Just to say that the IRC channel has taken off nicely, so my questions 
here about "venues" are deferred for now.

kc

On 12/7/12 12:12 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> I agree. Everyone gets to have their opinions.
>
> So, in terms of a place to set up a discussion about (or of, I don't 
> remember the wording) women in code4lib or even just women and code, 
> the places I'm aware of that might work are:
>
> Google+
> Google Groups
> an email list (not my favorite)
> IRC
>
> However, I'm probably the least knowledgeable of most people here 
> about social software since I mostly don't participate. So I'm asking 
> for suggestions.
>
> kc
>
> On 12/7/12 10:03 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>> There being no rules about who can form a group does not mean there 
>> are no opinions about it, or that nobody should share an opinion.  
>> Just the opposite, the community defines itself by sharing opinions 
>> and discussing them, not by rules. There is no contradiction between 
>> thinking something is a bad idea and thinking it is not prohibited by 
>> any rules, I am surprised to find you astonished by it.
>>
>> Yes, you don't need permission, you can just do it. But people will 
>> have opinions about what you do, and they'll share them. That's how a 
>> community functions, no?   People are encouraged to float their ideas 
>> by the community and get community feedback and take that feedback 
>> into account -- but taking it into account doesn't mean you "have to" 
>> refrain from doing something if some people don't like it (especially 
>> when other people do), you can make your own decision.
>>
>> I'm not even going to talk about the particular plan here, because I 
>> think this general point is much more important.
>>
>> The idea that "rules" are the only thing that can or should guide's 
>> one course of action is absolutely antithetical to a well-functioning 
>> community, online or offline.  Thinking that either there should be a 
>> rule against something, or else nobody should resist or express 
>> opposition to anything that lacks a rule against it -- is a recipe 
>> for stultifying beuarocracy, not community.
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of 
>> Karen Coyle [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 12:50 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Question abt the code4libwomen idea
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> kc
>>
>> 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 a group.
>>>
>>> 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
>>> 805/437-3198
>>>
>>> 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 Bohyun Kim
>>> 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! :)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> ~Bohyun
>> -- 
>> Karen Coyle
>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet