[Osmf-talk] Reaching out and diversity (Was: Re: AGM and board elections)

[Randy Meech]

In the last hour I've heard directly from two women who have seen this
& specifically said they don't feel comfortable here.

One says: "Can you send a message that some women purposefully don't
join certain communication channels because of the vitriolic and
ineffectual reputation of them (OSMF/talk and irc). We may not be
leaving completely, but I definitely have no interest in talking with
them."

So regarding toxicity, any interest in working on that from a
leadership perspective, or no not really? I think if we can't see the
problem with this thread it's going to be difficult.

-Randy

On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Randy Meech <randy.meech at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 28, 2014 2:35 PM, "Frederik Ramm" <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>> Frankly, I found this thread, and indeed *anything* said on this mailing
>> list in the last couple of months that I recall, to be far from "toxic".
>
> Kathleen joined the group, gave a number of examples of what sexism in OSM
> looks like as requested by others on the list (despite Kate's sound
> explanations of why that's risky), and made some suggestions. The *board
> chair* replies, immediately criticizes her use of mailing list etiquette,
> makes an ad hominem argument because she's from the US, is combative and
> basically ignores her suggestions.
>
> We can debate the definition of "toxic," but this is at the very least poor
> and destructive leadership. Coming from the top, it has a big impact. If I
> were Kathleen, I wouldn't stick around. And that's what happens: no one
> calls it out (even I have a hard time writing this), people leave, and then
> people wonder why there's a diversity problem. The people who remain and see
> no problems elect boards like this and it goes on and on.
>
>> It is difficult for me to understand how people can make a case for
>> including more and different people in the project and at the very same
>> time be so inconsiderate to those that are already here it almost sounds
>> they'd like them gone.
>>
>> Or did I misread your comment?
>
> Yes and no: I absolutely think there should be leadership changes and some
> people in boards seats should lose them as the leadership here is honestly
> poor for such an important project.
>
> But no, people shouldn't leave OSM or the OSMF, those should be bigger and
> include many more people and things will take care of themselves. Let's
> start with engaging current OSM users. Part of the problem here is the
> protected smallness and isolated nature of the foundation, which I sometimes
> suspect to be intentional.
>
> -Randy