Re: Diversity / Inclusion

[Ross Gardler]

Justin Mclean has done some work on Apache Way teaching modules (added to To 
line as I'm not sure if he is on the ComDev list)


From: Austin Bennett 
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 7:19 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Diversity / Inclusion

Hi Apache Community,

This is related to recent discussions, but I'm looking for practical
suggestions for a concrete initiative, so not jumping in on those threads.

Working with the administration at a local community college - looking at
methods for training some English as a second language - and immigrant (to
the USA) - students to learn things coding/computing.  Computer Science is
an 'impacted' major, meaning students are not even able to gain access to
those classes, so there is motivation to figure out how to expand those
capabilities.

This has me exploring putting things together to train these students.
Outside of the technical skills, I am imagining teaching them about (and
encourage living by) the Apache Way, and thoughts around encouraging this
mentality from the outset ("meritocracy" as a quite loaded word, for
example).  It seems such awareness would be beneficial to people as they
are learning (and anyone); In addition this might serve as a pipeline for
the future for people that would contribute positively to Apache.

Anything else I should be looking at outside of the website:
https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.apache.org&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1e0ef8bd54174f76f88508d6b57f51c3%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636895955760405352&sdata=IEJzzDEsxGCaeFHpfr%2BpGizvwxvClhZWuB%2BudCoyW0s%3D&reserved=0
 ?

Thanks,
Austin

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Diversity / Inclusion

[Austin Bennett]

Hi Apache Community,

This is related to recent discussions, but I'm looking for practical
suggestions for a concrete initiative, so not jumping in on those threads.

Working with the administration at a local community college - looking at
methods for training some English as a second language - and immigrant (to
the USA) - students to learn things coding/computing.  Computer Science is
an 'impacted' major, meaning students are not even able to gain access to
those classes, so there is motivation to figure out how to expand those
capabilities.

This has me exploring putting things together to train these students.
Outside of the technical skills, I am imagining teaching them about (and
encourage living by) the Apache Way, and thoughts around encouraging this
mentality from the outset ("meritocracy" as a quite loaded word, for
example).  It seems such awareness would be beneficial to people as they
are learning (and anyone); In addition this might serve as a pipeline for
the future for people that would contribute positively to Apache.

Anything else I should be looking at outside of the website:
https://community.apache.org ?

Thanks,
Austin

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

[Owen Rubel]

My ethics teacher in high school summed it up well I thought in stating
your rights end where mine begin.

Owen Rubel
oru...@gmail.com


On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 1:14 PM Eric Covener  wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:32 PM Daniel Gruno  wrote:
> >
> > On 30/03/2019 13.23, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or
> against anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so
> as long as you protect my right to help you achieve the
> > >>> right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the
> existence of any discrimination (positive or negative).
> > >>> Community over code
> > >>
> > >> How do you square this with the code of conduct? In my reading, unless
> > >> the discrimination threaded some extremely fine needle, it would be in
> > >> violation and a good argument could be made for the defense of it
> > >> being in violation as well.
> > >
> > >
> > > Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
> >
> > We discriminate all day long in our every day life, it's fine, as long
> > as it serves a greater good (or our personal selves). I don't get to go
> > into your house without you inviting me in, you don't get to claim
> > social benefits while you have a job, I can't apply for TAC - all
> > perfectly valid, legal cases of discrimination, that would not violate
> > the CoC. It's more about the action and consequences than the
> > dichotomous definition of a term here.
>
> But those aren't the kinds of discrimination that anyone would talk
> about needing to be "protected" as a right or "stamped out of
> existence", nor the ones relevant to the current threads on
> D&I/meritocracy.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>
>

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

[Naomi Slater]

Jim, you have correctly identified that context is important when
interpreting someone's words

On Sat 30. Mar 2019 at 22:43, Jim Jagielski  wrote:

> If you heard on the TV that the Mayor was charged with
> discrimination, your first reaction would not be to
> assume that she is choosy about her golden mustard.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>
>

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

[Jim Jagielski]

If you heard on the TV that the Mayor was charged with
discrimination, your first reaction would not be to
assume that she is choosy about her golden mustard.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Sam Ruby]

Top posting.

"you're on the sidelines; the President said so".

None of the quotes you provided were my words, nor do they support the
claim that I made that statement.

I'm pleased that we agree on Griselda's plan.

- Sam Ruby

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:23 PM Wade Chandler  wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 30, 2019, at 3:37 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:57 PM Wade Chandler  
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> And mine was there is a line in this thread attacking the way a lot of very
> >> inclusive people work here, and that line is like "your points have no
> >> merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org,
> >> while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
> >> this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not working on the
> >> specific thing you are, because it impacts the whole/everyone working on
> >> something at Apache, and is also directly related to my point on the
> >> possibility to exist for overreach and overreaction considering that.
> >>
> >> Folks chose to throw around weight with various phrases such as "because
> >> the President" and "policing". Where is the plan for what this looks like
> >> given these mandates?
> >
> > Slow down.  It is impossible to keep up with the false accusations.
> >
>
> Perhaps it starts with something as simple as:
>
> >>
> >>> Given you previously mentioned companies and performance reviews etc;
> >>> I will suggest part of the problem in those contexts are those
> >>> reviews are often measuring the wrong things, and not measuring the
> >>> drivers of the hierarchy of work in which most workers actually
> >>> exist within an organization; they please the street though.
> >>
> >> To me, this reads as you saying "We're promoting women and minorities
> >> just because they look good for our D&I numbers, not because they have
> >> the skillsets required." Was that what you really intended to say?
> >> If so that's borderline offensive, but as you say, irrelevant to
> >> our situation at Apache - so why bring it up? I'm trying to assume
> >> good faith on your part, but finding it hard to do so.
>
> Which was actually in response to a statement how reviews contradict 
> promotions and upward mobility. I was suggesting the reviews themselves are 
> often out of touch with the managers at the ground level, and often those 
> people are directly responsible for anything bigger than cost of living 
> adjustments to compensation and not the reviews. I certainly wasn’t saying 
> anything negative about women and minorities, but OK.
>
> Or, what I was specifically responding to for which you replied; I was 
> directly accused for appropriating the language of the marginalized as a way 
> to personally negatively reflect on me after I had tried to move on from the 
> thread for some time.
>
>
> > From your previous email " you're on the sidelines; the President said
> > so"... to which I can only respond [citation needed].
> >
>
> From this thread: some of what I’m referencing:
>
> In relation to low-level projects and policing
>
> >> Not only do the outbound communication need to improve, but more
> >> importantly the oversight and policing needs to improve.
>
> and
>
> >> This means that the policies can be created at Foundation level, and can be
> >> policed (by the Board, and/or through delegation by a specific office). If 
> >> the
> >> highest body of the Foundation established a strict(er) policy on 'merit 
> >> awarding’
> >> and/or 'Diversity & Inclusion' then it is obliged, with regards to these 
> >> policies, to:
>
>
> President and the Board
>
> >>  I have long since stopped caring about *persuading* our skeptic members
> >> about the need to do this work. They're not going to help anyways, why 
> >> bother?
> >> And we already have the full support of the President and the Board on 
> >> this,
> >> so they can't interfere in any meaningful way.
>
>
> Don’t people who are not skeptics, but are concerned about what that work is 
> have some right to ask about it? Is it interfering to ask for the information 
> to be enumerated in a place to make it clear and concise or otherwise be 
> pointed to where it has already happened? I’m assuming this work will have 
> impacts on everyone at Apache, not just those “doing that work” or a 
> sub-project.
>
> >> Again as Rich says, there's explicit approval to proceed with a D&I
> >> initiative already, from both the Board and the President. People like
> >> Naomi and I have been through the "prove it to me" request many times
> >> over, and I'm tired of responding to this particular email.
>
>
> >> TL;DR: It's obvious no one is going to convince you that anything needs
> >> to be done. But thankfully, we can move ahead without your personal
> >> approval. Please let us get on with our work rather than just heckling
> >> from the sidelines.
>
>
> It would be much easier if there were bits in the wiki or some where, and 
> this was tracked there; we’d all be 

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Wade Chandler]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 3:37 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:57 PM Wade Chandler  wrote:
>> 
>> And mine was there is a line in this thread attacking the way a lot of very
>> inclusive people work here, and that line is like "your points have no
>> merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org,
>> while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
>> this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not working on the
>> specific thing you are, because it impacts the whole/everyone working on
>> something at Apache, and is also directly related to my point on the
>> possibility to exist for overreach and overreaction considering that.
>> 
>> Folks chose to throw around weight with various phrases such as "because
>> the President" and "policing". Where is the plan for what this looks like
>> given these mandates?
> 
> Slow down.  It is impossible to keep up with the false accusations.
> 

Perhaps it starts with something as simple as:

>> 
>>> Given you previously mentioned companies and performance reviews etc;
>>> I will suggest part of the problem in those contexts are those
>>> reviews are often measuring the wrong things, and not measuring the
>>> drivers of the hierarchy of work in which most workers actually
>>> exist within an organization; they please the street though.
>> 
>> To me, this reads as you saying "We're promoting women and minorities
>> just because they look good for our D&I numbers, not because they have
>> the skillsets required." Was that what you really intended to say?
>> If so that's borderline offensive, but as you say, irrelevant to
>> our situation at Apache - so why bring it up? I'm trying to assume
>> good faith on your part, but finding it hard to do so.

Which was actually in response to a statement how reviews contradict promotions 
and upward mobility. I was suggesting the reviews themselves are often out of 
touch with the managers at the ground level, and often those people are 
directly responsible for anything bigger than cost of living adjustments to 
compensation and not the reviews. I certainly wasn’t saying anything negative 
about women and minorities, but OK.

Or, what I was specifically responding to for which you replied; I was directly 
accused for appropriating the language of the marginalized as a way to 
personally negatively reflect on me after I had tried to move on from the 
thread for some time.


> From your previous email " you're on the sidelines; the President said
> so"... to which I can only respond [citation needed].
> 

From this thread: some of what I’m referencing:

In relation to low-level projects and policing

>> Not only do the outbound communication need to improve, but more
>> importantly the oversight and policing needs to improve.

and

>> This means that the policies can be created at Foundation level, and can be
>> policed (by the Board, and/or through delegation by a specific office). If 
>> the
>> highest body of the Foundation established a strict(er) policy on 'merit 
>> awarding’
>> and/or 'Diversity & Inclusion' then it is obliged, with regards to these 
>> policies, to:


President and the Board

>>  I have long since stopped caring about *persuading* our skeptic members
>> about the need to do this work. They're not going to help anyways, why 
>> bother?
>> And we already have the full support of the President and the Board on this,
>> so they can't interfere in any meaningful way.


Don’t people who are not skeptics, but are concerned about what that work is 
have some right to ask about it? Is it interfering to ask for the information 
to be enumerated in a place to make it clear and concise or otherwise be 
pointed to where it has already happened? I’m assuming this work will have 
impacts on everyone at Apache, not just those “doing that work” or a 
sub-project.

>> Again as Rich says, there's explicit approval to proceed with a D&I
>> initiative already, from both the Board and the President. People like
>> Naomi and I have been through the "prove it to me" request many times
>> over, and I'm tired of responding to this particular email.


>> TL;DR: It's obvious no one is going to convince you that anything needs
>> to be done. But thankfully, we can move ahead without your personal
>> approval. Please let us get on with our work rather than just heckling
>> from the sidelines.


It would be much easier if there were bits in the wiki or some where, and this 
was tracked there; we’d all be able to understand what the mandate means as 
well as those driving its views on what specifically need to change. It’s a lot 
of referencing.

>> I am sure
>>> we could and can find common ground. Certainly more information
>>> and data would be very useful!
>> 
>> 
>> in 2014, I was challenged to provide data on members@ and spent a whole
>> evening doing statistical modeling to demonstrate why it's extremely
>> unlikely that the homogeneity of our committee base i

Re: Continuing conversation on Apache Swag

[Shane Curcuru]

Sharan Foga wrote on 3/30/19 11:44 AM:
> Hi Gris
> 
> Thanks for the introductions. I seem to remember that Sally outlined a 
> possible process of how a central Apache swag store could work so let's 
> review that and plan the next steps.

ComDev runs a RedBubble store, so some things are already there to order
by anyone outside the ASF; any project that wants to upload their
standalone logo should just ask to get items put there:

  https://www.redbubble.com/people/comdev/portfolio?asc=u

> For the branding - there is a style guide that might help:
> https://apache.org/foundation/press/kit/ApacheFoundation_StyleGuide.pdf

And depending on the specific use (i.e. who's creating/buying/giving
away the swag; is it *just* an Apache project logo as-is, or a larger
design; etc.) the trademark guidelines are here:

  https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/merchandise

-- 

- Shane
  ComDev PMC
  The Apache Software Foundation

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

[Eric Covener]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:32 PM Daniel Gruno  wrote:
>
> On 30/03/2019 13.23, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener  wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against 
> >>> anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long 
> >>> as you protect my right to help you achieve the
> >>> right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of 
> >>> any discrimination (positive or negative).
> >>> Community over code
> >>
> >> How do you square this with the code of conduct? In my reading, unless
> >> the discrimination threaded some extremely fine needle, it would be in
> >> violation and a good argument could be made for the defense of it
> >> being in violation as well.
> >
> >
> > Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
>
> We discriminate all day long in our every day life, it's fine, as long
> as it serves a greater good (or our personal selves). I don't get to go
> into your house without you inviting me in, you don't get to claim
> social benefits while you have a job, I can't apply for TAC - all
> perfectly valid, legal cases of discrimination, that would not violate
> the CoC. It's more about the action and consequences than the
> dichotomous definition of a term here.

But those aren't the kinds of discrimination that anyone would talk
about needing to be "protected" as a right or "stamped out of
existence", nor the ones relevant to the current threads on
D&I/meritocracy.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:50 PM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
>> 
> 
> simplistic and incorrect
> 
> discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell apart
> 

recognize a distinction; differentiate.
"babies can discriminate between different facial expressions of emotion"
synonyms:   differentiate, distinguish, draw/recognize a distinction, tell 
the difference, discern a difference; More
2. 
make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different 
categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, sex, or age.
"existing employment policies discriminate against women"
synonyms:   be biased, show prejudice, be prejudiced; More

I contend that when people use the word discrimination, 9 times out of
10, #2 is what is meant/implied/inferred.

We might as well argue about the definition of 'meritocracy'... oops.
Bad idea. :)

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Sam Ruby]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:57 PM Wade Chandler  wrote:
>
> And mine was there is a line in this thread attacking the way a lot of very
> inclusive people work here, and that line is like "your points have no
> merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org,
> while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
> this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not working on the
> specific thing you are, because it impacts the whole/everyone working on
> something at Apache, and is also directly related to my point on the
> possibility to exist for overreach and overreaction considering that.
>
> Folks chose to throw around weight with various phrases such as "because
> the President" and "policing". Where is the plan for what this looks like
> given these mandates?

Slow down.  It is impossible to keep up with the false accusations.

>From your previous email " you're on the sidelines; the President said
so"... to which I can only respond [citation needed].

If you want to react to an actual plan, I welcome your feedback on the
following:

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a5e7e30fad3e89547db554cf64b10d33611d4401356590bddf94b918@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E

If you want to build your own plan to, feel free to do so.  At the
present time I can say that the link above is a plan that I can
support.  It doesn't start out with (or even mention) policing.  It
describes a plan that involves gathering data, analyzing results, and
making recommendations.  Nor does saying that I support and can see
the ASF approving such a plan mean that we aren't capable of
evaluating and supporting other plans.

If you continue to want to attack proposals that absolutely nobody has
made, I encourage you to do so elsewhere.

> Wade

- Sam Ruby

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Eric Covener]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:17 PM Ross Gardler  wrote:
> I think the problem is that *I* used the term "positive discrimination". That 
> has led to an interpretation of someone elses words through a cloudy lens. 
> Before making assumptions about that other persons intent you should listen 
> to their words. Have you watched Joan's presentation?

I read your words and asked you to elaborate on your intent because it
seemed uncharacteristic/controversial,
not because of the bearing on anyone else or other unspecified comments.

Obviously you have no obligation to explain, but don't misrepresent my
question or motives. It's insulting.

> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone. 
> But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you 
> protect my right to help you achieve the
> right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of any 
> discrimination (positive or negative).

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Ross Gardler]

Yes. I'm making accommodations. I plan to take affirmative action (I note that 
Wikipedia calls out the UK, my native country, as having a different meaning to 
other places, so perhaps that's why I like the term and you don't).

I will comply with the CoC and I will continue to try to assert the CoC on all 
actions of all participants. But I *will* take affirmative action to help 
address the inequalities we have.

Ross


From: Jim Jagielski 
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 12:01 PM
To: ComDev
Cc: Naomi Slater
Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on 
"meritocracy")

Making accommodations.

IMO, 'affirmative action' should be avoided too much political baggage.

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:55 PM, Ross Gardler  wrote:
>
> Let use the term "affirmative action" from now on...
>
> 
> From: Naomi Slater 
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 11:50 AM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on 
> "meritocracy")
>
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>
>>
>> Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
>>
>
> simplistic and incorrect
>
> discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell apart
>
> we discriminate when we determine who "has merit". but most people at the
> organization consider that form of discrimination a positive and
> constructive process
>
> when you choose who to hire, you are discriminating. between the hirable
> candidates and the unhirable candidates
>
> "positive discrimination", also known as affirmative action, is the process
> of discriminating between those who are advantaged and those who are
> disadvantaged and then doing something to help the ones who are
> disadvantaged
>
> this is similar in spirit to means testing when it comes to social welfare.
> the state discriminates between those who need assistance and those who
> don't (how well they do this is another matter entirely)
>
> I would like to see a well-reasoned argument that explains why identifying
> those in need of assistance and then providing that assistance is "by
> definition" unjust. it appears we have a *very* different understanding of
> what justice is
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:37 PM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz  > wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
 
 I've done a
 lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
 name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation
>>> carries
 much weight
 
>>> 
>>> Please don't go there.
>>> 
>> 
>> JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
>> 
> 
> and my point wasn't "I've done more work than you so I am right". my point
> was "who are you to tell me I don't care about this organization because I
> 'dare' to criticize 'the meritocracy'". which I believe is a perfectly
> reasonable comment in reply to such a preposterous claim


Gotcha! Thx for the clarification.

Cheers!

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Dave Fisher]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 11:57 AM, Wade Chandler  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 14:44 Naomi Slater  wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>> 
 
 
> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater 
>> wrote:
> 
> I've done a
> lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing
>> your
> name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation
 carries
> much weight
> 
 
 Please don't go there.
 
>>> 
>>> JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
>>> 
>> 
>> and my point wasn't "I've done more work than you so I am right". my point
>> was "who are you to tell me I don't care about this organization because I
>> 'dare' to criticize 'the meritocracy'". which I believe is a perfectly
>> reasonable comment in reply to such a preposterous claim
>> 
> 
> And mine was there is a line in this thread attacking the way a lot of very
> inclusive people work here, and that line is like "your points have no
> merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org,
> while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
> this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not working on the
> specific thing you are, because it impacts the whole/everyone working on
> something at Apache, and is also directly related to my point on the
> possibility to exist for overreach and overreaction considering that.
> 
> Folks chose to throw around weight with various phrases such as "because
> the President" and "policing". Where is the plan for what this looks like
> given these mandates?

Well I happen not to like that aspect of how the Incubator is currently 
working. I know it is frustrating for you. I woke up to that thread...

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Wade


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Jim Jagielski]

Making accommodations.

IMO, 'affirmative action' should be avoided too much political baggage.

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:55 PM, Ross Gardler  wrote:
> 
> Let use the term "affirmative action" from now on...
> 
> 
> From: Naomi Slater 
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 11:50 AM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on 
> "meritocracy")
> 
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
>> 
> 
> simplistic and incorrect
> 
> discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell apart
> 
> we discriminate when we determine who "has merit". but most people at the
> organization consider that form of discrimination a positive and
> constructive process
> 
> when you choose who to hire, you are discriminating. between the hirable
> candidates and the unhirable candidates
> 
> "positive discrimination", also known as affirmative action, is the process
> of discriminating between those who are advantaged and those who are
> disadvantaged and then doing something to help the ones who are
> disadvantaged
> 
> this is similar in spirit to means testing when it comes to social welfare.
> the state discriminates between those who need assistance and those who
> don't (how well they do this is another matter entirely)
> 
> I would like to see a well-reasoned argument that explains why identifying
> those in need of assistance and then providing that assistance is "by
> definition" unjust. it appears we have a *very* different understanding of
> what justice is
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Wade Chandler]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 14:44 Naomi Slater  wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz  wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've done a
> > > > lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing
> your
> > > > name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation
> > > carries
> > > > much weight
> > > >
> > >
> > > Please don't go there.
> > >
> >
> > JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
> >
>
> and my point wasn't "I've done more work than you so I am right". my point
> was "who are you to tell me I don't care about this organization because I
> 'dare' to criticize 'the meritocracy'". which I believe is a perfectly
> reasonable comment in reply to such a preposterous claim
>

And mine was there is a line in this thread attacking the way a lot of very
inclusive people work here, and that line is like "your points have no
merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org,
while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not working on the
specific thing you are, because it impacts the whole/everyone working on
something at Apache, and is also directly related to my point on the
possibility to exist for overreach and overreaction considering that.

Folks chose to throw around weight with various phrases such as "because
the President" and "policing". Where is the plan for what this looks like
given these mandates?

Wade

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Ross Gardler]

Let use the term "affirmative action" from now on...


From: Naomi Slater 
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 11:50 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on 
"meritocracy")

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski  wrote:

>
> Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
>

simplistic and incorrect

discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell apart

we discriminate when we determine who "has merit". but most people at the
organization consider that form of discrimination a positive and
constructive process

when you choose who to hire, you are discriminating. between the hirable
candidates and the unhirable candidates

"positive discrimination", also known as affirmative action, is the process
of discriminating between those who are advantaged and those who are
disadvantaged and then doing something to help the ones who are
disadvantaged

this is similar in spirit to means testing when it comes to social welfare.
the state discriminates between those who need assistance and those who
don't (how well they do this is another matter entirely)

I would like to see a well-reasoned argument that explains why identifying
those in need of assistance and then providing that assistance is "by
definition" unjust. it appears we have a *very* different understanding of
what justice is

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

One observation is that those who seem trollish may also have something else 
going on somewhere else in the overall Apache Community and it might be those 
annoyances for which they may or may not ever have resolution that may be 
“coloring” their interaction. If you are aware of it then you don’t even write 
the email that you then delete before sending. (There’s a thread on general@ 
that shows a current example. There was an email early in this thread that is 
an ancient example.)

Slowing one's own roll and not answering every email is a lesson I learned from 
prior passionate debates within projects. It’s part of the ethos of a global 
community to let the world spin and not have too many messages appearing in the 
morning for others on the list.

I’ll support whatever is agreed to on replacing the phrase “meritocracy” and 
will help to see that Incubator content is updated appropriately.

Regards,
Dave

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 11:28 AM, Myrle Krantz  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I've done a
>>> lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
>>> name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation
>> carries
>>> much weight
>>> 
>> 
>> Please don't go there.
>> 
> 
> JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
> 
> Best,
> Myrle


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Naomi Slater]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski  wrote:

>
> Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
>

simplistic and incorrect

discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell apart

we discriminate when we determine who "has merit". but most people at the
organization consider that form of discrimination a positive and
constructive process

when you choose who to hire, you are discriminating. between the hirable
candidates and the unhirable candidates

"positive discrimination", also known as affirmative action, is the process
of discriminating between those who are advantaged and those who are
disadvantaged and then doing something to help the ones who are
disadvantaged

this is similar in spirit to means testing when it comes to social welfare.
the state discriminates between those who need assistance and those who
don't (how well they do this is another matter entirely)

I would like to see a well-reasoned argument that explains why identifying
those in need of assistance and then providing that assistance is "by
definition" unjust. it appears we have a *very* different understanding of
what justice is

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Naomi Slater]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz  wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
> > >
> > > I've done a
> > > lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
> > > name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation
> > carries
> > > much weight
> > >
> >
> > Please don't go there.
> >
>
> JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
>

and my point wasn't "I've done more work than you so I am right". my point
was "who are you to tell me I don't care about this organization because I
'dare' to criticize 'the meritocracy'". which I believe is a perfectly
reasonable comment in reply to such a preposterous claim

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

[Daniel Gruno]

On 30/03/2019 13.23, Jim Jagielski wrote:




On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener  wrote:


I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone. 
But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you 
protect my right to help you achieve the
right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of any 
discrimination (positive or negative).
Community over code


How do you square this with the code of conduct? In my reading, unless
the discrimination threaded some extremely fine needle, it would be in
violation and a good argument could be made for the defense of it
being in violation as well.



Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.


We discriminate all day long in our every day life, it's fine, as long 
as it serves a greater good (or our personal selves). I don't get to go 
into your house without you inviting me in, you don't get to claim 
social benefits while you have a job, I can't apply for TAC - all 
perfectly valid, legal cases of discrimination, that would not violate 
the CoC. It's more about the action and consequences than the 
dichotomous definition of a term here.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Myrle Krantz]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:

>
>
> > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
> >
> > I've done a
> > lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
> > name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation
> carries
> > much weight
> >
>
> Please don't go there.
>

JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.

Best,
Myrle

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Ross Gardler]

I think the assumption that anyone is intending to violate the code of conduct 
is a bad one. Lets not make that assumption.

I think the problem is that *I* used the term "positive discrimination". That 
has led to an interpretation of someone elses words through a cloudy lens. 
Before making assumptions about that other persons intent you should listen to 
their words. Have you watched Joan's presentation?

Ross


From: Eric Covener 
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 10:32 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on 
"meritocracy")

> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone. 
> But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you 
> protect my right to help you achieve the
> right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of any 
> discrimination (positive or negative).
> Community over code

How do you square this with the code of conduct? In my reading, unless
the discrimination threaded some extremely fine needle, it would be in
violation and a good argument could be made for the defense of it
being in violation as well.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener  wrote:
> 
>> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against 
>> anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as 
>> you protect my right to help you achieve the
>> right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of 
>> any discrimination (positive or negative).
>> Community over code
> 
> How do you square this with the code of conduct? In my reading, unless
> the discrimination threaded some extremely fine needle, it would be in
> violation and a good argument could be made for the defense of it
> being in violation as well.


Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
> 
> I've done a
> lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
> name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation carries
> much weight
> 

Please don't go there.

For the record, I've done more than you. More than just about anybody.
That doesn't make me God. That doesn't make me Always Right. That
does not make me Beyond Reproach. That doesn't make My Opinion
Greater Than Yours. That doesn't give me the Authority To Shut You Down.

As someone who let's their passion frequently get out of hand, I'd
offer a suggestion to let's wind down the rhetoric and let's all chill a
little bit. We all have the best intentions at heart here. Let's remember
that. I'm stepping away. Maybe a cool-down period for everyone may
make some sense.

Cheers!

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Sam Ruby]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 1:33 PM Eric Covener  wrote:
>
> > I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against 
> > anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long 
> > as you protect my right to help you achieve the
> > right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of 
> > any discrimination (positive or negative).
> > Community over code
>
> How do you square this with the code of conduct? In my reading, unless
> the discrimination threaded some extremely fine needle, it would be in
> violation and a good argument could be made for the defense of it
> being in violation as well.

My sense is that introducing the term discrimination into the
discussion taints it.  My way of looking at it is that we don't want
anybody to feel unwelcome here, and yet clearly there are individuals
who don't feel welcome here, and enough of them that we can determine
broad patterns.

An analogy that won't make sense at first: the board votes pretty much
every month to create a new PMC, and in most cases without any
intention of personally participating in that PMC.

I'm a native English speaker.  If a group of people wanted to get
together to figure out a way to attract more people who either don't
speak English or don't speak English well, I'd support them.  This is
an effort that I would not necessarily be able to help with, but I
will help them organize.

I've lived my whole life in Northern America.  If a group of people
want to get together to figure out how to attract more people from
west Africa or east Asia, I'd support them.

A non-ASF code example: some work on Kubernetes to bring order to the
cloud.  Recently, some people have been working on Kubernetes to make
this work on IOT/Edge devices.  That may not be a use case every
member of the first set of people are interested in, but that simply
means that those that aren't interested simply don't participate.

Recapping: identify a pattern in the data where a group of people are
(presumably inadvertently due to our collective ineptness) made to
feel unwelcome, create a proposal to address that, build consensus
around that proposal, and then execute on it.

If this does not result in an effort to attract a specific
demographic, that's because either there isn't demonstrably a problem,
or we haven't found a proposal that would address that problem.

- Sam Ruby

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:25 AM, Naomi Slater  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> 
>> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in
>> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise,
>> 
> 
> we don't need to get buy-in from everyone. thank God. 

Agreed.

>> our reaction should not be "you are wrong; you just can't see it. So STFU."
>> Instead, help educate them that there actually is a problem.
>> 
> 
> the problem with this, Jim -- and the reason you (and you in particular)
> got a "no." from me earlier -- is that it never ends. the requests to
> educate and to convince and to prove. at some point, you reach the point of
> diminishing returns
> 

You are welcome, of course, to have your own position on when
the horse you are beating is a dead one :)

> 
> the Devil does not need an advocate. like I already said. your position is
> the default one. your concerns are not novel. they are mundane

And what position is that, pray tell?

Fortunately, I do not need to prove my real concern, interest and
desire for inclusion and diversity to you, nor my position as ally.
You are free to paint me as this strawman... as well as assign
concerns to me that I do not ascribe to and then describe them
as mundane. None of this actually helps DO anything. In that
regard, I will no longer partake in this conversation with you.

I wish the D&I effort the best of luck and I promise my full support.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:21 AM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 9:33 AM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>> 
>> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in
>> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise,
>> our reaction should not be "you are wrong; you just can't see it. So STFU."
>> Instead, help educate them that there actually is a problem.
> 
> My experience, like Ross's is that doing such rarely ends well.  But
> I'll give it a try.  Let's see how it goes.
> 
> Imagine you are one of a few women in a room full of men.  You are
> uncertain as to whether you belong or are welcome.  A highly respected
> and accomplished man makes the following statement:
> 
>"Merit has nothing to do with gender, or race, or religion,
>or what genitalia one has or is attracted to. If your idea
>of what constitutes merit is based on any of these, then
>that's a f'ed up definition of merit. That means it's a
>problem w/ how merit is defined, and not meritocracy per se."
> 
> For clarity: this is not a question as to whether the statement is
> correct or whether the intent is correct.  This is a question as to
> whether you feel that would make this hypothetical woman feel more
> welcome or less welcome.
> 

More welcome. As confirmed by women at the event I asked.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Eric Covener]

> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone. 
> But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you 
> protect my right to help you achieve the
> right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of any 
> discrimination (positive or negative).
> Community over code

How do you square this with the code of conduct? In my reading, unless
the discrimination threaded some extremely fine needle, it would be in
violation and a good argument could be made for the defense of it
being in violation as well.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Ross Gardler]

:-)

Get Outlook for Android


From: Naomi Slater 
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 9:54:52 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Cc: Wade Chandler
Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"

my mistake! thanks for clarifying

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:52, Ross Gardler  wrote:

> You said "this is the last time I will reply to you". I intended to say
> there is great honor in doing that.
>
>
>
>
>
> Get Outlook for 
> Android
>
>
>
> From: Naomi Slater
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 9:45 AM
> Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Cc: Wade Chandler
>
>
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Ross Gardler  wrote:
>
> > "this is the last time I will reply to you"
> >
> > Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive
> debate.
> > I apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent"
> >
>
> I don't know why you keep singling *me* out as someone who needs to be
> criticized/moderated on list. surely there are better candidates
>
>
>

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Naomi Slater]

my mistake! thanks for clarifying

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:52, Ross Gardler  wrote:

> You said "this is the last time I will reply to you". I intended to say
> there is great honor in doing that.
>
>
>
>
>
> Get Outlook for Android
>
>
>
> From: Naomi Slater
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 9:45 AM
> Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Cc: Wade Chandler
>
>
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Ross Gardler  wrote:
>
> > "this is the last time I will reply to you"
> >
> > Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive
> debate.
> > I apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent"
> >
>
> I don't know why you keep singling *me* out as someone who needs to be
> criticized/moderated on list. surely there are better candidates
>
>
>

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Joan Touzet]

Thanks for this post, Shane. You share a number of my concerns.

I am absolutely not blind to opposition to some of the things I've
suggested, but I would argue that the thread on the topic has become
so negative and heated that informed discussion isn't useful.

Again I encourage others to listen to and read my presentation to
hear my concrete, achievable suggestions, and others' reactions to
them at the meeting.


- Original Message -
Shane wrote:

> A situation that's happened to me personally with saddening
> regularity:
> I come up with a new idea to improve a process or document, and ask
> for
> feedback.  Some of the feedback asks "why are we bothering with this"
> or
> "I think that's wrong because X", or merely asks clarifying questions
> /
> requests for more additional data, or or or... and often ends up
> being
> an endless game of "fetch me a rock".
>
> After attempting to answer a half-dozen of these questions - many
> tangential or merely expressing opposition *without providing useful
> alternatives*, I simply run out of volunteer energy and give up on
> the
> idea completely, and I find some other place to spend my time.  The
> opposition of just a couple of people spending the time to keep
> asking
> for clarifications can often turn into a de facto veto for all sorts
> of
> new ideas.

Yes, this is exactly the war of attrition that I'm trying to avoid in
my last post. It shouldn't be up to me to endlessly rebut all of the
attacks on this; they've been written hundreds and hundreds of times
to date, even limiting yourself to open source development. It's not
my job to rehash this yet again for another newcomer to the discussion.

The concern trolling assumes bad intentions on my part. I think the
proposals I've made speak for themselves as not being ill-intentioned,
and don't step too far. They are in the Apache tradition of small,
incremental, reversible steps.


> 
> Apache communities work better when people who think a new idea is
> [dumb
> | annoying | not useful | whatever ] simply raise the general concern
> once, but otherwise get out of the way.  We're all volunteers; we all
> have opinions; we all have things we want to work on in our different
> communities.  We can respectfully say we don't like some new idea,
> but
> it's not up to any of us to stop other volunteers from doing that new
> idea that they're passionate about.
> 
> Even better: when you don't like a new idea, come up with a better
> idea,
> and volunteer your own time in a new thread to productively work on
> it.

Yes, I'd like to shift the discussion in this direction.


> Bonus link, that I hadn't seen before but I really like the
> *explanations* behind this organization's social rules:
> 
>   https://www.recurse.com/social-rules

Pretty sure I linked to this and mentioned it in my presentation,
too. :)

-Joan "let's talk action" Touzet

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Ross Gardler]

You said "this is the last time I will reply to you". I intended to say there 
is great honor in doing that.





Get Outlook for Android



From: Naomi Slater
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
To: dev@community.apache.org
Cc: Wade Chandler


On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Ross Gardler  wrote:

> "this is the last time I will reply to you"
>
> Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive debate.
> I apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent"
>

I don't know why you keep singling *me* out as someone who needs to be
criticized/moderated on list. surely there are better candidates

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Ross Gardler]

+1 for JFDI

I am generally not supportive of positive discrimination.  But I recognize that 
I can afford not to be.

As Shane says it's irrelevant what I think unless I'm going to put effort into 
an alternative (remember a -1 around here means you object and will work on a 
better alternative). Feel free to force the naysayers to put effort into 
"fixing" what they consider to be broken about a positive discrimination 
approach.

I say this, not just because it's the Apache Way, but also because of a day job 
experience...

At work we had a period of what I consider positive discrimination. I was 
really pissed off at first. I felt it was holding me back (wrongly, but that's 
what it felt like).

Guess what happened...

I woke up one day and realized what I was experiencing was discrimination. 
Discrimination of the sort minorities at work were feeling. I felt there were 
barriers, even if they were only social ones that could be torn down wiith 
effort. That was one surprisingly effective lesson!

Today at work every employee has a required D&I commitment. We get to choose 
what we do, but we have to show some effect in the industry. The change I've 
seen at work is amazing.

My point is, I've learned that while I object to positive discrimination for 
(IMHO) really good reasons  there are even better reasons why a period of it 
can help.

I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone. 
But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you 
protect my right to help you achieve the right balance in our broader 
communities by stamping out the existence of any discrimination (positive or 
negative).

Community over code

Ross




Get Outlook for Android


From: Shane Curcuru 
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 8:43:08 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

Joan Touzet wrote on 3/30/19 12:52 AM:
...snip...
> Precisely the point. I'm in favour of this, though I know others are
> actively against it. I talked about this at length during my
> ApacheCon 2018 talk, proposing options that are well thought-out and
> fair, drawing from a wide variety of sources; I encourage you to
> listen to the full recording and read my slides before passing
> judgement.

For the benefit of list readers:

https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fspeakerdeck.com%2Fwohali%2Fbuilding-and-sustaining-inclusive-communities%3Fslide%3D10&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cda7e74db44914717e68b08d6b52670f4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636895574032505781&sdata=1W5l6a9knggZlSKmHn1Hepx5p0edk1jIq0jlhNkTcNw%3D&reserved=0

https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffeathercast.apache.org%2F2018%2F09%2F29%2Fbuilding-and-sustaining-inclusive-communities-joan-touzet%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cda7e74db44914717e68b08d6b52670f4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636895574032505781&sdata=86hnw2%2B2jN5RZ2wMj78x7K%2BgX7vS5FZ2Yvgm%2B5%2B4X5s%3D&reserved=0

...snip...
> Again as Rich says, there's explicit approval to proceed with a D&I
> initiative already, from both the Board and the President. People like
> Naomi and I have been through the "prove it to me" request many times
> over, and I'm tired of responding to this particular email.

There's not even a need for explicit approval for volunteers here to
spend their own time finding a space to work, and building Apache 2.0
licensed content anywhere on the ComDev website, at upcoming ApacheCons,
or within their own Apache projects.  I'm excited to see several
dedicated people showing up in this thread, and once we have a new space
for the ideas Naomi and Gris and others want to work on, I'll join.



But this thread does show an unfortunate classic meta-issue in many
broad volunteer-run communities: people not actively working on a
specific issue bringing sufficient tangential discussion, questions, and
vague opposition to effectively kill new work on that issue.

A situation that's happened to me personally with saddening regularity:
I come up with a new idea to improve a process or document, and ask for
feedback.  Some of the feedback asks "why are we bothering with this" or
"I think that's wrong because X", or merely asks clarifying questions /
requests for more additional data, or or or... and often ends up being
an endless game of "fetch me a rock".

After attempting to answer a half-dozen of these questions - many
tangential or merely expressing opposition *without providing useful
alternatives*, I simply run out of volunteer energy and give up on the
idea completely, and I find some other place to spend my time.  The
opposition of just a couple of people spending the time to keep asking
for clarifications can often turn into a de facto veto for all sorts of
new ideas.

Apache communities work better when people who think a new idea is [dumb
| annoying | not useful | wh

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Naomi Slater]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Ross Gardler  wrote:

> "this is the last time I will reply to you"
>
> Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive debate.
> I apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent"
>

I don't know why you keep singling *me* out as someone who needs to be
criticized/moderated on list. surely there are better candidates

Re: [DISCUSSION] ComDev Event Participation for 2019

[Sharan Foga]

Hi Gris

Do you have any more details on the Open Source Summit in Mexico that you 
mentioned is happening this year? I checked the Linux Foundation website and 
only see a summit in San Diego - is this the one you were talking about?

Thanks
Sharan

On 2019/01/16 16:05:23, Griselda Cuevas  wrote: 
> +1 to OSCON and Open Source Summit. I am also organizing an Open Source
> Summit in Mexico and I'd love for us to participate in Festival del
> Software Libre. This is an event organized by the Linux Foundation and its
> international committee. I'm happy to take on the organization of the
> Mexico events, and would love to be part of the organizing committee for
> OSCON.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 06:23, Rob Tompkins  wrote:
> 
> > I’m trying to get $work to send me to OSCON as well. Furthermore, I’ve
> > submitted talks on Commons as well as how to work up CVE’s. If those pan
> > out I’d be happy to help with anything Apache related.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > > On Jan 16, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Daniel Ruggeri 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 to OSCON
> > > It may be worth considering Open Source Summit, too. I've been only
> > once, but they did have local and community booths as well.
> > >
> > > If I can trick $dayjob to get me to either/both, I'm more than happy to
> > to organize the booth again.
> > > --
> > > Daniel Ruggeri
> > >
> > >> On January 15, 2019 2:17:41 PM CST, Roman Shaposhnik <
> > ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
> > >> Personally, for North America (where I hail from ;-)) I've always
> > >> consider the following to be a pretty solid (if not must attend) set
> > >> of events:
> > >>   * SCALE
> > >>   * LinuxFest NorthWest
> > >>   * OSCON
> > >>   * ApacheCON NA
> > >>   * All Things Open
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Roman.
> > >>
> > >>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 7:16 AM Sharan Foga  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi All
> > >>>
> > >>> Last year we had an extremely busy year and participated at lots and
> > >> lots of events. As well as ApacheCon we also held an EU Roadshow and
> > >> had representation at around 15 other events. While it was good to be
> > >> busy, last minute planning can cause stress so this year we would like
> > >> to be a bit more prepared.
> > >>>
> > >>> Identifying the events that we’d like to participate in now, means
> > >> that we will have time to plan and prepare for the event in relation to
> > >> the availability of volunteers as well as stickers and giveways. It
> > >> also gives us some visibility and control of how much we might
> > >> potentially spend as part of our participation.
> > >>>
> > >>> For 2019 we already are planning a couple of ApacheCons (EU and NA)
> > >> and also a couple of Roadshows (DC and Chicago) so are definitely going
> > >> to have some form of participation at those!
> > >>>
> > >>> Where I’d like to start a discussion is about which events people
> > >> think that are the most important for us to have a presence at for 2019
> > >> so we can add it to our list of events for this year.
> > >>>
> > >>> In a couple of weeks we are going to be at CHAOSSCon and FOSDEM so
> > >> technically those two are already on the list.:-)
> > >>>
> > >>> Which other events do people think should be on our radar and in our
> > >> planned participation list for 2019?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>> Sharan
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> >
> >
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Ross Gardler]

"this is the last time I will reply to you"

Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive debate. I 
apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent"

Ross

Get Outlook for Android


From: Naomi Slater 
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 8:00:20 AM
To: Wade Chandler
Cc: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:57, Wade Chandler  wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After
>>> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be
>>> all about community and then disenfranchising huge swatches of people?
>>>
>>
>> you are doing the same thing Wade was doing. appropriating the language
>> that marginalized people use
>>
>
> How do people become marginalized? By being marginalized by people
> perhaps? See any of that in this thread?
>

yes. but I suspect you are not making the point you think you're making. lol

this is the last time I will reply to you

Re: Google Season of Docs 2019

[sharan]

Excellent and thanks Maxim! :-)

Thanks
Sharan

On 30. 03. 19 16:45, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:

Hello Sharah

I can help :)

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 22:33 Sharan Foga  wrote:


Hi Kenn

No not yet - applications open on 2nd April and close on 23rd April. Will
aim to get a draft together this weekend.

We also need to have two organisation administrators for GSoD so I am
still looking for another volunteer to help out with that.

Thanks
Sharan

On 2019/03/29 23:21:16, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:

Is this taken care of? Did ASF apply? Is there anything more that I could
help with at all? I would also be happy to review anything.

Kenn

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 3:14 AM Sharan Foga  wrote:


Hi Dinesh

It's great to hear that the Apache Cassandra community is keen to be
involved with this. I confirm that I will put an application on behalf

of

the ASF.

Thanks
Sharan

On 2019/03/22 07:24:20, Dinesh Joshi 
wrote:

Hi all,

I am coordinating the GSoD effort in the Apache Cassandra community.

We

already have a few volunteers willing to help mentor the tech writer.

Who

can confirm whether ASF is applying as an organization? We will not

apply

separately.

Thanks,

Dinesh


On Mar 19, 2019, at 11:11 AM, Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy

 wrote:

Hi Sharan,

I'm happy to help with the ASF's application for SoD, if you need

any

support there.

Thanks,
Aizhamal

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:25 PM Sharan Foga 

wrote:

Hi

ComDev currently manages the ASF applications for GSoC so it might

make

sense for us to centralise the application for this too.

We would need 2 people to manage the ASF organisation application

as a

mentor organisation as well as administer the projects and

mentors.

If selected then each project participating would need to

guarantee at

least 2 mentors to work with the technical writer.  We currently

collect

the GSoC ideas via a JIra so perhaps that could be adapted for

GSoD

too,

The timeline is tight - I think 2nd April is when applications

open.

It

already sounds like the level of interest is high so we need to

act

quickly

if we want to participate.

Thanks
Sharan

On 2019/03/12 18:14:54, Dave Fisher 

wrote:

Hi -

Looks pretty cool.

Cc: to Apache Community Development.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone


On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:22 AM, Huxing Zhang 

wrote:

Hi,

Google Season of Docs 2019[1] seems to be an interesting

project,

which bring open source project and technical writer communities
together, just Like Google summer of code.

I think the Dubbo can benefit from the project, especially the

English

version of documentation could be improved.

How do you think?

[1] https://developers.google.com/season-of-docs/docs/timeline

--
Best Regards！
Huxing




-

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org





-

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSSION] ComDev Event Participation for 2019

[Sharan Foga]

Hi All

I'm bringing this topic back up again so we can finalise the main events we 
will be participating in this year.).

I've put together a wiki page with all the suggestions and will start 
completing the details of dates and location. 

https://s.apache.org/qz0d

We can then look at seeing what type of presence we can have at these events 
(e.g presentation, tracks or booth etc) and also identify any volunteers 
willing to take the lead on managing our participation.

Thanks
Sharan

On 2019/01/13 15:16:55, Sharan Foga  wrote: 
> Hi All
> 
> Last year we had an extremely busy year and participated at lots and lots of 
> events. As well as ApacheCon we also held an EU Roadshow and had 
> representation at around 15 other events. While it was good to be busy, last 
> minute planning can cause stress so this year we would like to be a bit more 
> prepared.
> 
> Identifying the events that we’d like to participate in now, means that we 
> will have time to plan and prepare for the event in relation to the 
> availability of volunteers as well as stickers and giveways. It also gives us 
> some visibility and control of how much we might potentially spend as part of 
> our participation. 
> 
> For 2019 we already are planning a couple of ApacheCons (EU and NA) and also 
> a couple of Roadshows (DC and Chicago) so are definitely going to have some 
> form of participation at those!  
> 
> Where I’d like to start a discussion is about which events people think that 
> are the most important for us to have a presence at for 2019 so we can add it 
> to our list of events for this year.
> 
> In a couple of weeks we are going to be at CHAOSSCon and FOSDEM so 
> technically those two are already on the list.:-)
> 
> Which other events do people think should be on our radar and in our planned 
> participation list for 2019?
> 
> Thanks
> Sharan 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> 
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Google Season of Docs 2019

[Maxim Solodovnik]

Hello Sharah

I can help :)

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 22:33 Sharan Foga  wrote:

> Hi Kenn
>
> No not yet - applications open on 2nd April and close on 23rd April. Will
> aim to get a draft together this weekend.
>
> We also need to have two organisation administrators for GSoD so I am
> still looking for another volunteer to help out with that.
>
> Thanks
> Sharan
>
> On 2019/03/29 23:21:16, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:
> > Is this taken care of? Did ASF apply? Is there anything more that I could
> > help with at all? I would also be happy to review anything.
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 3:14 AM Sharan Foga  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Dinesh
> > >
> > > It's great to hear that the Apache Cassandra community is keen to be
> > > involved with this. I confirm that I will put an application on behalf
> of
> > > the ASF.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Sharan
> > >
> > > On 2019/03/22 07:24:20, Dinesh Joshi 
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I am coordinating the GSoD effort in the Apache Cassandra community.
> We
> > > already have a few volunteers willing to help mentor the tech writer.
> Who
> > > can confirm whether ASF is applying as an organization? We will not
> apply
> > > separately.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Dinesh
> > > >
> > > > > On Mar 19, 2019, at 11:11 AM, Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy
> > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Sharan,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm happy to help with the ASF's application for SoD, if you need
> any
> > > > > support there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Aizhamal
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:25 PM Sharan Foga 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ComDev currently manages the ASF applications for GSoC so it might
> > > make
> > > > >> sense for us to centralise the application for this too.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> We would need 2 people to manage the ASF organisation application
> as a
> > > > >> mentor organisation as well as administer the projects and
> mentors.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If selected then each project participating would need to
> guarantee at
> > > > >> least 2 mentors to work with the technical writer.  We currently
> > > collect
> > > > >> the GSoC ideas via a JIra so perhaps that could be adapted for
> GSoD
> > > too,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The timeline is tight - I think 2nd April is when applications
> open.
> > > It
> > > > >> already sounds like the level of interest is high so we need to
> act
> > > quickly
> > > > >> if we want to participate.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks
> > > > >> Sharan
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 2019/03/12 18:14:54, Dave Fisher 
> wrote:
> > > > >>> Hi -
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Looks pretty cool.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Cc: to Apache Community Development.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Regards,
> > > > >>> Dave
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Sent from my iPhone
> > > > >>>
> > > >  On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:22 AM, Huxing Zhang 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >  Hi,
> > > > 
> > > >  Google Season of Docs 2019[1] seems to be an interesting
> project,
> > > >  which bring open source project and technical writer communities
> > > >  together, just Like Google summer of code.
> > > > 
> > > >  I think the Dubbo can benefit from the project, especially the
> > > English
> > > >  version of documentation could be improved.
> > > > 
> > > >  How do you think?
> > > > 
> > > >  [1] https://developers.google.com/season-of-docs/docs/timeline
> > > > 
> > > >  --
> > > >  Best Regards！
> > > >  Huxing
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> -
> > > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> -
> > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>
>

Re: Continuing conversation on Apache Swag

[Sharan Foga]

Hi Gris

Thanks for the introductions. I seem to remember that Sally outlined a possible 
process of how a central Apache swag store could work so let's review that and 
plan the next steps.

For the branding - there is a style guide that might help:
https://apache.org/foundation/press/kit/ApacheFoundation_StyleGuide.pdf

Thanks
Sharan

On 2019/03/30 00:13:55, Griselda Cuevas  wrote: 
> Hi ComDev & Sharan,
> 
> As per our last convo
> 
> [1]
> on an Apache swag, we mentioned that we'd discuss a solution for a possible
> Apache Swag Store. I'd like to follow up on that and make an introduction
> for Joana Carrasqueira (who does swag for Google) and Sharan Foga (who
> manages the Apache swag). It'd be helpful if you two connect and continue
> this convo and evaluate if this is feasible.
> 
> In another note, we're interested in producing some swag for Apache Beam
> and Apache Airflow, and we'd like to know how to do it well, i.e. how to
> not violate trademark guidelines in terms of logo usage, name, etc. Who
> would help us with that?
> 
> I believe that having a central store will streamline how projects produce
> their swag and comply with trademark guidelines.
> 
> Thanks & Happy Friday.
> 
> 
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5e66494f132b87a9ebd54be7189edaa13dbb8c02e49023bdd5f52ecd@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

[Shane Curcuru]

Joan Touzet wrote on 3/30/19 12:52 AM:
...snip...
> Precisely the point. I'm in favour of this, though I know others are
> actively against it. I talked about this at length during my
> ApacheCon 2018 talk, proposing options that are well thought-out and
> fair, drawing from a wide variety of sources; I encourage you to
> listen to the full recording and read my slides before passing
> judgement.

For the benefit of list readers:

https://speakerdeck.com/wohali/building-and-sustaining-inclusive-communities?slide=10

https://feathercast.apache.org/2018/09/29/building-and-sustaining-inclusive-communities-joan-touzet/

...snip...
> Again as Rich says, there's explicit approval to proceed with a D&I
> initiative already, from both the Board and the President. People like
> Naomi and I have been through the "prove it to me" request many times
> over, and I'm tired of responding to this particular email.

There's not even a need for explicit approval for volunteers here to
spend their own time finding a space to work, and building Apache 2.0
licensed content anywhere on the ComDev website, at upcoming ApacheCons,
or within their own Apache projects.  I'm excited to see several
dedicated people showing up in this thread, and once we have a new space
for the ideas Naomi and Gris and others want to work on, I'll join.



But this thread does show an unfortunate classic meta-issue in many
broad volunteer-run communities: people not actively working on a
specific issue bringing sufficient tangential discussion, questions, and
vague opposition to effectively kill new work on that issue.

A situation that's happened to me personally with saddening regularity:
I come up with a new idea to improve a process or document, and ask for
feedback.  Some of the feedback asks "why are we bothering with this" or
"I think that's wrong because X", or merely asks clarifying questions /
requests for more additional data, or or or... and often ends up being
an endless game of "fetch me a rock".

After attempting to answer a half-dozen of these questions - many
tangential or merely expressing opposition *without providing useful
alternatives*, I simply run out of volunteer energy and give up on the
idea completely, and I find some other place to spend my time.  The
opposition of just a couple of people spending the time to keep asking
for clarifications can often turn into a de facto veto for all sorts of
new ideas.

Apache communities work better when people who think a new idea is [dumb
| annoying | not useful | whatever ] simply raise the general concern
once, but otherwise get out of the way.  We're all volunteers; we all
have opinions; we all have things we want to work on in our different
communities.  We can respectfully say we don't like some new idea, but
it's not up to any of us to stop other volunteers from doing that new
idea that they're passionate about.

Even better: when you don't like a new idea, come up with a better idea,
and volunteer your own time in a new thread to productively work on it.



Bonus link, that I hadn't seen before but I really like the
*explanations* behind this organization's social rules:

  https://www.recurse.com/social-rules

-- 

- Shane
  ComDev PMC & Member
  The Apache Software Foundation

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: Google Season of Docs 2019

[Sharan Foga]

Hi Kenn

No not yet - applications open on 2nd April and close on 23rd April. Will aim 
to get a draft together this weekend. 

We also need to have two organisation administrators for GSoD so I am still 
looking for another volunteer to help out with that.

Thanks
Sharan

On 2019/03/29 23:21:16, Kenneth Knowles  wrote: 
> Is this taken care of? Did ASF apply? Is there anything more that I could
> help with at all? I would also be happy to review anything.
> 
> Kenn
> 
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 3:14 AM Sharan Foga  wrote:
> 
> > Hi Dinesh
> >
> > It's great to hear that the Apache Cassandra community is keen to be
> > involved with this. I confirm that I will put an application on behalf of
> > the ASF.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Sharan
> >
> > On 2019/03/22 07:24:20, Dinesh Joshi 
> > wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I am coordinating the GSoD effort in the Apache Cassandra community. We
> > already have a few volunteers willing to help mentor the tech writer. Who
> > can confirm whether ASF is applying as an organization? We will not apply
> > separately.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Dinesh
> > >
> > > > On Mar 19, 2019, at 11:11 AM, Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy
> >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Sharan,
> > > >
> > > > I'm happy to help with the ASF's application for SoD, if you need any
> > > > support there.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Aizhamal
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:25 PM Sharan Foga  wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi
> > > >>
> > > >> ComDev currently manages the ASF applications for GSoC so it might
> > make
> > > >> sense for us to centralise the application for this too.
> > > >>
> > > >> We would need 2 people to manage the ASF organisation application as a
> > > >> mentor organisation as well as administer the projects and mentors.
> > > >>
> > > >> If selected then each project participating would need to guarantee at
> > > >> least 2 mentors to work with the technical writer.  We currently
> > collect
> > > >> the GSoC ideas via a JIra so perhaps that could be adapted for GSoD
> > too,
> > > >>
> > > >> The timeline is tight - I think 2nd April is when applications open.
> > It
> > > >> already sounds like the level of interest is high so we need to act
> > quickly
> > > >> if we want to participate.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks
> > > >> Sharan
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2019/03/12 18:14:54, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> > > >>> Hi -
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Looks pretty cool.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cc: to Apache Community Development.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards,
> > > >>> Dave
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Sent from my iPhone
> > > >>>
> > >  On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:22 AM, Huxing Zhang 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > >  Hi,
> > > 
> > >  Google Season of Docs 2019[1] seems to be an interesting project,
> > >  which bring open source project and technical writer communities
> > >  together, just Like Google summer of code.
> > > 
> > >  I think the Dubbo can benefit from the project, especially the
> > English
> > >  version of documentation could be improved.
> > > 
> > >  How do you think?
> > > 
> > >  [1] https://developers.google.com/season-of-docs/docs/timeline
> > > 
> > >  --
> > >  Best Regards！
> > >  Huxing
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> -
> > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> -
> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
> >
> >
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Daniel Gruno]

On 30/03/2019 09.57, Wade Chandler wrote:

In another message I ask about a wiki page etc. That might he helpful, and
seems if this issue has been attempted to be addressed for such a long
period of time in the context of Apache, there will be plenty of material
to help us all do more than argue on a mailing list, and will get to the
important work of having the humans in the context understand the causation
of the issues; you do need them to modify some behaviors to be successful
do you not?

Wade



It hasn't been attempted, by any real stretch of the definition. We have 
TAC, that is pretty much all. Nothing else, basically. We claim to only 
look at merit, and be neutral in all regards, but to use a crude sci-fi 
metaphor (bear with me), we are ending up trying to falsely apply the 
Prime Directive (do not interfere until they are sufficiently advanced) 
to subset of our own species, as the neutrality only applies insofar 
that people are at our level first. Neutrality doesn't work when people 
are at a significant disadvantage to begin with.


Having said that, TAC has proven to be very successful in terms of 
bringing new, underprivileged people into the Apache family and making 
them stick and succeed (that's how I got here!), so we have something to 
build off, and we have definitive proof that we can make a difference. 
We also, however, have ample empirical data suggesting this is *far* 
from enough if we are to truly claim community > code.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Naomi Slater]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:57, Wade Chandler  wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After
>>> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be
>>> all about community and then disenfranchising huge swatches of people?
>>>
>>
>> you are doing the same thing Wade was doing. appropriating the language
>> that marginalized people use
>>
>
> How do people become marginalized? By being marginalized by people
> perhaps? See any of that in this thread?
>

yes. but I suspect you are not making the point you think you're making. lol

this is the last time I will reply to you

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Wade Chandler]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater  wrote:

>
>
>> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After
>> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be
>> all about community and then disenfranchising huge swatches of people?
>>
>
> you are doing the same thing Wade was doing. appropriating the language
> that marginalized people use
>

How do people become marginalized? By being marginalized by people perhaps?
See any of that in this thread?

This feels like an episode of political news theater. I didn't appropriate
the language, and find that offensive. I simply used a dictionary; what
comes next a poster with a depiction of appropriators to drive the fervor?

In another message I ask about a wiki page etc. That might he helpful, and
seems if this issue has been attempted to be addressed for such a long
period of time in the context of Apache, there will be plenty of material
to help us all do more than argue on a mailing list, and will get to the
important work of having the humans in the context understand the causation
of the issues; you do need them to modify some behaviors to be successful
do you not?

Wade

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Naomi Slater]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:33, Wade Chandler  wrote:


> "that sucks and is evil, is the cause, that also makes Apache suck"
>

this is the second time you've alluded to vaguely nationalistic-type
rhetoric to, essentially, accuse me of not caring about Apache. I've done a
lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation carries
much weight

>

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Wade Chandler]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 08:01 Naomi Slater  wrote:



On Sat 30. Mar 2019 at 07:02, Wade Chandler  wrote:


But, I'm sure
you'll have a good D&I initiative if you continue to marginalize people
like you did there; treat others as insignificant or peripheral.

"marginalize"

*Inigo Montoya voice* you keep using that word. I do not think it means
what you think it means


It is used to fit exactly the response I feel received. I feel like "so we
agree on finding ways to increase diversity are good and we lack it (thus
we have common ground), but since you don't agree this big list of negative
things that we haven't made clear exists, that sucks and is evil, is the
cause, that also makes Apache suck, then you're ignorant and part of this
horrible problem, so we don't value you"... is exactly marginalizing me, my
opinion, and others; treating them as insignificant; lots of feelings in
this; I expressed I see correlation not causation in what is said about
Apache and meritocracy as applied here.

Replace my opinion on the part I feel isn't clear with race or any other
physical or mental attribute for a mental experiment.

This also reenforces some of my internal concerns with this. That often
people are apt to overreact and overreach, and when it changes an
environment containing people and processes, it is more important to keep
that in mind.

What is this going to look and feel like (for the humans here)? How about a
wiki page enumerating something other than correlation from the data points
Apache has about Apache specifically? That would be helpful. I know I have
limited time to contribute to the projects I use, and I suspect others do
as well, and may help sell the points where people are not getting it.

Thanks

Wade

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Naomi Slater]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Jim Jagielski  wrote:


> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in
> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise,
>

we don't need to get buy-in from everyone. thank God. because it would
never happen. all we need is a critical mass in order to be able to get
work done. and in that respect, the positive responses on this thread have
given me some hope


> our reaction should not be "you are wrong; you just can't see it. So STFU."
> Instead, help educate them that there actually is a problem.
>

the problem with this, Jim -- and the reason you (and you in particular)
got a "no." from me earlier -- is that it never ends. the requests to
educate and to convince and to prove. at some point, you reach the point of
diminishing returns

again, wary of repeating myself here, but Ross mentioned patience. I have
been patiently trying to get people at this organization to give a shit
about basic stuff like "hey maybe we shouldn't be pushing away women" for,
what, the best part of a decade now

the same old arguments pop up over and over again. (ironically, the people
who raise those points believe they are novel). at some point, you have to
be able to say "you are wrong" and just continue trying to do productive
work

if you don't do that, your community can essentially be held hostage by
anyone with the determination to halt progress. something I am sure you
have seen in other areas of the work we do here

this is one of the reasons I have a good feeling about a dedicated D&I
initiative. because if people don't believe in the work we want to do, they
can just unsubscribe from the list. it's as simple as that

and if they do believe in it, in principle, but lack background knowledge,
it is their responsibility to go away and educate themselves. it is unfair
to put that responsibility on people who are already marginalized


> The only way we can enact change is to convince those "on the fence"
> that there are problems and that these specific actions will fix them.
>

false. we do not need to convince those people. they can just get out of
the way and let us do the work. requiring the explicit approval of everyone
before work is done is pretty much the antithesis of how we approach any
other problem in this organization


> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After
> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be
> all about community and then disenfranchising huge swatches of people?
>

you are doing the same thing Wade was doing. appropriating the language
that marginalized people use

you hold the power here, Jim. and your position is *not* the unpopular one.
it is the default one. it is the same position I have been rebuffed with
time and time again. thread after thread. year after year

you are not being "disenfranchised" or "marginalized" because a couple of
women have said that they don't want to discuss this with you any more. to
equate that with the treatment that women get at this organization is
absurd (and offensive -- but that's another matter)

PS: Ignoring the other numerous issues w/ the Roman Catholic church,
> one thing that really bothered me immensely was the removal
> of the Devil's Advocate role in the canonization of sainthood.
> Uncomfortable and inconvenient questions sometimes need to be
> asked, if only to ensure full and total transparency. I think
> that applies in lots and lots of situations.
>

the Devil does not need an advocate. like I already said. your position is
the default one. your concerns are not novel. they are mundane

they are so commonplace and so repetitive for people like me that maybe it
doesn't surprise some readers there are literally wikis set up where people
document and categorize them

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Sam Ruby]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 9:33 AM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>
> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in
> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise,
> our reaction should not be "you are wrong; you just can't see it. So STFU."
> Instead, help educate them that there actually is a problem.

My experience, like Ross's is that doing such rarely ends well.  But
I'll give it a try.  Let's see how it goes.

Imagine you are one of a few women in a room full of men.  You are
uncertain as to whether you belong or are welcome.  A highly respected
and accomplished man makes the following statement:

"Merit has nothing to do with gender, or race, or religion,
or what genitalia one has or is attracted to. If your idea
of what constitutes merit is based on any of these, then
that's a f'ed up definition of merit. That means it's a
problem w/ how merit is defined, and not meritocracy per se."

For clarity: this is not a question as to whether the statement is
correct or whether the intent is correct.  This is a question as to
whether you feel that would make this hypothetical woman feel more
welcome or less welcome.

- Sam Ruby

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:21 AM, Ross Gardler  wrote:
> 
> I ask that everyone reading this far take a moment to think the above 
> through. It means the issues that cause us to have poor diversity are mostly 
> invisible to us. Therefore we assume the problem doesn't exist or isn't as 
> severe as some claim. Thus when someone raises concerns we tell them they are 
> wrong, which is exclusionary in and of itself. [TIP: always assume the other 
> person has a justifiable reason for raising their concern and learn from it. 
> Maybe ask how one might help. If you just can't see it, fine, don't engage. 
> For the sake of our community don't deny the claim. Assume good intent. If 
> you are right and the it's a non-event the thread will die immediately - 
> there is no need to refute it]
> 

I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in
from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise,
our reaction should not be "you are wrong; you just can't see it. So STFU."
Instead, help educate them that there actually is a problem.

The only way we can enact change is to convince those "on the fence"
that there are problems and that these specific actions will fix them.
There are some who will never change their minds no matter what,
on both sides of any issue. Preaching to the choir and beating a
dead horse are fruitless activities. What good are echo chambers?

We are on one hand saying "assume good intent" and that we should assume that
someone has a "justifiable reason" for raising a concern... and then we call out
and "shame" people who do that exact thing, because they don't agree.
We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After
all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be
all about community and then disenfranchising huge swatches of people?

PS: Ignoring the other numerous issues w/ the Roman Catholic church,
one thing that really bothered me immensely was the removal
of the Devil's Advocate role in the canonization of sainthood.
Uncomfortable and inconvenient questions sometimes need to be
asked, if only to ensure full and total transparency. I think
that applies in lots and lots of situations.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Re: on "meritocracy"

[Naomi Slater]

On Sat 30. Mar 2019 at 07:02, Wade Chandler  wrote:

>
> But, I'm sure
> you'll have a good D&I initiative if you continue to marginalize people
> like you did there; treat others as insignificant or peripheral.
>
"marginalize"

*Inigo Montoya voice* you keep using that word. I do not think it means
what you think it means