Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

Adam,

I do not care for Stoet and Geary's attempt to explain the correlation 
they found, but their statistics are harder to dismiss. Anyone arguing 
for quantitative measures such as equality of gender outcome will need 
to address this quantitative evidence and explain how OSGeo might be 
able to overcome this wider cultural bias. While I admire the 
determination of those aiming for equal gender representation, I do not 
think this should be OSGeo policy.


I continue to be disheartened by women not choosing or not remaining in 
STEM careers, despite improved gender equality. I believe (without 
evidence) that career choice is culturally determined, but then why do 
so many women leave STEM careers?


When I was a union delegate, I supported through a personal grievance 
process a senior woman scientist from an ethnic minority who had been 
subjected to severe workplace bullying by a white male clique and their 
enablers, both male and female. I am more than willing to believe 
María's description of an "unfriendly environment". But is STEM worse 
than other disciplines? By comparison, in my country, the legal 
profession is currently under scrutiny for endemic workplace sexual 
harassment of both women and men. Despite the majority of law graduates 
being women, there is a high exit rate for women and low representation 
at the senior level, which is almost exclusively dominated by men. Is it 
the money? Do highly-paid disciplines attract the worst people, or make 
them? I do not know.


I think that the best thing that OSGeo can do is to continue to support 
the "stubborn women" we have, especially those in leadership positions, 
because they are great role models for all. While women will likely 
continue to be underrepresented, at least we can ensure that we have 
enough diversity of role models that no one considering a career in open 
source GIS is discouraged. Keynotes are an important opportunity for 
role models to be visible.


Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/08/18 00:38, adam steer wrote:

Hi all

I appreciate this topic arising. I appreciate the efforts of the FOSS4G Dar
committee; and the reasons for their decisions. I also appreciate that the
FOSS4G Asia LOC have a different operating environment and look forward to
hearing about their drivers. And I appreciate discussion about various
factors affecting diversity and audiences. From FOSS4G Oceania experience
it’s not an easy discussion to get right - I hope we all make the best
effort we can.

I also want to avoid papering over a substantially disheartening part of
this particular e-mail conversation.

Earlier in this discussion thread a research paper was rolled out as
evidence that women choose to do STEM less; with the argument following
that aiming for levels of attendance and speakership at FOSS4G conferences
which represent the population is over-reach; and then a few people jumping
on the sciencing wagon.

So I read the paper. …and I'm puzzled that in 2018, such a work would be
latched onto and held up as truth without question. I would certainly not
try to use it as a platform to base a solid argument on.

What was more disappointing is that this work was repeatedly held up as
canon and defended, as a counter to Maria’s patient attempts to inject some
living experience into discussion about a topic on which she has invested
vast time and energy (and whose initial assessment of the work was actually
completely correct)!

A great first step to increase diversity and inclusion would be to avoid
this type of top down lecturing and engage with experience - and then
listen. To stories like Vicky’s. To the experience of Maria and Maria; to
the committee from FOSS4G Asia who have made choices for reasons we don’t
know; and from FOSS4G in Dar, who made choices for very clear reasons
because they were able to; and aimed to have a specific impact (which I
hope, has worked).

Back to lurking now..

Adam




___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

Vicky,

this recent article in The Economist discusses decreasing workforce 
participation of women in India, very much in-line with your experience:

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/07/05/why-india-needs-women-to-work

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 13/08/18 15:57, Vicky Vergara wrote:

But I am glad that, this student's father is letting her study.
And maybe, in the future, she will have daughters that will go to the
University and they will be able to go out of the University premises to
eat.
And she will have grand-daughters that will can go out of the country
(without a chaperon) and be speakers.


--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Cameron Shorter]

I think I'm safe in assessing that all of us contributing to this 
discussion (and probably many more lurking) believe in promoting 
diversity. We might disagree on relevance of specific scientific papers, 
but I feel we should not be distracted by our differences and rather 
should focus on what we collectively agree on and can achieve together.


When I was married, an old wise relative advised "you can be right, or 
you can be happy". I'll modify that for Open Source by saying "you can 
be right, or you can have a collaborative community".


While this message is intended for all of us, Maria, I'm especially 
thinking about you. I see in you contagious passion, and can-do 
commitment to back that up. I'd love to see many of us in the community 
rallying behind you even more than done already. And I think that the 
more you are embracing and adopting the ideas of others the more 
successful you will become.


Keep up the enthusiasm, Cameron


On 13/08/2018 11:39 PM, Guido Stein wrote:

Hey folks,

It is great to see so much discussion about what our standard as a 
community are for defining a successfully event.


I would suggest that we codify our goals towards diversity and 
inclusion into the Code of Conduct (CoC). This would make it clearer 
about what values we as a community hold and aspire to.


Please let me express my respect for everyone else's thoughts and 
feelings here. I am a sys white mail in my 40s who has been part of 
many communities including ones where the majority are male, female, 
Chilean, or white guys. I cannot speak for anyone else and I hope that 
the comments I share are taken in the positive helpful manor in which 
I intent them to be.


When I was working on the FOSS4G Boston 2017 I was overwhelmed by the 
many factors that go into choosing speakers and keynotes. My intention 
for the conference was to be as inclusive and welcoming as I could 
make it. I attempted to do this by bringing multiple local communities 
which I knew about into the planning of the event and also trying to 
encourage people to do out reach to groups that I felt were not well 
represented.


I am still not sure how to judge how I did in this effort. Is the goal 
to invite the right people who would represent the community? Is the 
goal to make sure you have the right mix of people who would represent 
the community? What is the benchmark? Which underrepresented group 
should you be measuring? Can you ask demographic questions of people 
attending to measure your success?


Personally, I struggled with the idea of diversity. Not that diversity 
isn't important, but creating diversity may sometimes lead to quotas 
and tokenism. I never want someone to feel like they are being singled 
out to participate because I need to reach a diversity goal.


For me it would be helpful if our values and priorities around 
diversity were written out in the CoC. I think there could be a strong 
case made for focusing our community efforts on bringing more women 
into our events, but I also think the same could be said for 
communities of color, youth, impoverished, and others.


I think that being clear and specific about what goals and objectives 
we have as a community is an important step towards understanding who 
we are as a community.


I look forward to the continued discussion.

Thank you for your time,

Guido


On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 8:38 AM adam steer > wrote:


Hi all

I appreciate this topic arising. I appreciate the efforts of the
FOSS4G Dar committee; and the reasons for their decisions. I also
appreciate that the FOSS4G Asia LOC have a different operating
environment and look forward to hearing about their drivers. And I
appreciate discussion about various factors affecting diversity
and audiences. From FOSS4G Oceania experience it’s not an easy
discussion to get right - I hope we all make the best effort we can.

I also want to avoid papering over a substantially disheartening
part of this particular e-mail conversation.

Earlier in this discussion thread a research paper was rolled out
as evidence that women choose to do STEM less; with the argument
following that aiming for levels of attendance and speakership at
FOSS4G conferences which represent the population is over-reach;
and then a few people jumping on the sciencing wagon.

So I read the paper. …and I'm puzzled that in 2018, such a work
would be latched onto and held up as truth without question. I
would certainly not try to use it as a platform to base a solid
argument on.

What was more disappointing is that this work was repeatedly held
up as canon and defended, as a counter to Maria’s patient attempts
to inject some living experience into discussion about a topic on
which she has invested vast time and energy (and whose initial
assessment of the work was actually completely correct)!

A great first step to 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Guido Stein]

Hey folks,

It is great to see so much discussion about what our standard as a
community are for defining a successfully event.

I would suggest that we codify our goals towards diversity and inclusion
into the Code of Conduct (CoC). This would make it clearer about what
values we as a community hold and aspire to.

Please let me express my respect for everyone else's thoughts and feelings
here. I am a sys white mail in my 40s who has been part of many communities
including ones where the majority are male, female, Chilean, or white guys.
I cannot speak for anyone else and I hope that the comments I share are
taken in the positive helpful manor in which I intent them to be.

When I was working on the FOSS4G Boston 2017 I was overwhelmed by the many
factors that go into choosing speakers and keynotes. My intention for the
conference was to be as inclusive and welcoming as I could make it. I
attempted to do this by bringing multiple local communities which I knew
about into the planning of the event and also trying to encourage people to
do out reach to groups that I felt were not well represented.

I am still not sure how to judge how I did in this effort. Is the goal to
invite the right people who would represent the community? Is the goal to
make sure you have the right mix of people who would represent the
community? What is the benchmark? Which underrepresented group should you
be measuring? Can you ask demographic questions of people attending to
measure your success?

Personally, I struggled with the idea of diversity. Not that diversity
isn't important, but creating diversity may sometimes lead to quotas and
tokenism. I never want someone to feel like they are being singled out to
participate because I need to reach a diversity goal.

For me it would be helpful if our values and priorities around diversity
were written out in the CoC. I think there could be a strong case made for
focusing our community efforts on bringing more women into our events, but
I also think the same could be said for communities of color, youth,
impoverished, and others.

I think that being clear and specific about what goals and objectives we
have as a community is an important step towards understanding who we are
as a community.

I look forward to the continued discussion.

Thank you for your time,

Guido


On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 8:38 AM adam steer  wrote:

> Hi all
>
> I appreciate this topic arising. I appreciate the efforts of the FOSS4G
> Dar committee; and the reasons for their decisions. I also appreciate that
> the FOSS4G Asia LOC have a different operating environment and look forward
> to hearing about their drivers. And I appreciate discussion about various
> factors affecting diversity and audiences. From FOSS4G Oceania experience
> it’s not an easy discussion to get right - I hope we all make the best
> effort we can.
>
> I also want to avoid papering over a substantially disheartening part of
> this particular e-mail conversation.
>
> Earlier in this discussion thread a research paper was rolled out as
> evidence that women choose to do STEM less; with the argument following
> that aiming for levels of attendance and speakership at FOSS4G conferences
> which represent the population is over-reach; and then a few people jumping
> on the sciencing wagon.
>
> So I read the paper. …and I'm puzzled that in 2018, such a work would be
> latched onto and held up as truth without question. I would certainly not
> try to use it as a platform to base a solid argument on.
>
> What was more disappointing is that this work was repeatedly held up as
> canon and defended, as a counter to Maria’s patient attempts to inject some
> living experience into discussion about a topic on which she has invested
> vast time and energy (and whose initial assessment of the work was actually
> completely correct)!
>
> A great first step to increase diversity and inclusion would be to avoid
> this type of top down lecturing and engage with experience - and then
> listen. To stories like Vicky’s. To the experience of Maria and Maria; to
> the committee from FOSS4G Asia who have made choices for reasons we don’t
> know; and from FOSS4G in Dar, who made choices for very clear reasons
> because they were able to; and aimed to have a specific impact (which I
> hope, has worked).
>
> Back to lurking now..
>
> Adam
>
>
> --
> Dr. Adam Steer
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer
> http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer
> http://orcid.org/-0003-0046-7236
> +61 427 091 712 <+61%20427%20091%20712>
> skype: adam.d.steer
> tweet: @adamdsteer
>
> On 13 August 2018 at 21:21, Jeff McKenna 
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for sharing these personal stories Vicky.
>>
>> There are so many different cultural factors at our FOSS4G events around
>> the world.
>>
>> How can we make sure that FOSS4G events are both diverse and inclusive?
>>
>> I think the first step is always to try contacting the FOSS4G local
>> committee directly.  And if you are 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jeff McKenna]

Thank you Adam.  I believe listening and talking directly is even more 
important in the case of events such as FOSS4G-Asia where part of the 
culture is showing respect for each other.  It takes much more of a 
boots-on-the-ground approach, to talk directly and plan in those cases.


Looking forward to continuing this discussion in person in Dar.

-jeff




On 2018-08-13 9:38 AM, adam steer wrote:

Hi all

I appreciate this topic arising. I appreciate the efforts of the FOSS4G 
Dar committee; and the reasons for their decisions. I also appreciate 
that the FOSS4G Asia LOC have a different operating environment and look 
forward to hearing about their drivers. And I appreciate discussion 
about various factors affecting diversity and audiences. From FOSS4G 
Oceania experience it’s not an easy discussion to get right - I hope we 
all make the best effort we can.


I also want to avoid papering over a substantially disheartening part of 
this particular e-mail conversation.


Earlier in this discussion thread a research paper was rolled out as 
evidence that women choose to do STEM less; with the argument following 
that aiming for levels of attendance and speakership at FOSS4G 
conferences which represent the population is over-reach; and then a few 
people jumping on the sciencing wagon.


So I read the paper. …and I'm puzzled that in 2018, such a work would be 
latched onto and held up as truth without question. I would certainly 
not try to use it as a platform to base a solid argument on.


What was more disappointing is that this work was repeatedly held up as 
canon and defended, as a counter to Maria’s patient attempts to inject 
some living experience into discussion about a topic on which she has 
invested vast time and energy (and whose initial assessment of the work 
was actually completely correct)!


A great first step to increase diversity and inclusion would be to avoid 
this type of top down lecturing and engage with experience - and then 
listen. To stories like Vicky’s. To the experience of Maria and Maria; 
to the committee from FOSS4G Asia who have made choices for reasons we 
don’t know; and from FOSS4G in Dar, who made choices for very clear 
reasons because they were able to; and aimed to have a specific impact 
(which I hope, has worked).


Back to lurking now..

Adam


--
Dr. Adam Steer
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer 


http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer 
http://orcid.org/-0003-0046-7236 
+61 427 091 712
skype: adam.d.steer
tweet: @adamdsteer

On 13 August 2018 at 21:21, Jeff McKenna > wrote:


Thank you for sharing these personal stories Vicky.

There are so many different cultural factors at our FOSS4G events
around the world.

How can we make sure that FOSS4G events are both diverse and inclusive?

I think the first step is always to try contacting the FOSS4G local
committee directly.  And if you are concerned of a FOSS4G event but
don't know who to contact, just send me a quick email and I'll
forward you the direct contact.  In the case of FOSS4G-Asia, I would
forward you to Nimalika from OSGeo-Sri Lanka, who has been so kind
to listen and take the advice back to her local organizing
committee, where they can discuss and make the necessary changes.

I also feel that old-school talking directly is still very
important, and look forward to speaking directly of these issues
with leaders Malena, María and others in Dar es Salaam.  This is why
I hop on a plane for a 40 hour trip, to work together on these
issues so we can all continue to create great FOSS4G events of all
sizes.

-jeff





On 2018-08-13 12:57 AM, Vicky Vergara wrote:

Hi all

I went to the last FOSS4G Asia in Hyderabad, India, within IIIT
university premises.
There I met wonderful students.
I was actually impressed with a particular female student, very
bright, and with lots of ideas to tell.

I invited her to eat out.
She could not go out of the university, because her father had
forbidden her to go out of the University premises.
I asked, where is your father?
She told me he lived about 300km to the north, and that when she
needed to go out, he would drive to take her to where she needed
to go.

Culture: not obey the (family/religion/legal) rules is not an
option.
She follows the rules, she is obedient.

What do you expect for woman who live that kind of culture, that
we don't understand, not even a 1%?
If woman like her, get invited to be a keynote speaker, what is
the probability for her to go?

Can you fight a culture that is completely different to
occidental cultures?
Can 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[adam steer]

Hi all

I appreciate this topic arising. I appreciate the efforts of the FOSS4G Dar
committee; and the reasons for their decisions. I also appreciate that the
FOSS4G Asia LOC have a different operating environment and look forward to
hearing about their drivers. And I appreciate discussion about various
factors affecting diversity and audiences. From FOSS4G Oceania experience
it’s not an easy discussion to get right - I hope we all make the best
effort we can.

I also want to avoid papering over a substantially disheartening part of
this particular e-mail conversation.

Earlier in this discussion thread a research paper was rolled out as
evidence that women choose to do STEM less; with the argument following
that aiming for levels of attendance and speakership at FOSS4G conferences
which represent the population is over-reach; and then a few people jumping
on the sciencing wagon.

So I read the paper. …and I'm puzzled that in 2018, such a work would be
latched onto and held up as truth without question. I would certainly not
try to use it as a platform to base a solid argument on.

What was more disappointing is that this work was repeatedly held up as
canon and defended, as a counter to Maria’s patient attempts to inject some
living experience into discussion about a topic on which she has invested
vast time and energy (and whose initial assessment of the work was actually
completely correct)!

A great first step to increase diversity and inclusion would be to avoid
this type of top down lecturing and engage with experience - and then
listen. To stories like Vicky’s. To the experience of Maria and Maria; to
the committee from FOSS4G Asia who have made choices for reasons we don’t
know; and from FOSS4G in Dar, who made choices for very clear reasons
because they were able to; and aimed to have a specific impact (which I
hope, has worked).

Back to lurking now..

Adam


-- 
Dr. Adam Steer
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer
http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer
http://orcid.org/-0003-0046-7236
+61 427 091 712
skype: adam.d.steer
tweet: @adamdsteer

On 13 August 2018 at 21:21, Jeff McKenna 
wrote:

> Thank you for sharing these personal stories Vicky.
>
> There are so many different cultural factors at our FOSS4G events around
> the world.
>
> How can we make sure that FOSS4G events are both diverse and inclusive?
>
> I think the first step is always to try contacting the FOSS4G local
> committee directly.  And if you are concerned of a FOSS4G event but don't
> know who to contact, just send me a quick email and I'll forward you the
> direct contact.  In the case of FOSS4G-Asia, I would forward you to
> Nimalika from OSGeo-Sri Lanka, who has been so kind to listen and take the
> advice back to her local organizing committee, where they can discuss and
> make the necessary changes.
>
> I also feel that old-school talking directly is still very important, and
> look forward to speaking directly of these issues with leaders Malena,
> María and others in Dar es Salaam.  This is why I hop on a plane for a 40
> hour trip, to work together on these issues so we can all continue to
> create great FOSS4G events of all sizes.
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2018-08-13 12:57 AM, Vicky Vergara wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> I went to the last FOSS4G Asia in Hyderabad, India, within IIIT
>> university premises.
>> There I met wonderful students.
>> I was actually impressed with a particular female student, very bright,
>> and with lots of ideas to tell.
>>
>> I invited her to eat out.
>> She could not go out of the university, because her father had forbidden
>> her to go out of the University premises.
>> I asked, where is your father?
>> She told me he lived about 300km to the north, and that when she needed
>> to go out, he would drive to take her to where she needed to go.
>>
>> Culture: not obey the (family/religion/legal) rules is not an option.
>> She follows the rules, she is obedient.
>>
>> What do you expect for woman who live that kind of culture, that we don't
>> understand, not even a 1%?
>> If woman like her, get invited to be a keynote speaker, what is the
>> probability for her to go?
>>
>> Can you fight a culture that is completely different to occidental
>> cultures?
>> Can you fight that culture, sitting in front of your computer, in
>> England, USA, Mexico?
>>
>> What would you tell her if you had that conversation?
>> In my particular case, I told her:
>> I am sure my father has the same concerns as your father, that is why he
>> came with me.
>>
>> And we ate in the University.
>>
>> I invited my father, I paid his airplane ticket, hotel, food, souvenir,
>> etc.
>> The reason that I invited him is: I wanted to fit in the culture as much
>> as possible.
>> When passing through customs, he was called, and he had to do the talking.
>> When going shopping or eating, the cashier first interaction was directed
>> to him.
>>
>> I can't fight a culture, I have to blend in.
>>
>> But I am glad that, this 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jeff McKenna]

Thank you for sharing these personal stories Vicky.

There are so many different cultural factors at our FOSS4G events around 
the world.


How can we make sure that FOSS4G events are both diverse and inclusive?

I think the first step is always to try contacting the FOSS4G local 
committee directly.  And if you are concerned of a FOSS4G event but 
don't know who to contact, just send me a quick email and I'll forward 
you the direct contact.  In the case of FOSS4G-Asia, I would forward you 
to Nimalika from OSGeo-Sri Lanka, who has been so kind to listen and 
take the advice back to her local organizing committee, where they can 
discuss and make the necessary changes.


I also feel that old-school talking directly is still very important, 
and look forward to speaking directly of these issues with leaders 
Malena, María and others in Dar es Salaam.  This is why I hop on a plane 
for a 40 hour trip, to work together on these issues so we can all 
continue to create great FOSS4G events of all sizes.


-jeff




On 2018-08-13 12:57 AM, Vicky Vergara wrote:

Hi all

I went to the last FOSS4G Asia in Hyderabad, India, within IIIT 
university premises.

There I met wonderful students.
I was actually impressed with a particular female student, very bright, 
and with lots of ideas to tell.


I invited her to eat out.
She could not go out of the university, because her father had forbidden 
her to go out of the University premises.

I asked, where is your father?
She told me he lived about 300km to the north, and that when she needed 
to go out, he would drive to take her to where she needed to go.


Culture: not obey the (family/religion/legal) rules is not an option.
She follows the rules, she is obedient.

What do you expect for woman who live that kind of culture, that we 
don't understand, not even a 1%?
If woman like her, get invited to be a keynote speaker, what is the 
probability for her to go?


Can you fight a culture that is completely different to occidental cultures?
Can you fight that culture, sitting in front of your computer, in 
England, USA, Mexico?


What would you tell her if you had that conversation?
In my particular case, I told her:
I am sure my father has the same concerns as your father, that is why he 
came with me.


And we ate in the University.

I invited my father, I paid his airplane ticket, hotel, food, souvenir, etc.
The reason that I invited him is: I wanted to fit in the culture as much 
as possible.

When passing through customs, he was called, and he had to do the talking.
When going shopping or eating, the cashier first interaction was 
directed to him.


I can't fight a culture, I have to blend in.

But I am glad that, this student's father is letting her study.
And maybe, in the future, she will have daughters that will go to the 
University and they will be able to go out of the University premises to 
eat.
And she will have grand-daughters that will can go out of the country 
(without a chaperon) and be speakers.


Regards
Vicky







On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 6:19 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies > wrote:


On 12/08/18 21:14, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts.
This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation"

fallacy:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation



Yes, but lack of correlation refutes causation. That is their point:
gender equality does *not* cause equality of STEM gender outcomes.

Science requires humility. There is no greater experience in science
than refuting your own hypothesis because it means that you might
have discovered something non-obvious. The obvious hypothesis in
this study was that equality of STEM gender outcomes would improve
with gender equality. Their surprising discovery is the opposite.
While there is much conjecture as to the cause, the core finding is
remarkable, good science, and worthy of publication (in my
uninformed opinion as a layman).

Kind regards,




___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jachym Cepicky]

I would agree with Jonathan's point of view. Yes, Asian's team put together
unfortunate list of keynoters (from one point of view). Dar team did the
same the opposite way around and apparently fully consciously (nothing
against any of the speakers, this is the LOC decision).

Leave it for now and try to be better next time. But, remember "better next
time" is different (diverse) for everybody else.

J


so 11. 8. 2018 v 12:51 odesílatel Jonathan Moules <
jonathan-li...@lightpear.com> napsal:

> Glass-half-full observation: In a topic talking about the FOSS4G Asia
> diversity, no-one has commented on the commendable range of racial
> diversity in those keynotes.
>
> As to gender in keynotes, a Devils Advocate would point out there is no
> gender diversity in the 2018 Dar es Salaam keynote speakers either
> (assuming the four on the 2018.foss4g.org front page) - they're also all
> the same gender. Except that given the gender disparity in this field, it
> seems reasonable to me to conclude that Dar have probably done this
> intentionally whereas Asia's seems statistically plausible without even
> needing to factor in unconscious biases.
> And what of diversity of age? I'm fairly confident in guessing that the
> Asia keynotes are all 40s-50s. I'm less confident guessing Dar's, but I'd
> say in their 20's to 30's.
>
> Definition (from the OED):
> Diverse (Adj), "Showing a great deal of variety; very different."
>
> By that definition, neither have gender diversity, both have racial
> diversity (Asia's more-so), and both have little age diversity.
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
>
> On 2018-08-09 10:43, María Arias de Reyna wrote:
>
> I agree this is a good topic to bring into the open, and not an easy
> one. For what I have seen, FOSS4G Asia organization is doing a good
> job, this is just a hard subject to address. Even if that keynote
> lineup was full of women (like in main FOSS4G!) we still have to check
> about the rest of speakers and the attendees. But you are right,
> adding at least one woman keynoter can make a difference.
>
> For those of you who may be reading this and need some context, this
> is a long-distance race, not a sprint. Reaching outside your comfort
> zone networks (usually mostly male contacts in the case of male
> developers) to get more women speakers is not something you can do on
> a blink. Specially if the organizers didn't have the problem in mind
> when the organization started. We usually say that if you start
> worrying about diversity after you choose the venue, you are already
> too late.
>
> I will be in FOSS4G Asia and I hope to get in contact with the
> organization to know about their idiosyncrasy, their worries and their
> challenges. Trying to help from here is difficult, as my networks are
> mostly european and american. But still, we can work together in
> strategies and how to improve diversity. I am going to give a talk
> with Malena on Tanzania about general strategies and how to work on
> improving diversity and my plan is to write down later whatever comes
> from that conversation so we have some guidelines or good practices
> that any OSGeo event can use.
>
> Maybe it is time we renew the woman@osgeo mailing list to join forces?
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:25 AM, Jody Garnett  
>  wrote:
>
> Hey Mark, good on you for voicing publicly. Our ability to discuss openly is
> a strength of our community, and one we are learning to use responsibly. I
> saw your tweet yesterday, but find the discussion list more useful for
> internal discussion such as this.
>
> It is a hard balance between requesting or encouraging changes we want to
> see vs expressing dissapointment in the activities of others. This is
> especially important in a volunteer organization such as ours where
> disappointment however kindly expressed can hit really moral hard
> (especially as volunteers are pulling an event together).
>
> I have been on both sides of this balance and it is never comfortable, as
> you express in your struggle above. Ideally, I seek to offer my time if I am
> in position to be of assistance and if the assistance is welcome.  If not in
> a position to help I seek to learn or look for an opportunity for feedback.
>
> I learned a lot as your foss4g event planning has unfolded and your
> challenges, priorities and direction became clear.
>
> It is my hope that we will learn what challenges the foss4g-asia event is
> facing and what we as an organization can do to assist.
>
> If you have been following the board meetings the Sri Lanka chapter is just
> being officially recognized (and the membership shows some diversity). OSGeo
> has also set aside funding for our president to attend the foss4g-asia
> event.
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 14:53, Mark Iliffe  
>  wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I’ve really agonised over whether to send this email. First of which,
> being the imminent final preparations for FOSS4G taking up a lot of time,
> but also whether it’s appropriate 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Vicky Vergara]

Hi all

I went to the last FOSS4G Asia in Hyderabad, India, within IIIT university
premises.
There I met wonderful students.
I was actually impressed with a particular female student, very bright, and
with lots of ideas to tell.

I invited her to eat out.
She could not go out of the university, because her father had forbidden
her to go out of the University premises.
I asked, where is your father?
She told me he lived about 300km to the north, and that when she needed to
go out, he would drive to take her to where she needed to go.

Culture: not obey the (family/religion/legal) rules is not an option.
She follows the rules, she is obedient.

What do you expect for woman who live that kind of culture, that we don't
understand, not even a 1%?
If woman like her, get invited to be a keynote speaker, what is the
probability for her to go?

Can you fight a culture that is completely different to occidental cultures?
Can you fight that culture, sitting in front of your computer, in England,
USA, Mexico?

What would you tell her if you had that conversation?
In my particular case, I told her:
I am sure my father has the same concerns as your father, that is why he
came with me.

And we ate in the University.

I invited my father, I paid his airplane ticket, hotel, food, souvenir, etc.
The reason that I invited him is: I wanted to fit in the culture as much as
possible.
When passing through customs, he was called, and he had to do the talking.
When going shopping or eating, the cashier first interaction was directed
to him.

I can't fight a culture, I have to blend in.

But I am glad that, this student's father is letting her study.
And maybe, in the future, she will have daughters that will go to the
University and they will be able to go out of the University premises to
eat.
And she will have grand-daughters that will can go out of the country
(without a chaperon) and be speakers.

Regards
Vicky







On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 6:19 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies 
wrote:

> On 12/08/18 21:14, María Arias de Reyna wrote:
>
>> No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts.
>> This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation"
>> fallacy:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_i
>> mply_causation
>>
>
> Yes, but lack of correlation refutes causation. That is their point:
> gender equality does *not* cause equality of STEM gender outcomes.
>
> Science requires humility. There is no greater experience in science than
> refuting your own hypothesis because it means that you might have
> discovered something non-obvious. The obvious hypothesis in this study was
> that equality of STEM gender outcomes would improve with gender equality.
> Their surprising discovery is the opposite. While there is much conjecture
> as to the cause, the core finding is remarkable, good science, and worthy
> of publication (in my uninformed opinion as a layman).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> --
> Ben Caradoc-Davies 
> Director
> Transient Software Limited 
> New Zealand
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 

Georepublic UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
Salzmannstraße 44,
81739 München, Germany

Vicky Vergara
Operations Research

eMail: vi...@georepublic.de
Web: https://georepublic.info

Tel: +49 (089) 4161 7698-1
Fax: +49 (089) 4161 7698-9

Commercial register: Amtsgericht München, HRB 181428
CEO: Daniel Kastl
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

On 12/08/18 21:14, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts.
This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation"
fallacy:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation


Yes, but lack of correlation refutes causation. That is their point: 
gender equality does *not* cause equality of STEM gender outcomes.


Science requires humility. There is no greater experience in science 
than refuting your own hypothesis because it means that you might have 
discovered something non-obvious. The obvious hypothesis in this study 
was that equality of STEM gender outcomes would improve with gender 
equality. Their surprising discovery is the opposite. While there is 
much conjecture as to the cause, the core finding is remarkable, good 
science, and worthy of publication (in my uninformed opinion as a layman).


Kind regards,

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

On 13/08/18 07:31, Maria Antonia Brovelli wrote:

in my opinion, we shall distinguish between equality and equity. Even supposing that 
there were countries where there is equality  (but this is not true: think simply to the 
"gender gap", i.e. the difference in salary between men and women), the point 
is not of ensuring equality because there are great differences inherited by our history 
and by our culture. If we want to reach equality of outcomes, we have to consider equity, 
which is more than simply giving the same opportunities. Obviously, this is a choice. 
This is my choice, even if sometimes it is difficult and if sometimes I make mistakes. 
What we have collectively to decide is if, as OSGeo, we want to go in this direction. 
And, about that, I'm thinking of diversities that are wider than the gender (and, also 
about gender, better not to limit ourselves to the binary logic ;-) ).  I'm absolutely 
positive about having a BOF on diversities at next FOSS4G. The more diversities, the 
better.


I like diversity. I want equality of opportunity. While I believe that 
it is important to measure outcomes to identify and eliminate 
discrimination (including structural discrimination), outcomes are also 
affected by individual choice. While I would like equality of outcome to 
follow directly from equality of opportunity in all fields, large 
studies, including the STEM study discussed earlier, suggest that men 
and women have statistically significant differences in preference for 
fields of endeavour and balance between remuneration, conditions, and 
risk. The reasons for this are open for conjecture but the numbers are 
clear.


For example, about half the 7% gender pay gap amongst Uber drivers is 
due to men driving 2.2% faster, and about 20% of the gap is due to men 
driving at more dangerous times and locations (I consider this economic 
impact of violence against women as structural discrimination):

https://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/researchers-detailed-male-uber-drivers-make-132101042.html

Improvements in outcomes are a valuable measure of success, but I do not 
think that equality of outcome should be a goal in itself. Attempts to 
impose equality of outcome may be frustrated by gender differences in 
preference. Ill-considered measures such as quotas risk causing harm by 
discriminating against candidates with greater merit. I support equality 
of opportunity and the elimination of discrimination because these are 
beneficial and, as far as I can tell, without harmful side-effects.


Kind regards,

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Bruce Bannerman]

Hello everyone,

It is good to see this discussion.

We have a very good community, with talented people from many diverse 
ethnicities, cultures and gender.

From my point of view, I would prefer to see a situation where we concentrate 
on getting the best representation for a particular event. We just need to 
ensure that the selection process is clearly defined.

I don’t want to see us select people in order to just fill a specific quota of 
one particular group, or another. 

If we have a situation where a specific event then has 100% female 
representation, then great. Similarly for other currently less represented 
groups.

Kind regards,

Bruce

> On 13 Aug 2018, at 05:31, Maria Antonia Brovelli  
> wrote:
> 
> Dear Maria, Jonathan, Peter (and All)
> in my opinion, we shall distinguish between equality and equity. Even 
> supposing that there were countries where there is equality  (but this is not 
> true: think simply to the "gender gap", i.e. the difference in salary between 
> men and women), the point is not of ensuring equality because there are great 
> differences inherited by our history and by our culture. If we want to reach 
> equality of outcomes, we have to consider equity, which is more than simply 
> giving the same opportunities. Obviously, this is a choice. This is my 
> choice, even if sometimes it is difficult and if sometimes I make mistakes. 
> What we have collectively to decide is if, as OSGeo, we want to go in this 
> direction. And, about that, I'm thinking of diversities that are wider than 
> the gender (and, also about gender, better not to limit ourselves to the 
> binary logic ;-) ).  I'm absolutely positive about having a BOF on 
> diversities at next FOSS4G. The more diversities, the better. 
> Thanks for starting this thread!
> See you in Dar.
> Maria
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A paper to read this summer ;-)
> 
> http://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/7/8/289
> 
> 
> Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
> Professor of GIS and Digital Mapping
> Politecnico di Milano
> 
> P.zza Leonardo da Vinci, 32 - Building 3 - 20133 Milano (Italy)
> Tel. +39-02-23996242 - Mob. +39-328-0023867,  maria.brove...@polimi.it
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Da: Discuss  per conto di María Arias de 
> Reyna 
> Inviato: domenica 12 agosto 2018 16:54:23
> A: jonathan-li...@lightpear.com
> Cc: OSGeo Discussions
> Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G
>  
> I understand it is difficult to see your own privileges and biases[1].
> That's why I always prefer that a PoC talks about racism instead of
> me. But I can still talk about inequality regarding women. Remember
> that 90% of said here applies to all PoC. And that WoC suffer this
> from both sides.
> 
> So I'm going to take a couple of steps back and start again, to see if
> you can see the flaw. Sorry for not having the best bibliography, but
> I have a weak connection here so I have to rely on things I have
> already offline. But I am sure you will be capable of following the
> lead and find better sources.
> 
> Those researchers have the prejudice that a country that has better
> indexes regarding gender equality means there should be more women
> studying STEM because nothing stops them to do so. So they call it a
> paradox that "the more equal a country is, the fewer women go into
> STEM". But the thing is, if they have researched a bit more (even just
> asking the women of the study why they don't follow a STEM career!!)
> they wouldn't call it a paradox, but something natural coming from
> other causes.
> 
> In Europe, the percentage of women studying Science is increasing,
> while percentage of women studying Technology is decreasing, according
> to Eurostat[it was a bunch of links with data from different years,
> just use the search engine from Eurostat]. That's one of the reasons
> why talking about STEM is already a first bias because you are mixing
> stuff. But many authors do this, so let's just skip it.
> 
> In Tech, women are leaving studies and the industry at higher rate
> than men[2]. Which means, we have even less women working in our
> industry than the real percentage of women that would like to work in
> our industry. This unfriendly environment causes a lack of successful
> happy role models that could encourage other girls to enter the field
> too.[3] Role models are even more important to girls than to boys
> because of the Otherness[4]. By default, everything is male.
> 
> So, first loop that explains the "paradox".
> 
> But even then, why are there fewer female college students in STEM?
> Because, as all the links I posted previously already explained,
> society pushes you out of STEM [5] [6]. Only stubb

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Maria Antonia Brovelli]

Dear Maria, Jonathan, Peter (and All)

in my opinion, we shall distinguish between equality and equity. Even supposing 
that there were countries where there is equality  (but this is not true: think 
simply to the "gender gap", i.e. the difference in salary between men and 
women), the point is not of ensuring equality because there are great 
differences inherited by our history and by our culture. If we want to reach 
equality of outcomes, we have to consider equity, which is more than simply 
giving the same opportunities. Obviously, this is a choice. This is my choice, 
even if sometimes it is difficult and if sometimes I make mistakes. What we 
have collectively to decide is if, as OSGeo, we want to go in this direction. 
And, about that, I'm thinking of diversities that are wider than the gender 
(and, also about gender, better not to limit ourselves to the binary logic ;-) 
).  I'm absolutely positive about having a BOF on diversities at next FOSS4G. 
The more diversities, the better.

Thanks for starting this thread!

See you in Dar.

Maria





A paper to read this summer ;-)

http://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/7/8/289


Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
Professor of GIS and Digital Mapping
Politecnico di Milano

P.zza Leonardo da Vinci, 32 - Building 3 - 20133 Milano (Italy)
Tel. +39-02-23996242 - Mob. +39-328-0023867,  <mailto:maria.brove...@polimi.it> 
maria.brove...@polimi.it






Da: Discuss  per conto di María Arias de Reyna 

Inviato: domenica 12 agosto 2018 16:54:23
A: jonathan-li...@lightpear.com
Cc: OSGeo Discussions
Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

I understand it is difficult to see your own privileges and biases[1].
That's why I always prefer that a PoC talks about racism instead of
me. But I can still talk about inequality regarding women. Remember
that 90% of said here applies to all PoC. And that WoC suffer this
from both sides.

So I'm going to take a couple of steps back and start again, to see if
you can see the flaw. Sorry for not having the best bibliography, but
I have a weak connection here so I have to rely on things I have
already offline. But I am sure you will be capable of following the
lead and find better sources.

Those researchers have the prejudice that a country that has better
indexes regarding gender equality means there should be more women
studying STEM because nothing stops them to do so. So they call it a
paradox that "the more equal a country is, the fewer women go into
STEM". But the thing is, if they have researched a bit more (even just
asking the women of the study why they don't follow a STEM career!!)
they wouldn't call it a paradox, but something natural coming from
other causes.

In Europe, the percentage of women studying Science is increasing,
while percentage of women studying Technology is decreasing, according
to Eurostat[it was a bunch of links with data from different years,
just use the search engine from Eurostat]. That's one of the reasons
why talking about STEM is already a first bias because you are mixing
stuff. But many authors do this, so let's just skip it.

In Tech, women are leaving studies and the industry at higher rate
than men[2]. Which means, we have even less women working in our
industry than the real percentage of women that would like to work in
our industry. This unfriendly environment causes a lack of successful
happy role models that could encourage other girls to enter the field
too.[3] Role models are even more important to girls than to boys
because of the Otherness[4]. By default, everything is male.

So, first loop that explains the "paradox".

But even then, why are there fewer female college students in STEM?
Because, as all the links I posted previously already explained,
society pushes you out of STEM [5] [6]. Only stubborn woman like me
get far and it is just a matter of time to get burned because of this
unfriendly environment.

And there's more variables that influences why women are not into STEM
in supposedly "more egalitarian countries", but I don't think I should
extend more here. I am more than happy to have a BoF session about
diversity in next FOSS4G to extend the subject. Or in any other FOSS4G
I can attend.

So yes, that study is highly biased. In just a couple of paragraphs I
dig deeper than they did on their study about why that "paradox". And
yes, even the peer reviews were unable to see something so obvious.
Maybe because they are biased too[1]? Probably. I am not saying they
are evil on purpose or anything. I'm just saying their study is very
superficial. Just crunching a lot of data from one side and trying to
explain a multi-variable outcome with that.

To summarize: what can we do from OSGeo? Provide a welcoming friendly
environment, encourage those that are already on their path and
provide enough role models for all diverse groups. That

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Patrick Hogan]

Maria, 
Beautifully expressed and quite enlightening!
As well as sad for want of the less-aggressive and 
more-nurturing instincts women bring to the equation.
We are a world out-of-balance without women truly equal.
And the increasing imbalance to both economics and 
the environment exacerbates the issue.
Thankfully FOSS4G can be a guiding light,
if we do more with it to help.

-Original Message-
From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of María Arias 
de Reyna
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2018 7:54 AM
To: jonathan-li...@lightpear.com
Cc: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

I understand it is difficult to see your own privileges and biases[1].
That's why I always prefer that a PoC talks about racism instead of
me. But I can still talk about inequality regarding women. Remember
that 90% of said here applies to all PoC. And that WoC suffer this
from both sides.

So I'm going to take a couple of steps back and start again, to see if
you can see the flaw. Sorry for not having the best bibliography, but
I have a weak connection here so I have to rely on things I have
already offline. But I am sure you will be capable of following the
lead and find better sources.

Those researchers have the prejudice that a country that has better
indexes regarding gender equality means there should be more women
studying STEM because nothing stops them to do so. So they call it a
paradox that "the more equal a country is, the fewer women go into
STEM". But the thing is, if they have researched a bit more (even just
asking the women of the study why they don't follow a STEM career!!)
they wouldn't call it a paradox, but something natural coming from
other causes.

In Europe, the percentage of women studying Science is increasing,
while percentage of women studying Technology is decreasing, according
to Eurostat[it was a bunch of links with data from different years,
just use the search engine from Eurostat]. That's one of the reasons
why talking about STEM is already a first bias because you are mixing
stuff. But many authors do this, so let's just skip it.

In Tech, women are leaving studies and the industry at higher rate
than men[2]. Which means, we have even less women working in our
industry than the real percentage of women that would like to work in
our industry. This unfriendly environment causes a lack of successful
happy role models that could encourage other girls to enter the field
too.[3] Role models are even more important to girls than to boys
because of the Otherness[4]. By default, everything is male.

So, first loop that explains the "paradox".

But even then, why are there fewer female college students in STEM?
Because, as all the links I posted previously already explained,
society pushes you out of STEM [5] [6]. Only stubborn woman like me
get far and it is just a matter of time to get burned because of this
unfriendly environment.

And there's more variables that influences why women are not into STEM
in supposedly "more egalitarian countries", but I don't think I should
extend more here. I am more than happy to have a BoF session about
diversity in next FOSS4G to extend the subject. Or in any other FOSS4G
I can attend.

So yes, that study is highly biased. In just a couple of paragraphs I
dig deeper than they did on their study about why that "paradox". And
yes, even the peer reviews were unable to see something so obvious.
Maybe because they are biased too[1]? Probably. I am not saying they
are evil on purpose or anything. I'm just saying their study is very
superficial. Just crunching a lot of data from one side and trying to
explain a multi-variable outcome with that.

To summarize: what can we do from OSGeo? Provide a welcoming friendly
environment, encourage those that are already on their path and
provide enough role models for all diverse groups. That's what I am
going to fight for. And as this is a global organization, until our
global demography statistics match the world statistics, we will be
doing something wrong.


[1] https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_piff_does_money_make_you_mean
[2] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0019793915594597
[3] https://thesocietypages.org/trot/2017/02/22/the-role-of-female-role-models/
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_(philosophy)
[5] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0
[6] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0038040714547770
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

I understand it is difficult to see your own privileges and biases[1].
That's why I always prefer that a PoC talks about racism instead of
me. But I can still talk about inequality regarding women. Remember
that 90% of said here applies to all PoC. And that WoC suffer this
from both sides.

So I'm going to take a couple of steps back and start again, to see if
you can see the flaw. Sorry for not having the best bibliography, but
I have a weak connection here so I have to rely on things I have
already offline. But I am sure you will be capable of following the
lead and find better sources.

Those researchers have the prejudice that a country that has better
indexes regarding gender equality means there should be more women
studying STEM because nothing stops them to do so. So they call it a
paradox that "the more equal a country is, the fewer women go into
STEM". But the thing is, if they have researched a bit more (even just
asking the women of the study why they don't follow a STEM career!!)
they wouldn't call it a paradox, but something natural coming from
other causes.

In Europe, the percentage of women studying Science is increasing,
while percentage of women studying Technology is decreasing, according
to Eurostat[it was a bunch of links with data from different years,
just use the search engine from Eurostat]. That's one of the reasons
why talking about STEM is already a first bias because you are mixing
stuff. But many authors do this, so let's just skip it.

In Tech, women are leaving studies and the industry at higher rate
than men[2]. Which means, we have even less women working in our
industry than the real percentage of women that would like to work in
our industry. This unfriendly environment causes a lack of successful
happy role models that could encourage other girls to enter the field
too.[3] Role models are even more important to girls than to boys
because of the Otherness[4]. By default, everything is male.

So, first loop that explains the "paradox".

But even then, why are there fewer female college students in STEM?
Because, as all the links I posted previously already explained,
society pushes you out of STEM [5] [6]. Only stubborn woman like me
get far and it is just a matter of time to get burned because of this
unfriendly environment.

And there's more variables that influences why women are not into STEM
in supposedly "more egalitarian countries", but I don't think I should
extend more here. I am more than happy to have a BoF session about
diversity in next FOSS4G to extend the subject. Or in any other FOSS4G
I can attend.

So yes, that study is highly biased. In just a couple of paragraphs I
dig deeper than they did on their study about why that "paradox". And
yes, even the peer reviews were unable to see something so obvious.
Maybe because they are biased too[1]? Probably. I am not saying they
are evil on purpose or anything. I'm just saying their study is very
superficial. Just crunching a lot of data from one side and trying to
explain a multi-variable outcome with that.

To summarize: what can we do from OSGeo? Provide a welcoming friendly
environment, encourage those that are already on their path and
provide enough role models for all diverse groups. That's what I am
going to fight for. And as this is a global organization, until our
global demography statistics match the world statistics, we will be
doing something wrong.


[1] https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_piff_does_money_make_you_mean
[2] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0019793915594597
[3] https://thesocietypages.org/trot/2017/02/22/the-role-of-female-role-models/
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_(philosophy)
[5] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0
[6] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0038040714547770
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jonathan Moules]

That's the thing: they jump into that conclusion with biased 
prejudices. Right now, we don't have equal opportunity anywhere in the 
world. Not women, not PoC. You are proving me right, they are biased!




https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/169/Strawman-Fallacy

The paper clearly does *not* say "these countries are equal" (your 
Strawman) it says "the more equal a country is, the fewer women go into 
STEM" and it has over 400,000 data points behind that assertion.
If you can prove they are biased, you are encouraged to get a 
peer-reviewed paper published to that effect - it would likely set you 
onto a career in either psychology or gender studies.


I'm sorry, but if you're going to dismiss a peer-reviewed scientific 
paper out of hand without reading it because it disagrees with your 
world-views there's no point in continuing this conversation.
I would also suggest it's worth reading: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Peter Baumann]

On 12.08.2018 11:28, María Arias de Reyna wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Peter Baumann
>  wrote:
>> +1 for every word in Jonathan's excellently worded message. Science at its 
>> heart
>> is open (!) to any and all provable insights (and even conjectures expressed,
>> and all of that may be disproven of course), which works only if not driven 
>> by
>> dogmas wiping out unwanted results upfront as "wrong conclusions probably
>> because bias of the researchers".
>>
>> -Peter
>>
> I'm starting to wonder if you at least tried to open my links. You got
> a biased research result and hold onto that not wanting to see that
> evidence points in another direction. That's not what open science is.

my point is not about the content of the research, but the approach of stating
"bias" when results don't please.

- In the work cited by Jonathan, several reviewers have looked at it, and found
it done well enough to get published. Can you prove "bias"?
- Results of research have been presented, strictly separated from their
suggestions (opinion, if you will). Did you find any mistake in how they got
their results?
- Their suggestions are - scientifically correct - clearly marked as such. So a
debate about those is possible of course. However, we need better arguments than
just "it's biased", science lives from rationalization and providing evidence.
Not allegations.

Science is a hard job.

-Peter


>
>>
>> On 11.08.2018 23:34, Jonathan Moules wrote:
 Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
 equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
 conclusions probably because bias of the researchers.
>>> Apologies, but that's a general dismissal of a peer-reviewed scientific 
>>> paper,
>>> seemingly because you don't like the result. That's not how science works. 
>>> If
>>> there is a problem with the paper (and most papers have a few quirks) I 
>>> would
>>> suggest the correct way to refute it is to start by pointing out the
>>> methodological and/or statistical flaws, not dismissing it out of hand. If
>>> done thoroughly enough you can probably get a subsequent paper published via
>>> peer-review with some other experts in the field that refutes it which is
>>> usually good for career prospects.
>>> Like you I would have expected more women to choose STEM given the
>>> opportunity, but apparently they do the opposite and so I've updated my
>>> world-view accordingly to fit the facts. As the saying goes: You're welcome 
>>> to
>>> your own opinions, but facts are facts.
>>>
>>> Anyway, we're heading off-topic. I was originally simply pointing out that 
>>> Dar
>>> doesn't have gender diversity in the keynotes either (a point I maintain), 
>>> and
>>> I question the unfounded assertion that 50% females in the
>>> industry/speakers/etc is something that is feasible given the research on
>>> female career preferences. I'll leave it at that.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> --
>> Dr. Peter Baumann
>>  - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>>www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
>>mail: p.baum...@jacobs-university.de
>>tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>>  - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>>www.rasdaman.com, mail: baum...@rasdaman.com
>>tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
>> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis 
>> ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli 
>> destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 
>> 1083)
>>
>>

-- 
Dr. Peter Baumann
 - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
   www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
   mail: p.baum...@jacobs-university.de
   tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
 - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
   www.rasdaman.com, mail: baum...@rasdaman.com
   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis 
dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec 
preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

El dom., 12 ago. 2018 11:58, Jonathan Moules 
escribió:

>  >  No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts.
> This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation"
> fallacy:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
>
> You will find it is rarely the case that a peer-reviewed scientific
> paper in what is one of the most influential journals in its field
> (Psychology in this case) can be dismissed so readily.
>
> I suspect you have not read it. Given it's behind a paywall, the entire
> paper is available via sci-hub:
> https://sci-hub.mu/10.1177/0956797617741719
>
> As you can see if you read it, it only states the correlation, there is
> no causation. Indeed, it too like you, I, and most folks expected
> different results, that's why they called it the
> "educational-gender-equality paradox". It's a paradox - it's doing the
> opposite of what is expected - it's quite literally in the title of the
> paper.
>
> The core of the paper:
>
> "One of the main findings of this study is that, para-
> doxically, countries with lower levels of gender equality
> had relatively more women among STEM graduates than
> did more gender-equal countries. This is a paradox,
> because gender-equal countries are those that give girls
> and women more educational and empowerment oppor-
> tunities and that generally promote girls’ and women’s
> engagement in STEM fields (e.g., Williams & Ceci, 2015)."
>
> They do try and take a guess as to what the reason is for this
> (causation), but they make it clear it's just a guess (a "suggestion" as
> it's phrased). That doesn't change the core correltation of the paper:
> that given more education and empowerment, women choose against STEM.
>
> Or put even more simply: given equal opportunity, it appears men and
> women preferentially choose different careers.
>

That's the thing: they jump into that conclusion with biased prejudices.
Right now, we don't have equal opportunity anywhere in the world. Not
women, not PoC. You are proving me right, they are biased!



>  > You can aim for 37%, I will still aim for 50%
>
> I don't have any aim at all in this beyond 100% of people having equal
> opportunity to choose whatever career they wish, and I believe FOSS4G
> and OSGeo should have a similar aim. Anything else will be a dis-service
> to people of both genders.
>
>
> On 2018-08-12 10:14, María Arias de Reyna wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Jonathan Moules
> >  wrote:
> >>> Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
> >>> equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
> >>> conclusions probably because bias of the researchers.
> >>
> >> Apologies, but that's a general dismissal of a peer-reviewed scientific
> >> paper, seemingly because you don't like the result. That's not how
> science
> >> works. If there is a problem with the paper (and most papers have a few
> >> quirks) I would suggest the correct way to refute it is to start by
> pointing
> >> out the methodological and/or statistical flaws, not dismissing it out
> of
> >> hand. If done thoroughly enough you can probably get a subsequent paper
> >> published via peer-review with some other experts in the field that
> refutes
> >> it which is usually good for career prospects.
> >> Like you I would have expected more women to choose STEM given the
> >> opportunity, but apparently they do the opposite and so I've updated my
> >> world-view accordingly to fit the facts. As the saying goes: You're
> welcome
> >> to your own opinions, but facts are facts.
> >>
> > No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts.
> > This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation"
> > fallacy:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
> >
> > The first and second waves of feminism focused on legal. And we
> > advanced a lot. But still, this "forces of society" has been detected
> > and studied since "The Second Sex" of Simone de Beauvoir. There was
> > this general feeling (the same bias the researches of the studies fall
> > into) that when you change legality, society will follow happily. But,
> > as we can see (and study), this is not what happens.
> >
> > And we should have known it: the same happened when racism was removed
> > from law country after country: it was not removed from society.
> > Society follows more slowly, if it follows. Seriously, you should at
> > least watch the video of Neil.
> >
> > That's why third/fourth? wave of feminism (depends on how you count
> > them) are focusing on behavior of society and acceptance.
> >
> >> Anyway, we're heading off-topic. I was originally simply pointing out
> that
> >> Dar doesn't have gender diversity in the keynotes either (a point I
> >> maintain), and I question the unfounded assertion that 50% females in
> the
> >> industry/speakers/etc is something that is feasible given the research
> on
> >> female career 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jonathan Moules]

>  No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts. 
This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation" 
fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation


You will find it is rarely the case that a peer-reviewed scientific 
paper in what is one of the most influential journals in its field 
(Psychology in this case) can be dismissed so readily.


I suspect you have not read it. Given it's behind a paywall, the entire 
paper is available via sci-hub: https://sci-hub.mu/10.1177/0956797617741719


As you can see if you read it, it only states the correlation, there is 
no causation. Indeed, it too like you, I, and most folks expected 
different results, that's why they called it the 
"educational-gender-equality paradox". It's a paradox - it's doing the 
opposite of what is expected - it's quite literally in the title of the 
paper.


The core of the paper:

"One of the main findings of this study is that, para-
doxically, countries with lower levels of gender equality
had relatively more women among STEM graduates than
did more gender-equal countries. This is a paradox,
because gender-equal countries are those that give girls
and women more educational and empowerment oppor-
tunities and that generally promote girls’ and women’s
engagement in STEM fields (e.g., Williams & Ceci, 2015)."

They do try and take a guess as to what the reason is for this 
(causation), but they make it clear it's just a guess (a "suggestion" as 
it's phrased). That doesn't change the core correltation of the paper: 
that given more education and empowerment, women choose against STEM.


Or put even more simply: given equal opportunity, it appears men and 
women preferentially choose different careers.


> You can aim for 37%, I will still aim for 50%

I don't have any aim at all in this beyond 100% of people having equal 
opportunity to choose whatever career they wish, and I believe FOSS4G 
and OSGeo should have a similar aim. Anything else will be a dis-service 
to people of both genders.



On 2018-08-12 10:14, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Jonathan Moules
 wrote:

Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
conclusions probably because bias of the researchers.


Apologies, but that's a general dismissal of a peer-reviewed scientific
paper, seemingly because you don't like the result. That's not how science
works. If there is a problem with the paper (and most papers have a few
quirks) I would suggest the correct way to refute it is to start by pointing
out the methodological and/or statistical flaws, not dismissing it out of
hand. If done thoroughly enough you can probably get a subsequent paper
published via peer-review with some other experts in the field that refutes
it which is usually good for career prospects.
Like you I would have expected more women to choose STEM given the
opportunity, but apparently they do the opposite and so I've updated my
world-view accordingly to fit the facts. As the saying goes: You're welcome
to your own opinions, but facts are facts.


No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts.
This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation"
fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

The first and second waves of feminism focused on legal. And we
advanced a lot. But still, this "forces of society" has been detected
and studied since "The Second Sex" of Simone de Beauvoir. There was
this general feeling (the same bias the researches of the studies fall
into) that when you change legality, society will follow happily. But,
as we can see (and study), this is not what happens.

And we should have known it: the same happened when racism was removed
from law country after country: it was not removed from society.
Society follows more slowly, if it follows. Seriously, you should at
least watch the video of Neil.

That's why third/fourth? wave of feminism (depends on how you count
them) are focusing on behavior of society and acceptance.


Anyway, we're heading off-topic. I was originally simply pointing out that
Dar doesn't have gender diversity in the keynotes either (a point I
maintain), and I question the unfounded assertion that 50% females in the
industry/speakers/etc is something that is feasible given the research on
female career preferences. I'll leave it at that.
Cheers,
Jonathan

You can aim for 37%, I will still aim for 50%. And this is not a
change that only OSGeo has to do, but we should push from different
perspectives to get something really done. As said, this is a
long-distance race, and by that I mean: I doubt my generation will
have equal opportunity ever, no matter how hard and how far we get. I
am aiming for the next generation.




___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Peter Baumann
 wrote:
> +1 for every word in Jonathan's excellently worded message. Science at its 
> heart
> is open (!) to any and all provable insights (and even conjectures expressed,
> and all of that may be disproven of course), which works only if not driven by
> dogmas wiping out unwanted results upfront as "wrong conclusions probably
> because bias of the researchers".
>
> -Peter
>

I'm starting to wonder if you at least tried to open my links. You got
a biased research result and hold onto that not wanting to see that
evidence points in another direction. That's not what open science is.

>
>
> On 11.08.2018 23:34, Jonathan Moules wrote:
>>> Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
>>> equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
>>> conclusions probably because bias of the researchers.
>>
>> Apologies, but that's a general dismissal of a peer-reviewed scientific 
>> paper,
>> seemingly because you don't like the result. That's not how science works. If
>> there is a problem with the paper (and most papers have a few quirks) I would
>> suggest the correct way to refute it is to start by pointing out the
>> methodological and/or statistical flaws, not dismissing it out of hand. If
>> done thoroughly enough you can probably get a subsequent paper published via
>> peer-review with some other experts in the field that refutes it which is
>> usually good for career prospects.
>> Like you I would have expected more women to choose STEM given the
>> opportunity, but apparently they do the opposite and so I've updated my
>> world-view accordingly to fit the facts. As the saying goes: You're welcome 
>> to
>> your own opinions, but facts are facts.
>>
>> Anyway, we're heading off-topic. I was originally simply pointing out that 
>> Dar
>> doesn't have gender diversity in the keynotes either (a point I maintain), 
>> and
>> I question the unfounded assertion that 50% females in the
>> industry/speakers/etc is something that is feasible given the research on
>> female career preferences. I'll leave it at that.
>> Cheers,
>> Jonathan
>>
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Baumann
>  - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
>mail: p.baum...@jacobs-university.de
>tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>  - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>www.rasdaman.com, mail: baum...@rasdaman.com
>tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis 
> dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec 
> preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
>
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Jonathan Moules
 wrote:
>> Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
>> equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
>> conclusions probably because bias of the researchers.
>
>
> Apologies, but that's a general dismissal of a peer-reviewed scientific
> paper, seemingly because you don't like the result. That's not how science
> works. If there is a problem with the paper (and most papers have a few
> quirks) I would suggest the correct way to refute it is to start by pointing
> out the methodological and/or statistical flaws, not dismissing it out of
> hand. If done thoroughly enough you can probably get a subsequent paper
> published via peer-review with some other experts in the field that refutes
> it which is usually good for career prospects.
> Like you I would have expected more women to choose STEM given the
> opportunity, but apparently they do the opposite and so I've updated my
> world-view accordingly to fit the facts. As the saying goes: You're welcome
> to your own opinions, but facts are facts.
>

No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts.
This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation"
fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

The first and second waves of feminism focused on legal. And we
advanced a lot. But still, this "forces of society" has been detected
and studied since "The Second Sex" of Simone de Beauvoir. There was
this general feeling (the same bias the researches of the studies fall
into) that when you change legality, society will follow happily. But,
as we can see (and study), this is not what happens.

And we should have known it: the same happened when racism was removed
from law country after country: it was not removed from society.
Society follows more slowly, if it follows. Seriously, you should at
least watch the video of Neil.

That's why third/fourth? wave of feminism (depends on how you count
them) are focusing on behavior of society and acceptance.

> Anyway, we're heading off-topic. I was originally simply pointing out that
> Dar doesn't have gender diversity in the keynotes either (a point I
> maintain), and I question the unfounded assertion that 50% females in the
> industry/speakers/etc is something that is feasible given the research on
> female career preferences. I'll leave it at that.
> Cheers,
> Jonathan

You can aim for 37%, I will still aim for 50%. And this is not a
change that only OSGeo has to do, but we should push from different
perspectives to get something really done. As said, this is a
long-distance race, and by that I mean: I doubt my generation will
have equal opportunity ever, no matter how hard and how far we get. I
am aiming for the next generation.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Peter Baumann]

+1 for every word in Jonathan's excellently worded message. Science at its heart
is open (!) to any and all provable insights (and even conjectures expressed,
and all of that may be disproven of course), which works only if not driven by
dogmas wiping out unwanted results upfront as "wrong conclusions probably
because bias of the researchers".

-Peter



On 11.08.2018 23:34, Jonathan Moules wrote:
>> Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
>> equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
>> conclusions probably because bias of the researchers.
>
> Apologies, but that's a general dismissal of a peer-reviewed scientific paper,
> seemingly because you don't like the result. That's not how science works. If
> there is a problem with the paper (and most papers have a few quirks) I would
> suggest the correct way to refute it is to start by pointing out the
> methodological and/or statistical flaws, not dismissing it out of hand. If
> done thoroughly enough you can probably get a subsequent paper published via
> peer-review with some other experts in the field that refutes it which is
> usually good for career prospects.
> Like you I would have expected more women to choose STEM given the
> opportunity, but apparently they do the opposite and so I've updated my
> world-view accordingly to fit the facts. As the saying goes: You're welcome to
> your own opinions, but facts are facts.
>
> Anyway, we're heading off-topic. I was originally simply pointing out that Dar
> doesn't have gender diversity in the keynotes either (a point I maintain), and
> I question the unfounded assertion that 50% females in the
> industry/speakers/etc is something that is feasible given the research on
> female career preferences. I'll leave it at that.
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 
Dr. Peter Baumann
 - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
   www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
   mail: p.baum...@jacobs-university.de
   tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
 - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
   www.rasdaman.com, mail: baum...@rasdaman.com
   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis 
dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec 
preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jonathan Moules]

Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
conclusions probably because bias of the researchers.


Apologies, but that's a general dismissal of a peer-reviewed scientific 
paper, seemingly because you don't like the result. That's not how 
science works. If there is a problem with the paper (and most papers 
have a few quirks) I would suggest the correct way to refute it is to 
start by pointing out the methodological and/or statistical flaws, not 
dismissing it out of hand. If done thoroughly enough you can probably 
get a subsequent paper published via peer-review with some other experts 
in the field that refutes it which is usually good for career prospects.
Like you I would have expected more women to choose STEM given the 
opportunity, but apparently they do the opposite and so I've updated my 
world-view accordingly to fit the facts. As the saying goes: You're 
welcome to your own opinions, but facts are facts.


Anyway, we're heading off-topic. I was originally simply pointing out 
that Dar doesn't have gender diversity in the keynotes either (a point I 
maintain), and I question the unfounded assertion that 50% females in 
the industry/speakers/etc is something that is feasible given the 
research on female career preferences. I'll leave it at that.

Cheers,
Jonathan

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Jonathan Moules
 wrote:
>> This is a common mistake. If you aim for the already declining percentage
>> of women, you will not get far. You have to aim for the percentage of
>> population. The fact that only 37% of our industry is female is itself a
>> problem we have to address.
>
> ...
>
>> But going back to the topic of this thread, until we have half of the
>> developers/speakers/users being woman, we have a problem.
>
>
> I agree it's a common mistake, but I suspect I'm referring to a different
> mistake. Equality is about equal opportunity. It's not about forcing equal
> statistically representative numbers of people of various diversity types
> into all industries equally. Everyone should have the opportunity to do
> whatever they want.
>

That's the thing, we don't.

I guess you haven't seen the video. Unfortunately I don't have a good
internet connection here to look for more bibliography, but I can
point you easily to Neil, who can explain it again to you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5S7QD9dryI

> But rather than assertions, lets look at what science says on the matter.
> Which set of countries has more gender equality in STEM (Science,
> Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) - GIS falls under the T and some of
> the S:
> Finland, Norway (Countries that address most of the issues in your linked
> US-focused Forbes article)
> or
> Tunisia, United Arab Emirates?
>
> Chances are you picked wrong. It turns out that in countries with poor
> human/women's rights records (UAE, Tunisia) there are more females in STEM,
> and in countries where there is more gender equality (i.e. the
> Scandinavians), the women choose not to go into STEM.
>
> For discussion see:
> https://researchtheheadlines.org/2018/04/20/the-stem-gender-equality-paradox-from-fallacies-to-facts/
> - and the actual paper:
> http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797617741719
>
> It's great that you chose GIS, but given the choice, the research indicates
> that most women chose something other than STEM if they live in a
> progressive country, most likely psychology, education, and healthcare, all
> of which are generally dominated by women. Given this, to me at least,
> trying to force a perfect 50/50 gender balance would thus seem to be doing a
> dis-service to people of both genders; it's not equality of opportunity even
> if it does achieve perfect diversity.


Let me tell you something: having legal rights doesn't mean you have
equal opportunities. Those studies are falling into the wrong
conclusions probably because bias of the researchers. Do you really
thing a woman can choose freely to study STEM in so called advanced
countries? Because I live in one of the most feminist/advanced
countries in the world regarding gender and... no, we don't have equal
opportunity. We are very far from that. Society push us outside tech.
Please, watch the video of Neil, he explains it perfectly.

In fact, the best stories are the ones told by trans, because they
have experienced both sides of what society forces you to be. And how
they are treated is completely different. And all of them agree: women
and men are treated completely different and while being a man can be
difficult, being a woman is far more difficult. For example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrYx7HaUlMY I think there are better
videos, but this is the one I have in hand.

This is not a matter of forcing anything, it is a matter of really
having an equal field. Which, unfortunately, we don't have right now.
And same happens with PoC. And it is worst if you are WoC. We have a
lot to conquer here before we can really say we have equal
opportunities.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jonathan Moules]

> This is a common mistake. If you aim for the already declining 
percentage of women, you will not get far. You have to aim for the 
percentage of population. The fact that only 37% of our industry is 
female is itself a problem we have to address.


...

> But going back to the topic of this thread, until we have half of the 
developers/speakers/users being woman, we have a problem.



I agree it's a common mistake, but I suspect I'm referring to a 
different mistake. Equality is about equal /opportunity/. It's not about 
forcing equal statistically representative numbers of people of various 
diversity types into all industries equally. Everyone should have the 
opportunity to do whatever they want.


But rather than assertions, lets look at what science says on the matter.
Which set of countries has more gender equality in STEM (Science, 
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) - GIS falls under the T and 
some of the S:
Finland, Norway (Countries that address most of the issues in your 
linked US-focused Forbes article)

or
Tunisia, United Arab Emirates?

Chances are you picked wrong. It turns out that in countries with poor 
human/women's rights records (UAE, Tunisia) there are *more* females in 
STEM, and in countries where there is more gender equality (i.e. the 
Scandinavians), the women choose /not /to go into STEM.


For discussion see: 
https://researchtheheadlines.org/2018/04/20/the-stem-gender-equality-paradox-from-fallacies-to-facts/ 
- and the actual paper: 
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797617741719


It's great that you chose GIS, but given the choice, the research 
indicates that most women chose something other than STEM if they live 
in a progressive country, most likely psychology, education, and 
healthcare, all of which are generally dominated by women. Given this, 
to me at least, trying to force a perfect 50/50 gender balance would 
thus seem to be doing a dis-service to people of both genders; it's not 
equality of opportunity even if it does achieve perfect diversity.



On 2018-08-11 14:29, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Jonathan Moules
 wrote:

  Once we have a 50% of speakers that are women (even 40%), we can start
saying that having a full keynoter line of women speakers is no diversity.

At the risk of asking a question that I know isn't meant to be asked - why
50%? Or "even 40%"? Surely the % should be around the same as the percentage
of the workforce that engage in the field? This survey indicates it's about
37% globally so 40% would be reasonable -
https://www.gislounge.com/gender-gis-workforce/
(Why the rate is 37% globally is an entirely different kettle of fish).


This is a common mistake. If you aim for the already declining
percentage of women, you will not get far. You have to aim for the
percentage of population. The fact that only 37% of our industry is
female is itself a problem we have to address.

The lack of role models (speakers? women in the mailing lists? women
in developer leading roles?) and specially the lack of a friendly
environment for women at work is a problem in most tech related
industries:
https://code.likeagirl.io/women-are-leaving-tech-and-management-is-responsible-a6187a4d5d81
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/02/28/why-women-leave-the-tech-industry-at-a-45-higher-rate-than-men/

Not my best talk (blame jet lag), but this can give you more
perspective: https://vimeo.com/241597584

And this also applies to racial diversity. If the global foss4g is
mostly white... we have a problem.

But going back to the topic of this thread, until we have half of the
developers/speakers/users being woman, we have a problem. And the
longer we ignore it, the worse it gets.


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Jonathan Moules
 wrote:
>>  Once we have a 50% of speakers that are women (even 40%), we can start
>> saying that having a full keynoter line of women speakers is no diversity.
>
> At the risk of asking a question that I know isn't meant to be asked - why
> 50%? Or "even 40%"? Surely the % should be around the same as the percentage
> of the workforce that engage in the field? This survey indicates it's about
> 37% globally so 40% would be reasonable -
> https://www.gislounge.com/gender-gis-workforce/
> (Why the rate is 37% globally is an entirely different kettle of fish).
>

This is a common mistake. If you aim for the already declining
percentage of women, you will not get far. You have to aim for the
percentage of population. The fact that only 37% of our industry is
female is itself a problem we have to address.

The lack of role models (speakers? women in the mailing lists? women
in developer leading roles?) and specially the lack of a friendly
environment for women at work is a problem in most tech related
industries:
https://code.likeagirl.io/women-are-leaving-tech-and-management-is-responsible-a6187a4d5d81
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/02/28/why-women-leave-the-tech-industry-at-a-45-higher-rate-than-men/

Not my best talk (blame jet lag), but this can give you more
perspective: https://vimeo.com/241597584

And this also applies to racial diversity. If the global foss4g is
mostly white... we have a problem.

But going back to the topic of this thread, until we have half of the
developers/speakers/users being woman, we have a problem. And the
longer we ignore it, the worse it gets.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jonathan Moules]

>  Once we have a 50% of speakers that are women (even 40%), we can 
start saying that having a full keynoter line of women speakers is no 
diversity.


At the risk of asking a question that I know isn't meant to be asked - 
why 50%? Or "even 40%"? Surely the % should be around the same as the 
percentage of the workforce that engage in the field? This survey 
indicates it's about 37% globally so 40% would be reasonable - 
https://www.gislounge.com/gender-gis-workforce/

(Why the rate is 37% globally is an entirely different kettle of fish).

>  Up till then, having all women as keynoters is not a diversity 
issue, but an effort to try to promote gender diversity and balance with 
the rest of speakers.


I included the definition of diversity for a reason. As stated, by 
definition neither of the conferences has any gender diversity in their 
keynotes. Now, if the Dar committee wants to engage in 
gender-discrimination when picking their speakers to try and rectify a 
shortage of female-speakers in the general line-up, that's their choice, 
but it cannot then be claim keynote "diversity" when there is, again by 
definition, no such diversity.


What you appear to be saying is that it's fine to discriminate as long 
as it's in favour of the minority, aka "Affirmative action" which I 
think is just replacing one wrong with another.


> For me, saying you are only seeing the glass half full is like saying 
"we have done enough, don't press more".
I was commending them for the racial diversity they have (in a topic 
titled "Diversity in FOSS4G"), where others skipped over this and went 
straight to pointing out a diversity they had not achieved (while 
ironically not achieving it themselves).


Personally I seek to be an egalitarian - I'm a big fan of equality - 
which is why I pointed out some of the various other forms of diversity 
as they so often get forgotten (age especially).



On 2018-08-11 12:10, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Jonathan Moules
 wrote:

Glass-half-full observation: In a topic talking about the FOSS4G Asia
diversity, no-one has commented on the commendable range of racial diversity
in those keynotes.

As to gender in keynotes, a Devils Advocate would point out there is no
gender diversity in the 2018 Dar es Salaam keynote speakers either (assuming
the four on the 2018.foss4g.org front page) - they're also all the same
gender. Except that given the gender disparity in this field, it seems
reasonable to me to conclude that Dar have probably done this intentionally
whereas Asia's seems statistically plausible without even needing to factor
in unconscious biases.

Once we have a 50% of speakers that are women (even 40%), we can start
saying that having a full keynoter line of women speakers is no
diversity. Up till then, having all women as keynoters is not a
diversity issue, but an effort to try to promote gender diversity and
balance with the rest of speakers. Or... maybe the keynoters were good
on their own? Beware of thinking that chosen woman speakers are there
only because of quotas.

That's why I said we still have to check about percentages considering
the full program. But as a starter, having a full male line of
speakers is not a good sign. Statistics is only an excuse. I can
understand that this can be something the organization didn't have in
mind and, as they are volunteers, they have limited effort to spend on
the organization of the conference and gender diversity was not on
their priorities. As said, it is a subject difficult to approach and
it is no good to try to fix it in a rush because you may end up doing
more harm than you expected.

For me, saying you are only seeing the glass half full is like saying
"we have done enough, don't press more". While I think we should press
much more! We already know the conference is going to have a lot of
outstanding talks, the discussion here is where is the visibility for
woman. I don't think any of us is demeaning the speakers lineup, we
are just pointing to a real current problem we (all) have.


And what of diversity of age? I'm fairly confident in guessing that the Asia
keynotes are all 40s-50s. I'm less confident guessing Dar's, but I'd say in
their 20's to 30's.

I agree that age diversity is another concern. And also having always
the same "token" person talking. The classy "haha, I found a woman or
a poc that gives good talks, let's put her everywhere!". Nope.

But still, age diversity is something that gives everyone equal trait
at some point because everyone reaches the "good" range of ages at
some point of their lives. So, even if it is something we can improve,
it is a problem way behind of the gender diversity problem, where some
people just don't have an oportunity ever.


Definition (from the OED):
Diverse (Adj), "Showing a great deal of variety; very different."

By that definition, neither have gender diversity, both have racial
diversity (Asia's more-so), and both have little age 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Jonathan Moules
 wrote:
> Glass-half-full observation: In a topic talking about the FOSS4G Asia
> diversity, no-one has commented on the commendable range of racial diversity
> in those keynotes.
>
> As to gender in keynotes, a Devils Advocate would point out there is no
> gender diversity in the 2018 Dar es Salaam keynote speakers either (assuming
> the four on the 2018.foss4g.org front page) - they're also all the same
> gender. Except that given the gender disparity in this field, it seems
> reasonable to me to conclude that Dar have probably done this intentionally
> whereas Asia's seems statistically plausible without even needing to factor
> in unconscious biases.

Once we have a 50% of speakers that are women (even 40%), we can start
saying that having a full keynoter line of women speakers is no
diversity. Up till then, having all women as keynoters is not a
diversity issue, but an effort to try to promote gender diversity and
balance with the rest of speakers. Or... maybe the keynoters were good
on their own? Beware of thinking that chosen woman speakers are there
only because of quotas.

That's why I said we still have to check about percentages considering
the full program. But as a starter, having a full male line of
speakers is not a good sign. Statistics is only an excuse. I can
understand that this can be something the organization didn't have in
mind and, as they are volunteers, they have limited effort to spend on
the organization of the conference and gender diversity was not on
their priorities. As said, it is a subject difficult to approach and
it is no good to try to fix it in a rush because you may end up doing
more harm than you expected.

For me, saying you are only seeing the glass half full is like saying
"we have done enough, don't press more". While I think we should press
much more! We already know the conference is going to have a lot of
outstanding talks, the discussion here is where is the visibility for
woman. I don't think any of us is demeaning the speakers lineup, we
are just pointing to a real current problem we (all) have.

> And what of diversity of age? I'm fairly confident in guessing that the Asia
> keynotes are all 40s-50s. I'm less confident guessing Dar's, but I'd say in
> their 20's to 30's.

I agree that age diversity is another concern. And also having always
the same "token" person talking. The classy "haha, I found a woman or
a poc that gives good talks, let's put her everywhere!". Nope.

But still, age diversity is something that gives everyone equal trait
at some point because everyone reaches the "good" range of ages at
some point of their lives. So, even if it is something we can improve,
it is a problem way behind of the gender diversity problem, where some
people just don't have an oportunity ever.

> Definition (from the OED):
> Diverse (Adj), "Showing a great deal of variety; very different."
>
> By that definition, neither have gender diversity, both have racial
> diversity (Asia's more-so), and both have little age diversity.

So this means we are doing very good in racial diversity this year,
but falling behind on gender diversity on regional events. Let's see
if we can keep up on racial diversity next year for the main
conference and improve gender diversity in regional events? As said,
this is a long-distance race. It is not very helpful if we have a good
racial diversity this year but forget about them in the following
years.

Also, good time to remind amazing work of TGP for bringing economic
diversity to FOSS4G (which is another huge concern).

>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On 2018-08-09 10:43, María Arias de Reyna wrote:
>
> I agree this is a good topic to bring into the open, and not an easy
> one. For what I have seen, FOSS4G Asia organization is doing a good
> job, this is just a hard subject to address. Even if that keynote
> lineup was full of women (like in main FOSS4G!) we still have to check
> about the rest of speakers and the attendees. But you are right,
> adding at least one woman keynoter can make a difference.
>
> For those of you who may be reading this and need some context, this
> is a long-distance race, not a sprint. Reaching outside your comfort
> zone networks (usually mostly male contacts in the case of male
> developers) to get more women speakers is not something you can do on
> a blink. Specially if the organizers didn't have the problem in mind
> when the organization started. We usually say that if you start
> worrying about diversity after you choose the venue, you are already
> too late.
>
> I will be in FOSS4G Asia and I hope to get in contact with the
> organization to know about their idiosyncrasy, their worries and their
> challenges. Trying to help from here is difficult, as my networks are
> mostly european and american. But still, we can work together in
> strategies and how to improve diversity. I am going to give a talk
> with Malena on Tanzania about general 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jonathan Moules]

Glass-half-full observation: In a topic talking about the FOSS4G Asia 
diversity, no-one has commented on the commendable range of racial 
diversity in those keynotes.


As to gender in keynotes, a Devils Advocate would point out there is no 
gender diversity in the 2018 Dar es Salaam keynote speakers either 
(assuming the four on the 2018.foss4g.org front page) - they're also all 
the same gender. Except that given the gender disparity in this field, 
it seems reasonable to me to conclude that Dar have probably done this 
intentionally whereas Asia's seems statistically plausible without even 
needing to factor in unconscious biases.


And what of diversity of age? I'm fairly confident in guessing that the 
Asia keynotes are all 40s-50s. I'm less confident guessing Dar's, but 
I'd say in their 20's to 30's.


Definition (from the OED):
Diverse (Adj), "Showing a great deal of variety; very different."

By that definition, neither have gender diversity, both have racial 
diversity (Asia's more-so), and both have little age diversity.


Cheers,
Jonathan


On 2018-08-09 10:43, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

I agree this is a good topic to bring into the open, and not an easy
one. For what I have seen, FOSS4G Asia organization is doing a good
job, this is just a hard subject to address. Even if that keynote
lineup was full of women (like in main FOSS4G!) we still have to check
about the rest of speakers and the attendees. But you are right,
adding at least one woman keynoter can make a difference.

For those of you who may be reading this and need some context, this
is a long-distance race, not a sprint. Reaching outside your comfort
zone networks (usually mostly male contacts in the case of male
developers) to get more women speakers is not something you can do on
a blink. Specially if the organizers didn't have the problem in mind
when the organization started. We usually say that if you start
worrying about diversity after you choose the venue, you are already
too late.

I will be in FOSS4G Asia and I hope to get in contact with the
organization to know about their idiosyncrasy, their worries and their
challenges. Trying to help from here is difficult, as my networks are
mostly european and american. But still, we can work together in
strategies and how to improve diversity. I am going to give a talk
with Malena on Tanzania about general strategies and how to work on
improving diversity and my plan is to write down later whatever comes
from that conversation so we have some guidelines or good practices
that any OSGeo event can use.

Maybe it is time we renew the woman@osgeo mailing list to join forces?

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:25 AM, Jody Garnett  wrote:

Hey Mark, good on you for voicing publicly. Our ability to discuss openly is
a strength of our community, and one we are learning to use responsibly. I
saw your tweet yesterday, but find the discussion list more useful for
internal discussion such as this.

It is a hard balance between requesting or encouraging changes we want to
see vs expressing dissapointment in the activities of others. This is
especially important in a volunteer organization such as ours where
disappointment however kindly expressed can hit really moral hard
(especially as volunteers are pulling an event together).

I have been on both sides of this balance and it is never comfortable, as
you express in your struggle above. Ideally, I seek to offer my time if I am
in position to be of assistance and if the assistance is welcome.  If not in
a position to help I seek to learn or look for an opportunity for feedback.

I learned a lot as your foss4g event planning has unfolded and your
challenges, priorities and direction became clear.

It is my hope that we will learn what challenges the foss4g-asia event is
facing and what we as an organization can do to assist.

If you have been following the board meetings the Sri Lanka chapter is just
being officially recognized (and the membership shows some diversity). OSGeo
has also set aside funding for our president to attend the foss4g-asia
event.
--
Jody Garnett


On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 14:53, Mark Iliffe  wrote:

Hi All,

I’ve really agonised over whether to send this email. First of which,
being the imminent final preparations for FOSS4G taking up a lot of time,
but also whether it’s appropriate for me in my role of chair of FOOS4G to
offer public critique of regional events. It is in this vein that I’d like
to really stress that I’m writing this as an OSSGeo charter member.

When I first saw this, my heart sank:
http://www.foss4g-asia.org/2018/keynotes/

Where is the gender diversity in the line up? I know that organising a
FOSS4G is really difficult, but we need to be reaching far and wide and that
starts with our keynotes. Potentially I’m missing something here - and I
probably am, if so I am sorry if this is the case! - but can we have a
rethink of the line up to really represent our community?

Thank you,

Mark

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[María Arias de Reyna]

I agree this is a good topic to bring into the open, and not an easy
one. For what I have seen, FOSS4G Asia organization is doing a good
job, this is just a hard subject to address. Even if that keynote
lineup was full of women (like in main FOSS4G!) we still have to check
about the rest of speakers and the attendees. But you are right,
adding at least one woman keynoter can make a difference.

For those of you who may be reading this and need some context, this
is a long-distance race, not a sprint. Reaching outside your comfort
zone networks (usually mostly male contacts in the case of male
developers) to get more women speakers is not something you can do on
a blink. Specially if the organizers didn't have the problem in mind
when the organization started. We usually say that if you start
worrying about diversity after you choose the venue, you are already
too late.

I will be in FOSS4G Asia and I hope to get in contact with the
organization to know about their idiosyncrasy, their worries and their
challenges. Trying to help from here is difficult, as my networks are
mostly european and american. But still, we can work together in
strategies and how to improve diversity. I am going to give a talk
with Malena on Tanzania about general strategies and how to work on
improving diversity and my plan is to write down later whatever comes
from that conversation so we have some guidelines or good practices
that any OSGeo event can use.

Maybe it is time we renew the woman@osgeo mailing list to join forces?

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:25 AM, Jody Garnett  wrote:
> Hey Mark, good on you for voicing publicly. Our ability to discuss openly is
> a strength of our community, and one we are learning to use responsibly. I
> saw your tweet yesterday, but find the discussion list more useful for
> internal discussion such as this.
>
> It is a hard balance between requesting or encouraging changes we want to
> see vs expressing dissapointment in the activities of others. This is
> especially important in a volunteer organization such as ours where
> disappointment however kindly expressed can hit really moral hard
> (especially as volunteers are pulling an event together).
>
> I have been on both sides of this balance and it is never comfortable, as
> you express in your struggle above. Ideally, I seek to offer my time if I am
> in position to be of assistance and if the assistance is welcome.  If not in
> a position to help I seek to learn or look for an opportunity for feedback.
>
> I learned a lot as your foss4g event planning has unfolded and your
> challenges, priorities and direction became clear.
>
> It is my hope that we will learn what challenges the foss4g-asia event is
> facing and what we as an organization can do to assist.
>
> If you have been following the board meetings the Sri Lanka chapter is just
> being officially recognized (and the membership shows some diversity). OSGeo
> has also set aside funding for our president to attend the foss4g-asia
> event.
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 14:53, Mark Iliffe  wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I’ve really agonised over whether to send this email. First of which,
>> being the imminent final preparations for FOSS4G taking up a lot of time,
>> but also whether it’s appropriate for me in my role of chair of FOOS4G to
>> offer public critique of regional events. It is in this vein that I’d like
>> to really stress that I’m writing this as an OSSGeo charter member.
>>
>> When I first saw this, my heart sank:
>> http://www.foss4g-asia.org/2018/keynotes/
>>
>> Where is the gender diversity in the line up? I know that organising a
>> FOSS4G is really difficult, but we need to be reaching far and wide and that
>> starts with our keynotes. Potentially I’m missing something here - and I
>> probably am, if so I am sorry if this is the case! - but can we have a
>> rethink of the line up to really represent our community?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Mark
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Jody Garnett]

Hey Mark, good on you for voicing publicly. Our ability to discuss openly
is a strength of our community, and one we are learning to use responsibly.
I saw your tweet yesterday, but find the discussion list more useful for
internal discussion such as this.

It is a hard balance between requesting or encouraging changes we want to
see vs expressing dissapointment in the activities of others. This is
especially important in a volunteer organization such as ours where
disappointment however kindly expressed can hit really moral hard
(especially as volunteers are pulling an event together).

I have been on both sides of this balance and it is never comfortable, as
you express in your struggle above. Ideally, I seek to offer my time if I
am in position to be of assistance and if the assistance is welcome.  If
not in a position to help I seek to learn or look for an opportunity for
feedback.

I learned a lot as your foss4g event planning has unfolded and your
challenges, priorities and direction became clear.

It is my hope that we will learn what challenges the foss4g-asia event is
facing and what we as an organization can do to assist.

If you have been following the board meetings the Sri Lanka
 chapter is just being officially
recognized (and the membership shows some diversity). OSGeo has also set
aside funding for our president to attend the foss4g-asia event.
--
Jody Garnett


On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 14:53, Mark Iliffe  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I’ve really agonised over whether to send this email. First of which,
> being the imminent final preparations for FOSS4G taking up a lot of time,
> but also whether it’s appropriate for me in my role of chair of FOOS4G to
> offer public critique of regional events. It is in this vein that I’d like
> to really stress that I’m writing this as an OSSGeo charter member.
>
> When I first saw this, my heart sank:
> http://www.foss4g-asia.org/2018/keynotes/
>
> Where is the gender diversity in the line up? I know that organising a
> FOSS4G is really difficult, but we need to be reaching far and wide and
> that starts with our keynotes. Potentially I’m missing something here - and
> I probably am, if so I am sorry if this is the case! - but can we have a
> rethink of the line up to really represent our community?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Mark
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss