 |
 |
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