Tim Donohue <[log in to unmask]>
> However, I think some/many are taking offense to the implication that 
> 'libtechwomen' is discriminatory or prejudice against men or minority 
> groups just because its name includes "women". [...]
> To call a group discriminatory just because they initially planned to 
> concentrate on specific gender issues is just wrong (in my opinion). 

Whoa! Hang on a minute!  I don't think the name is great and I feel
that we could do better for a first support group, but I'm not
objecting to either of those.

It's not "just because" either of those and it's rather frustrating if
anyone still thinks it is.  (Similarly in the other email from Steve,
I never meant to suggest the "completely spurious" thing.)  My
objection arose because the opening post in this thread suggested it
would be discriminatory:
https://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1212&L=CODE4LIB&F=&S=&P=166649
described it as a "group for just women".

There are later emails which claim otherwise. twitter.com/libtechwomen
and http://libtechwomen.tumblr.com/ don't say either way, as far as
I can see (if you'll excuse the pun).  I don't really want to hop on
IRC and ask because of past bad experiences with a previous group.

Is there clarity that deliberately-discriminatory groups should have
no platform in code4lib?  And is it sure that libtechwomen is not the
aforementioned women-only group?

Thanks
-- 
MJ Ray <[log in to unmask]>
Setchey, Norfolk, England