[FOSS4G-Oceania] Motion: extended, targeted call for papers if needed

[adam steer]

I think Sarah has some great points. We can be brave and say ‘well, we
didn’t get what we expect, so we have N slots available for a round 2 CFP,
which is open only for women’

The strategy we would employ is this:

- Open a second call for papers, be open about our failure to attract a
speaker cohort that reflects the community in the first round.
- As Sarah suggested, specify how many speaker slots we would make
available for this round
- As Sarah suggested, make first round community results available at the
same time to inform second round voters**

How would we mitigate against delays? Squish everything a bit timewise. I
mean the community voting round is really long - we could examine first
week results and see what our mix would be if we made a call based purely
on that. And the second vote needs only be a week long.

If we acted *now*, we’d be able to reduce time delays to a few days or a
week, which is OK in my mind.

What do the women on this list feel about being focussed on as per a
specific CFP and community vote?

**We could further restrict the vote to women - talks by women, for women?
Why not? effectively we arguably right now have talks by men for men :D

Yes, it’s unfair. It’s also unfair to not be able to walk the streets of
Dar Es Salaam (or any city) safely on your own; it’s unfair to be told what
you’re interested in; and many other things. Forum panels etc are great -
but talking is one thing; and we need to *do*.

Cheers

Adam






On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 at 08:10, John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:

> So, I don't want to just drop this topic, but I'm not seeing a clear &
> actionable motion out of this. Adam, I understand you're pushing for an
> extended CFP, but I think we need more clarity on exactly what actions are
> being proposed, and how they could result in a different outcome than what
> we already have.
>
> Before I personally vote for such an action, I'd want to know what
> strategies we'd be employing, beyond what we've already done, to strive for
> a better outcome.
>
> A separate community vote is easy to set up, but I don't think I'm in
> favour, I feel it draws a lot of attention to a very small number of people
> who might be uncomfortable being identified as a special group.
>
> Also, there are timelines in place (for selections, publishing program,
> etc), changing them has knock-on effects, I'm not opposed to adjusting but
> a motion to produce an extended CFP will require us to take a look at these.
>
> _______________________________________________
> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>


-- 
Adam Steer
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer
http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0046-7236
+61 427 091 712
skype: adam.d.steer
tweet: @adamdsteer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g-oceania/attachments/20180907/502ade20/attachment-0001.html>