/12 10:03 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
There being no rules about who can form a group does not mean there
are no opinions about it, or that nobody should share an opinion.
Just the opposite, the community defines itself by sharing opinions
and discussing them, not by rules. There is no contradiction between
thinking something is a bad idea and thinking it is not prohibited by
any rules, I am surprised to find you astonished by it.
Yes, you don't need permission, you can just do it. But people will
have opinions about what you do, and they'll share them. That's how a
community functions, no? People are encouraged to float their ideas
by the community and get community feedback and take that feedback
into account -- but taking it into account doesn't mean you "have to"
refrain from doing something if some people don't like it (especially
when other people do), you can make your own decision.
I'm not even going to talk about the particular plan here, because I
think this general point is much more important.
The idea that "rules" are the only thing that can or should guide's
one course of action is absolutely antithetical to a well-functioning
community, online or offline. Thinking that either there should be a
rule against something, or else nobody should resist or express
opposition to anything that lacks a rule against it -- is a recipe
for stultifying beuarocracy, not community.
________________________________________
From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of
Karen Coyle [li...@kcoyle.net]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 12:50 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Question abt the code4libwomen idea
Code4lib appears to have no rules about who can and cannot form a group.
Therefore, if there are some folks who want a group, they should create
that group. If it's successful, it's successful. If not, it'll fade away
like so many start-up groups.
I'm astonished at the resistance to the formation of a group on the part
of people who also insist that there are no rules about forming groups.
I don't recall that any other proposal to set up a group has met this
kind of resistance. In fact, we were recently reminded that if you want
something done in c4l you should just do it. There is no need to ask
permission. So, do it.
I think the only open question is: where? e.g. what platform?
kc
On 12/7/12 9:25 AM, Salazar, Christina wrote:
Hi Bohyun,
Thank you so much for raising this again. I'm still interested in
such a group.
I found the terminology "separate but equal" (that some on this list
chose to use as a reason not to do this) offensive; it was not at
all the spirit that I'd originally proposed and no one had suggested
either separate OR equal other than detractors. In fact I said that
anyone would be welcome. I completely agree with what you're saying
about there not being any reason why we women couldn't do both (I
think we're versatile that way). I'm pretty sure I vaguely recall
(maybe) there being some (similar) concerns about the local c4ls and
I would say it's very similar - no one says that just because a
person finds say, Appalachia.c4l useful, it detracts from the global
c4l.
If I can find other women who are willing to work together as a
women in library technology/coder/whatever support group, I will
work to make something like this happen. As someone pointed out, we
don't need blessing from anyone.
If you will be there, I will look for you at the conference and we
can discuss further. If there are other women who are interested, go
us.
Christina Salazar
Systems Librarian
John Spoor Broome Library
California State University, Channel Islands
805/437-3198
p.s. Usual disclaimer about these opinions being my own and not
reflecting those of my workplace/employers.
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bohyun Kim
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 8:14 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: [CODE4LIB] Question abt the code4libwomen idea
Hi all,
I might upset some people with this, but I wanted to bring up this
question. First, let me say that I think it is a terrific idea to
have a code4lib learning group with or without a mentoring program.
But from what I read from the listserv, it seemed to me that there
were interests in a space for women, NOT as a separate group from
code4lib BUT more as just a small support and discussion group for
just women, INSIDE the c4l community not OUTSIDE of it. (Like an IG
inside LITA or something like that...).
I just wanted to know if there are still women in code4lib who are
interested in this idea because gender-specific issues won't be
addressed by a code4lib learning group. (If this is the case, I am
still interested in participating, and I already set up
#code4libwomen IRC channel.) Or, do we think that the initial needs
that led to the talk of code4libwomen will be sufficiently met by
having a learning group instead? Personally, I don't see why we can
have both code4libwomen and code4liblearn inside code4lib if there
are enough people who think that these would make code4lib more
useful to them and if this makes code4lib serve more diverse
interests of their members.
So I am looking forward to hearing form other women in c4l on this! :)
Cheers,
~Bohyun
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet