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

[Simon Poole]

Randy

Given that you singled me out, I believe i should respond despite my
better judgement telling me that it likely not going to bring this
thread back to a reasoned discussion.

As to all the things you accused me off, I would suggest simply going
back and rereading my contributions simply at face value without over
interpreting the contents. I do apologize for being  rather grumpy about
the way I was quoted in Kathleens mail, I assume it was just an honest
mistake.

I said very early on we need to realize that we have a large range of
different culture groups, with all kinds of different discussion
cultures participating in OSM. It is simply an imperative to assume good
faith and accept the cultural bloopers and faux pas as they come. Given
that it is simply impossible to push all the right buttons of everybody
at the same time, there is always going to be friction in such a diverse
group. The alternative, everybody going back to their own cubby hole and
just communicating with their own group already happens far too much and
will not solve any of the issues that face us.

Yes, it is very unfortunate that we have members of the community that
believe that our communications channels are so hostile that they don't
dare participate.  But there is a big difference between reputation and
reality and in my experience the OSM channels are not half as bad as you
would assume from the negative marketing (note I'm discounting my
particularly thick skin in that).

Back to your general discontent with the board: somewhere in the
discussion you wished for a board more representative of the community.
Now while I don't believe that the board is necessarily a representative
body, at least not how it is currently set up, and would be completely
happy  with any board that gets the work done, you obviously have more
concrete ideas on what the make up of the board should be. It would be
interesting to hear from you what your ideas on that are.

Simon
 
Am 29.09.2014 01:51, schrieb 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
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20140929/c6212f3b/attachment.sig>