"Code4lib appears to have no rules about who can and cannot form a group.
Therefore, if there are some folks who want a group, they should create
Joe Montibello, MLIS
Library Systems Manager
Dartmouth College Library
[log in to unmask]
On 12/7/12 12:50 PM, "Karen Coyle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Code4lib appears to have no rules about who can and cannot form a group.
>Therefore, if there are some folks who want a group, they should create
>that group. If it's successful, it's successful. If not, it'll fade away
>like so many start-up groups.
>I'm astonished at the resistance to the formation of a group on the part
>of people who also insist that there are no rules about forming groups.
>I don't recall that any other proposal to set up a group has met this
>kind of resistance. In fact, we were recently reminded that if you want
>something done in c4l you should just do it. There is no need to ask
>permission. So, do it.
>I think the only open question is: where? e.g. what platform?
>On 12/7/12 9:25 AM, Salazar, Christina wrote:
>> Hi Bohyun,
>> Thank you so much for raising this again. I'm still interested in such
>> I found the terminology "separate but equal" (that some on this list
>>chose to use as a reason not to do this) offensive; it was not at all
>>the spirit that I'd originally proposed and no one had suggested either
>>separate OR equal other than detractors. In fact I said that anyone
>>would be welcome. I completely agree with what you're saying about there
>>not being any reason why we women couldn't do both (I think we're
>>versatile that way). I'm pretty sure I vaguely recall (maybe) there
>>being some (similar) concerns about the local c4ls and I would say it's
>>very similar - no one says that just because a person finds say,
>>Appalachia.c4l useful, it detracts from the global c4l.
>> If I can find other women who are willing to work together as a women
>>in library technology/coder/whatever support group, I will work to make
>>something like this happen. As someone pointed out, we don't need
>>blessing from anyone.
>> If you will be there, I will look for you at the conference and we can
>>discuss further. If there are other women who are interested, go us.
>> Christina Salazar
>> Systems Librarian
>> John Spoor Broome Library
>> California State University, Channel Islands
>> p.s. Usual disclaimer about these opinions being my own and not
>>reflecting those of my workplace/employers.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 8:14 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [CODE4LIB] Question abt the code4libwomen idea
>> Hi all,
>> I might upset some people with this, but I wanted to bring up this
>>question. First, let me say that I think it is a terrific idea to have a
>>code4lib learning group with or without a mentoring program.
>> But from what I read from the listserv, it seemed to me that there were
>>interests in a space for women, NOT as a separate group from code4lib
>>BUT more as just a small support and discussion group for just women,
>>INSIDE the c4l community not OUTSIDE of it. (Like an IG inside LITA or
>>something like that...).
>> I just wanted to know if there are still women in code4lib who are
>>interested in this idea because gender-specific issues won't be
>>addressed by a code4lib learning group. (If this is the case, I am still
>>interested in participating, and I already set up #code4libwomen IRC
>>channel.) Or, do we think that the initial needs that led to the talk of
>>code4libwomen will be sufficiently met by having a learning group
>>instead? Personally, I don't see why we can have both code4libwomen and
>>code4liblearn inside code4lib if there are enough people who think that
>>these would make code4lib more useful to them and if this makes code4lib
>>serve more diverse interests of their members.
>> So I am looking forward to hearing form other women in c4l on this! :)
>[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net