Merit’s a tricky concept because it’s subjective. It’s been used to keep
various underrepresented groups out for quite a long time. You see this coming
out of studies where they change the names on resumes and measure the response
rate and things like that. You also see it in differences in performance
reviews for people doing similar jobs but differing in gender or race.
Sometimes to fix a broken thing you need a blunt instrument.
Nobody wants (or wants to be) the token anything but by forcing people to look
outside the box they’re used to you can get them to reevaluate, thus quotas can
become a transitional tool. Alternatively you do things like forcing first
rounds of review to be anonymous. All you get is the resume. That’s a bit hard
to do in a group like this where a lot of people will be able to piece together
who someone is based on their work history. I do know of some conferences that
do a blind review round for proposals so that all they see is the proposal and
anyone who actually knows the person behind it recuses themselves from that
round. Once the first round of review is done then the names are revealed. This
is done partly to ensure that people don’t get in on name recognition alone but
also to ensure that the reviewers review the content first and avoid any
entanglement with any biases they have (because we all have them).
I suspect what people are asking for here isn’t a quota and it certainly isn’t
appointing people based on anything other than their ability to be an effective
board member. What it often means is requiring that people actively look for
people who don’t fit the usual mould. Requiring people to actually look for
people who aren’t male, or aren’t white, or whatever doesn’t mean compromising
on anything, it just means requiring them to work a bit harder to achieve a
better outcome for everyone. It genuinely is a better outcome, too. The
healthiest and most vibrant communities I’ve seen are the ones that have
diverse and inclusive memberships. In fact they tend to be even better at
lifting people up and helping them develop which only makes them more
sustainable in the long run.
As I said above, knee-jerk responses to the notion that we might do something
aren’t useful. Constructive responses are better. If you don’t like quotas,
suggesting alternative ways to increase the representation of underrepresented
groups on the board (and in the community!) would be useful. If you don’t like
codes of conduct, offer an alternative that addresses the behavioural issues
that have been raised. Don’t just regurgitate the same tired rants that we’ve
all heard before because that adds nothing.
If you really want to do something constructive, go find the most talented,
most able woman in the industry you can think of and see if she’d be interested
in joining the AusNOG board. That way it’s not a quota thing and everyone’s
happy, right?
Cheers,
Benno.
> On 3 Oct 2018, at 13:29, James Troy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Benno,
> As I mentioned on the backlash – here it is…
>
> You see my response as not very positive or helpful – I think that is quite
> sad really.
>
> “White dude” – well ½ of that is right… I am actually TSI. I would NEVER want
> to be selected/hired/elected based on this. To the point its why I never
> include it on any application forms, not because im ashamed of who am I, but
> because I want to be selected on merit…
>
> The difference between my post and Mark’s post was he was offering help to
> the victim, I am offering my thought/advice on a selection/election to a
> board. I can see how you got these confused.
>
> I really hope there is full representation on any board, job, industry, etc.
> I guess I wasn’t clear enough the first time – Do it on merit. If that means
> on my next job interview I get pipped at the post by a more qualified
> female/different ethnicity/religion person/pigeon then great. Its what I
> want. Equality – real equality; not the quota kind.
>
> James Troy
> Senior Systems Administration
>
>
> From: AusNOG <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Benno Rice
> Sent: Wednesday, 3 October 2018 1:21 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Sexual harassment in our industry.
>
> So I, too, am a lurker on this list. Hell, I don’t even run any networks
> besides my home one, haven’t done for ages.
>
> That said I, too, have been watching this with interest and I’ve seen two
> responses, well one response, and one class of responses, that I find
> interesting.
>
> On the one hand, you’ve got stuff like James here. James is running the exact
> same set of arguments that you normally get from, generally, white dudes that
> feel threatened by any attempt to address the systemic problems we have in
> society in general and tech in particular. Yes, yes I know they don’t believe
> that those problems are there but, well, whatever. I saw similar from Noel
> Butler and from Matthew Young up-thread. All of these tend to come across as
> a knee-jerk reaction against the notion that we might actually do something.
>
> On the other hand we had Mark Newton’s “What I can do to help.” post. Instead
> of a knee-jerk reaction against doing something, he put forward a completely
> reasonable set of steps that he promised to do if someone were to come
> forward. Hell, his set of steps form a pretty good basis for the enforcement
> process of a Code of Conduct.
>
> One of these messages was positive and valuable. The others were very much
> not.
>
> Cheers,
> Benno.
>
>
>> On 3 Oct 2018, at 12:57, James Troy <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Ive long been a member of Ausnog mailing list, I find the information that
>> is often posted here to be quite valuable; I have also been watching this
>> thread with a particular keen interest.
>>
>> Particularly as I was waiting to see how long the #MeToo and ‘gender
>> diversity’ was going to get pushed.
>>
>> Firstly let me say, any assault, sexual or otherwise is not acceptable. Yes
>> IT as an industry is over-represented by males; however to second you start
>> to include someone in something like a board selection based solely on their
>> genitalia is the second you loose any credibility. I wholy subscribe to the
>> idea of the ‘best person for the job’
>>
>> If that means 25% of one gender and 75% of another then fine, they are all
>> selected on their merits.
>>
>> Anything short of selection based on merits (ie: Gender) opens an entirely
>> different can. Ie: is there someone of
>> Asian/African/Australia/aboriginal/TSI background? No? wow wouldn’t that be
>> racist?
>>
>> Suddenly people talk gender and its acceptable.
>>
>> I believe that IT, Along with many industries still has a long way to go to
>> be fully inclusive of all participants, regardless of
>> race/religion/gender/background – but selection based on gender,
>> percentages, inclusion policies is _not_ the way to get the recognition that
>> some hard-working people deserve. If I worked in a female dominated industry
>> (teaching, midwifery, childcare, etc) I would want to be selected for
>> something like this based on my work ethics, input, and recognition – not
>> simply to be the token male.
>>
>> We as an industry – and as humans – should be there to support our
>> colleagues when they get targeted and victimised, however I also agree that
>> if an accusation is made, and reported to the ‘other company’ then it should
>> also be accompanied with proof – too often we are seeing the #MeToo being
>> used as a weapon to destroy people – predominately men – without a shread of
>> proof.
>>
>> I do however agree that an ausnog post is not the correct forum for that
>> proof and that is best handled between the direct parties – it was suggested
>> at the CEO level – this protects the victim, the *Alleged* (I use this term
>> deliberately as until it is proof we have due process – innocent until
>> PROVEN guilty – same as the media reporting on items that are before the
>> courts.) aggressor until a chain of evidence can be established and only
>> then actioned upon.
>>
>> Im sure I will cop back-lash on this, virtue signalling and all…
>>
>> James Troy
>> Senior Systems Administration
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: AusNOG <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of dusty
>> Sent: Wednesday, 3 October 2018 12:33 PM
>> To: Matthew Young <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> List <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Sexual harassment in our industry.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 at 14:59, Matthew Young <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> “While we're at it though, there needs to be female representation on the
>>> Ausnog board.”
>>> People should be appointed based on their merits, not based on their gender.
>>
>> Show me a man with a bias-free recruitment/selection process, and I’ll show
>> you a deluded patriarchal fool.
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: AusNOG [mailto:[email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Paul Wilkins
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 2 October 2018 5:50 PM
>>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> List <[email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Sexual harassment in our industry.
>>>
>>> "Seems you've never been to a meeting."
>>>
>>> The verity of this statement cannot be overexaggerated.
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul Wilkins
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 17:42, Mark Smith <[email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 16:50, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > The need for a Code of Conduct has been raised and it's a good point.
>>>> >
>>>> > While we're at it though, there needs to be female representation on the
>>>> > Ausnog board. I see where there's 5 directors been appointed, and
>>>> > they're all men. I'm wondering who is doing the appointing.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Seems you've never been to a meeting. That's covered in the closing
>>>> session.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > That they couldn't find a woman up to the required standard gives rise
>>>> > to an unfortunate impression of the board acting as a boy's club.
>>>> >
>>>> > Kind regards
>>>> >
>>>> > Paul Wilkins
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 16:10, David Hughes <[email protected]
>>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We thank Bevan for raising this important issue and bringing it to our
>>>> >> attention.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> This is a complex situation and we take any allegation of this nature
>>>> >> very seriously. We hope to discuss this further with those concerned
>>>> >> in an attempt to establish specifics, while maintaining the
>>>> >> confidentiality of all parties. If there are any actionable details we
>>>> >> will offer assistance to the party involved if they wish to escalate
>>>> >> the matter further.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Even though issues regarding the behaviour of delegates at our events
>>>> >> have never been raised with us, we want our attendees to feel safe and
>>>> >> supported. We have commenced a review of policies and processes from
>>>> >> other organisations and will work with our solicitors to draft a policy
>>>> >> suitable for AusNOG events and mailing lists.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The organisers of AusNOG believe that behaviour of this nature is not
>>>> >> acceptable at any conference, function, or workplace in our industry.
>>>> >> We will attempt to engage the leaders of our industry to push for a
>>>> >> broader solution.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> David - on behalf of the AusNOG Board
>>>> >> ...
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> AusNOG mailing list
>>>> >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> >> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>> >> <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > AusNOG mailing list
>>>> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>> > <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>> <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>> <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
