+1

On Nov 15, 2016 9:18 AM, "Akerman, Laura" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> +1
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Kim, Bohyun
> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 12:09 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Post-election statement affirming diversity from
> Code4Lib?
>
> That’s great points, thanks for sharing. I totally agree with you and love
> your last paragraph!
>
> We need to make these statements as public and as wide spread as possible.
> We need to stand up for our community values of inclusion, equity, and
> diversity, and we need to be clear about the economic impact we, as a
> community, have on the cities we visit each and every year.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Bohyun
>
>
> On 11/15/16, 11:53 AM, "Code for Libraries on behalf of Tim McGeary" <
> [log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>     I will add something to the question about the Teeth to the
> statement.  One
>     way to do that is to also indicate that Cod4Lib will not accept any
>     proposals for hosting from states or municipalities that cannot
> support the
>     Code of Conduct policy.
>
>     As a real-world example, I co-chaired the hosting of Code4Lib in
> Raleigh in
>     2014.  Based on that success, we submitted a very competitive bid to
> host
>     Open Repositories in 2017, which was awarded to Australia, since it has
>     been so long since it was outside of North America or Europe.  But the
>     North Carolina Legislature rammed through HB2 right after our bid
> lost. Had
>     we won that bid, we likely would have had to give up hosting OR 2017.
>
>     I would love to host Code4Lib again or Open Repositories, but I cannot
> in
>     good conscience lead a proposal submission without the communities full
>     support, and given that HB2 still exists in North Carolina, I do not
> want
>     to ask either the Code4Lib or OR communities to compromise on the code
> of
>     conduct.  More importantly, I've asked the OR Steering Committee to be
> VERY
>     PUBLIC with their statement.  Code4Lib brings in $250,000 - $500,000 of
>     economic transactions, depending on the locality.  Open Repositories is
>     $500,000 - $750,000.  That is REAL money lost to a community and their
>     businesses.  The City of Durham, while one of the most inclusive
> cities I
>     have ever lived in, loses out.
>
>     We need to make these statements as public and as wide spread as
> possible.
>     We need to stand up for our community values of inclusion, equity, and
>     diversity, and we need to be clear about the economic impact we, as a
>     community, have on the cities we visit each and every year.
>
>     Tim
>
>     On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Kim, Bohyun <
> [log in to unmask]>
>     wrote:
>
>     > Great, I will submit a pull request later today with a starting doc
> with
>     > some wording that we can collectively edit and develop with the
> reference
>     > to our CoC - definitely a good starting point!
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     > Bohyun
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > > On Nov 15, 2016, at 10:35 AM, Richmond,Ian <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>     > >
>     > > The Code of Conduct seems to have a lot of teeth expressly covers
> who
>     > can help and sanction, and includes many levels of escalation.
> Though much
>     > of it is oriented to a conference setting, I think it would be a
> good base
>     > to reinforce.  Maybe some words about it and a link to the policy?
>     > >
>     > > --Ian Richmond
>     > >
>     > > -----Original Message-----
>     > > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of
>     > Collier, Aaron
>     > > Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 7:34 PM
>     > > To: [log in to unmask]
>     > > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Post-election statement affirming
> diversity from
>     > Code4Lib?
>     > >
>     > > We do have a Code of Conduct: https://github.com/code4lib/
>     > antiharassment-policy/blob/master/code_of_conduct.md
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > So possibly something that reinforces that would be useful.
>     > >
>     > > -----Original Message-----
>     > > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of
>     > Patrick Murray-John
>     > > Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 4:14 PM
>     > > To: [log in to unmask]
>     > > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Post-election statement affirming
> diversity from
>     > Code4Lib?
>     > >
>     > > I'm very much a reader/lurker on this list, so I don't know much
> about
>     > the bigger structures.
>     > >
>     > > I'm very much in favor of a statement along these lines.
>     > >
>     > > My question is about the teeth to it. When we look to who it will
> come
>     > from, do they have the ability to kick offenders off the list, or
> some
>     > other mechanism of response? Action seems to be needed now, and so in
>     > addition to a statement, I'd like to see behavior contrary to the
> statement
>     > having visible consequences. I think that'd add significance to
> whatever
>     > statement appears.
>     > >
>     > > Patrick Murray-John
>     > >
>     > >> On 11/14/2016 06:00 PM, Tara Wood wrote:
>     > >> Absolutely!
>     > >>
>     > >> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Salazar, Christina <
>     > >> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>     > >>
>     > >>> So can we see the samples - LITA's and NMRT's? And I'm also
> wondering
>     > >>> who will be responsible for sending it out (i.e., who will it
> "come
>     > >>> from") - C4L's "organization" being such that it is.
>     > >>> Christina Salazar
>     > >>> Broome Library
>     > >>> CSU Channel Islands
>     > >>> (PS I live in California where our Senate President Pro Tem and
>     > >>> Assembly Speaker made a statement in regards to the US's current
>     > >>> political situation, and their statement kept me personally from
>     > >>> TOTALLY losing it. I believe a statement will make clear what
>     > >>> otherwise might be an unknown for
>     > >>> some.)
>     > >>>
>     > >>> -----Original Message-----
>     > >>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf
>     > >>> Of Kim, Bohyun
>     > >>> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 1:05 PM
>     > >>> To: [log in to unmask]
>     > >>> Subject: [CODE4LIB] Post-election statement affirming diversity
> from
>     > >>> Code4Lib?
>     > >>>
>     > >>> Hi Code4Libbers,
>     > >>>
>     > >>> What do you think about issuing a post-election statement on
>     > >>> diversity basically affirming that we stand by it?
>     > >>>
>     > >>> If that _IS_ the majority opinion in Code4Lib which I am
> _POSITIVE_
>     > >>> that it is, then I want to hear it and I think others may well!
>     > >>>
>     > >>> I just drafted one for LITA (to be out tomorrow hopefully). So I
> have
>     > >>> some wordings that I can offer as a starting point.
>     > >>>
>     > >>> Thoughts?
>     > >>>
>     > >>> Thanks,
>     > >>> Bohyun
>     > >>>
>     > >>>
>     > >>
>     >
>
>
>
>     --
>     Tim McGeary
>     [log in to unmask]
>     GTalk/Yahoo/Skype/Twitter: timmcgeary
>     484-294-7660 (Google Voice)
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
> the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
> information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
> prohibited.
>
> If you have received this message in error, please contact
> the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
> original message (including attachments).
>