 |
 |
That sounds like a good option as well. My suggestion was just a suggestion. If we have numbers we want to meet, though, on any diversity axis you choose, then I think we ought to be explicit with those numbers and to take concrete action to achieve them. Besides the scholarships, there hasn't been much action. There's mostly just been perennial hand wringing. I think we can approximate how serious the community is about these issues by observing the amount of action, not the amount of talk. /dev On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > It seems to me that the most effective way to diversify the audience would > be to diversify the program. > > -Ross. > > On Nov 27, 2012, at 10:46 AM, Devon <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > If the numbers are not what we want them to be, if the percentage has > plateaued > > or regressed, then I don't think it's enough to be merely concerned, even > > if we're extremely concerned. There are actions we can take to make sure > > the numbers are exactly what we want them be, or very close. For > instance, > > we can make it so that a male registration opens up for each female that > > registers. That may be difficult for Francis to make happen for this > year, > > but we should consider making it a requirement for future organizers. > > > > /dev > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > > >> On Nov 27, 2012, at 10:03 AM, Chad Nelson <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> > >>> Rosalyn, > >>> > >>> If we are only 17% women, when we are subset of the broader Library > >>> community, which is majority women, then we are doing something wrong. > >> And > >>> that deeper question, what do we need to do to encourage more women to > >>> participate in the community, to make the community as a whole > appealing > >>> and safe, is the question I am really asking. > >>> > >> > >> I'm not entirely sure I agree with this. The issue is less about where > >> the number is now than where it's going (and how quickly). > >> > >> Is our (completely hypothetical) 17% up from 2006 (or whenever), when > >> Code4lib started? If so, then I'm less inclined to panic about the > >> statistics and just continue working towards making the community > amenable > >> to more groups. > >> > >> If it has plateaued or regressed, then, yes, we need to be extremely > >> concerned. > >> > >> -Ross. > >> > >>> Chad > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Rosalyn Metz <[log in to unmask]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I think first we would need to do a survey of how many women are in > the > >>>> community. if it turns out that this community is only 17% women then > >>>> we're on target. who knows, maybe we're actually 10% women and we're > >> way > >>>> above target. in which case the real question might be "how do we get > >> more > >>>> women in tech." > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Chad Nelson <[log in to unmask]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Ooops. Hit the wrong key. > >>>>> > >>>>> So, about our presenters... > >>>>> > >>>>> Is it a problem that only 4 of our 33 presenters are women? Or that > >> only > >>>> 16 > >>>>> of 95 proposers were women? > >>>>> > >>>>> Is there something this community needs to do to encourage more women > >> to > >>>>> feel like they can and should speak / propose sessions? > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Sent from my GMail account. > -- Sent from my GMail account.