[OSGeo-Discuss] FOSS4G2016 and diversity
Andrea Ross
andrea.ross at eclipse.org
Mon May 30 20:23:23 PDT 2016
Cameron,
Yes, your point was very hard to miss. I don't think you need to police this thread quite so hard though. :-)
For what it's worth, it makes good business & innovation sense to do more than 1% or so.
YMMV though,
Andrea
On May 30, 2016 10:54:06 PM EDT, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>Marc, Andrea,
>My point I'm hoping to make is that I think we might be spending more
>time discussing ethical code-of-conduct type questions than I think we
>need to. Yes it is important. Yes we need to flag bad behaviour and
>resolve it. But hopefully we can limit such discussions to 1% (or so)
>of
>our bandwidth - which we achieve by referencing our code-of-conduct.
>
>Disclaimer - I'm a privileged white male, living in a democratic
>country, and I'm used to expecting good behaviour to be the norm.
>
>Warm regards, Cameron
>
>On 31/05/2016 9:48 AM, Andrea Ross wrote:
>> That's an unexpected response. Was someone suggesting OSGeo should be
>
>> a forum for human rights?
>
>On 31/05/2016 9:28 AM, Marc Vloemans wrote:
>> Cameron,
>>
>> I think you misunderstood the aim of my comment.
>> I am not talking about human rights as such. (Unless they are
>> threatened, of course)
>>
>> I am addressing the need to guard and promote our inclusivity. If we
>> want to grow and develop as a community we need to take any
>> past/present/future concern about it seriously.
>>
>> That is an integral part of our marketing and communications effort:
>> avoid wrong perceptions and manage our public image where/when
>> possible. Whether such perceptions address the nature of our code,
>our
>> projects, our members, our organisation and its policies or our
>> activities.
>>
>> Hope this clarifies, cheers,
>> Marc Vloemans
>>
>>
>> Op 30 mei 2016 om 23:28 heeft Cameron Shorter
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> While I'm hugely in favour of mutual respect, and I personally
>>> co-authored the OSGeo Code-Of-Conduct, I feel that OSGeo shouldn't
>>> aim to be a forum for human rights. (There are other places for
>this).
>>>
>>> Our primary focus should be on supporting the creation of great
>OSGeo
>>> code, and supporting the communities doing this.
>>>
>>> Having a Code-Of-Conduct in place is a small part of supporting a
>>> community, and we should refer to it in cases where conversations or
>
>>> interactions deviate from good behavior, but I'm hopeful that we can
>
>>> leave it at that, and focus our time on our core code writing
>passions.
>>>
>>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>>
>>> On 30/05/2016 7:30 pm, Marc Vloemans wrote:
>>>> Thanks Andrea,
>>>>
>>>> You are quite right, unfortunately. Sharing and discussing
>>>> experiences and insights on this could come across as negative.
>>>>
>>>> The same happened when I read an earlier discussion on a Code of
>>>> Conduct for conferences. Frankly I was abhorred that such code was
>>>> deemed necessary. Until I realised that I was perhaps ignorant
>>>> (living in Amsterdam is such a privilege).
>>>>
>>>> Can I invite you to share your list-of-thoughts regarding potential
>
>>>> pitfalls for a Conference at least with me
>>>> (marcvloemans1[at]gmail.com <http://gmail.com>)? It would be such a
>
>>>> shame if we unintentionally overlook the obvious!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Marc Vloemans
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Op 30 mei 2016 om 03:49 heeft Andrea Ross <andrea.ross at eclipse.org>
>
>>>> het volgende geschreven:
>>>>
>>>>> Marc,
>>>>>
>>>>> I started to write a whole bunch of thoughts related to this but
>>>>> instead decided against as I felt it was stating the obvious and I
>
>>>>> didn't want the thoughts to be perceived as negative.
>>>>>
>>>>> The essence was that these things you have listed are great, and
>>>>> they help keep things from being screwed up, but they're not the
>>>>> hard work that it takes to really make a difference. So good, but
>>>>> so much more is needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrea
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28/05/16 11:26, Marc Vloemans wrote:
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To build upon the positive results as mentioned in the thread
>>>>>> below, I invite anyone to supply any suggestion that may support
>>>>>> the LOC FOSS4G 2016 in Bonn Germany, regarding diversity related
>>>>>> policies during the actual Conference. Either directly to me or
>>>>>> via this list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As LOC we strive to be aware that public policies and personal
>>>>>> experiences vary per continent, region, country and/or province.
>>>>>> However, living in Western-Europe we sometimes are unaware how
>>>>>> fortunate we are! That could hinder us in anticipating potential
>>>>>> fears, uncertainties and doubts that visitors to Bonn may have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For starters, please note the following from
>>>>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Germany :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Germany has become the first country in Europe to enact a law
>>>>>> that allows German citizens to choose to neither identify as male
>
>>>>>> or female on their birth certificate, which has been said to
>>>>>> specifically benefit hermaphrodites
>>>>>> <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermaphrodites> and intersex
>>>>>> <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex> persons."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately same sex marriage is still 'under construction',
>but
>>>>>> that does not reflect negatively on a number of laws protecting
>>>>>> the rights of the LGBTI community (including registered
>partnership).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards and hopefully we meet in Bonn,
>>>>>> Marc Vloemans
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vriendelijke groet,
>>>>>> Marc Vloemans
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Op 28 mei 2016 om 03:04 heeft Andrea Ross
>>>>>> <andrea.ross at eclipse.org> het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Kristin, Everyone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The sex/gender split was similar for FOSS4G NA 2016 as FOSS4G NA
>
>>>>>>> 2015. In the range of 25 to 30 percent women for both speakers
>>>>>>> and attendees. We don't ask people their gender as part of
>>>>>>> submitting or registering, so this is obviously a best effort
>>>>>>> from having met a number of folks, and discretely
>Google-stalking
>>>>>>> them just a little.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We probably had a record high number of trans people
>participate,
>>>>>>> despite North Carolina's HB2. Also because of HB2, many LGBT
>>>>>>> people reached out to me before the conference to understand
>what
>>>>>>> was being done, and to help decide whether to boycott or not. We
>
>>>>>>> are so grateful that so many did not boycott, and came anyway.
>It
>>>>>>> was a moving experience for me to learn how big the LGBT part of
>
>>>>>>> the community is and get a bit of the sense of how important the
>
>>>>>>> work they're doing is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, I want to call out the exemplary work of the Raleigh
>>>>>>> Convention Center. They really went above and beyond to ensure
>>>>>>> our attendees were safe and comfortable. So far as I know, there
>
>>>>>>> were zero instances of harassment of LGBT people. Laurie Okun
>>>>>>> from the Convention Center in particular was a superstar and so
>>>>>>> impressive & professional from our first contact when trying to
>>>>>>> assess Raleigh, through the chaos that HB2 inflicted, and to the
>
>>>>>>> post-conference follow-up. We are grateful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So many good things to note. I also want to note that it is
>still
>>>>>>> a mostly white conference. So the job is not done, and there's
>>>>>>> still much more important work to be done.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrea
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 27/05/16 17:28, Kristin Bott wrote:
>>>>>>>> Thanks for sharing the synopsis; I'm especially encouraged by
>>>>>>>> (1) gender (identity) parity in the planning committee (2)
>>>>>>>> strong presence of female-identifying folk at the conference
>and
>>>>>>>> (3) continued financial support for attendees.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd be curious what the gender split was across attendees v.
>>>>>>>> speakers -- possibly something worth tracking across years of
>>>>>>>> conferences to get a sense of any shifts in attendee
>demographics.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> cheers -
>>>>>>>> -k.bott
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mark Lucas <mlucas17 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I had the pleasure of serving as the OSGeo representative
>>>>>>>> for the 2016 FOSS4G NA conference selection and planning.
>I
>>>>>>>> thought the team did an excellent job in selecting,
>planning
>>>>>>>> and running the conference. The team made the decision to
>>>>>>>> not pursue a 2017 NA conference so as not to compete for
>>>>>>>> resources with the OSGeo international conference. Our
>>>>>>>> efforts will focus on 2018 planning and selection for the
>>>>>>>> next NA regional conference.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On a personal note I was initially concerned about how the
>>>>>>>> relationship with Location Tech and OSGeo would evolve.
>Our
>>>>>>>> teaming has resulted in yet another successful conference
>>>>>>>> that I believe plays to the strengths of both
>>>>>>>> organizations. I was very pleased with the openness and
>>>>>>>> collaboration that I witnessed.
>>>>>>>> — Mark
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The synopsis from Andrea Ross is included below:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FOSS4G NA 2016 Synopsis (please feel free to re-use this
>data)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> The conference ran from May 2-5, at the Raleigh
>>>>>>>> Convention Center, in Raleigh North Carolina. The code
>>>>>>>> sprint & unconference ran May 6 & 7 at Red Hat’s
>>>>>>>> headquarters, a few blocks from the convention center.
>A
>>>>>>>> Tour of the NCSU OSGeo Research and Education lab took
>>>>>>>> place on May 6th.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> The conference featured 1 day of workshops, 3 days of
>>>>>>>> sessions, a code sprint, an unconference, and social
>>>>>>>> events every night. There were 93 full length (35
>>>>>>>> minute) sessions, 36 short length (15 minute) sessions,
>>>>>>>> 10 workshops, and 3 keynotes. This represented an
>>>>>>>> increase in full length. The rooms were generally
>always
>>>>>>>> near full or slightly overflowing for particularly
>>>>>>>> popular talks, despite them being big rooms.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> The conference grew by 33% . There were 558 attendees.
>>>>>>>> This level of increase is very positive, when so many
>>>>>>>> other conferences are in decline.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> Like 2015’s team, 50% of the 2016 committee were women.
>>>>>>>> Also like 2015, a significant proportion of speakers
>and
>>>>>>>> attendees were women (in the 30% range), which is great
>>>>>>>> to see.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> 23 people were at the conference who wouldn't have
>>>>>>>> otherwise been without the financial support we gave
>them.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> From the attendee survey, people were clearly thrilled
>>>>>>>> about the conference... 99% positive feedback. (n=102).
>>>>>>>> The one negative response said they were disappointed
>>>>>>>> there was no lunch served. We’re not sure how they
>>>>>>>> missed it! The venue, the strong program, and the
>>>>>>>> positive & supportive atmosphere were the things people
>>>>>>>> commented (positively) on most.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> People loved the keynotes, and especially Tamar Cohen's
>>>>>>>> entitled Extreme Mapping.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> The video recordings of sessions are being uploaded to
>>>>>>>> Youtube, with dozens up, and more each day.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> 90% of sponsors rated the value excellent. 10% rated it
>>>>>>>> very good. The layout of the conference was especially
>>>>>>>> appreciated as it meant plenty of traffic for sponsors
>>>>>>>> at all times.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This year’s conference was produced by Andrea Ross and the
>>>>>>>> team at the Eclipse Foundation, the same as 2015. Sarah
>>>>>>>> Cordivano served as Community Chair. Rob Emanuele was
>>>>>>>> Program Committee Chair, repeating the same role he
>>>>>>>> performed in 2015.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cameron Shorter,
>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>>> LISAsoft
>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>>
>>> P +61 2 9009 5000, Wwww.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>--
>Cameron Shorter,
>Software and Data Solutions Manager
>LISAsoft
>Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>
>P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20160530/00cbaa3d/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list