Until this email chain, I hadn't seen the Outreachy thread. I must say that
I didn't see anything in what Niall wrote that suggested the SFC was
engaged in criminal activities. Rather, he suggested that what's acceptable
in the US is not acceptable elsewhere and that Boost should definitely
steer clear. He used more accusatory and less conciliatory phrasing, to be
sure, but I saw nothing outrageous.

What I find is that unless one chooses to interpret the email and posts
that one reads in the best possible way, one can find sinister
interpretations of most everything one reads. Niall has been guilty of that
and is frequently the subject of that issue.

As for the diversity issue, there's nothing about how Boost conducts itself
that is discriminatory, that I've ever seen. Societal pressures may well
dissuade women, for example, from getting involved with programming, but
why is that Boost's problem to solve?

Someone suggested Outreachy, and Niall quickly, and vehemently, disabused
the poster of thinking better of the program than he thought right. If
others think Niall has it wrong and wishes to defend the program and
encourage Boost's participation, they should do so. Instead, it seems
others could only complain about how he presented his opinion. The result,
it would seem, is to keep Boost out of Outreachy, as Niall intended.

On Sat, Aug 25, 2018, 7:21 PM <[email protected]> wrote:

> Niall is free to express his opinion. I'm just disappointed that no one
> from leadership thought it was worth replying to.
>
> How do you think Karen Sandler and Bradley Kuhn from the Software Freedom
> Conservancy, who have helped sustain Boost for the last decade+, and also
> happen to run Outreachy, feel about being accused, essentially, of being
> criminals.
>
> You are free to say whatever you wish. That doesn't mean you shouldn't try
> to be respectful to people you work with.
>
> On the actual subject matter: A few years ago I was unsure about these
> diversity programs. I felt that a pure merit-based approach was best, and
> that outreach for diversity should be done in other ways.
>
> The primary thing that changed my mind has been the fierceness with which
> some people oppose these programs and insist we do not have a diversity
> problem.
>
> I do not think sending a proposal to the Steering Committee is the correct
> way to evaluate a possible Outreachy program. I think it should be a
> community decision, which means it should be something discussed by the
> community and decided by consensus.
>
> Who is an administrator for the boost-dev list? My new email address
> [email protected] is not approved to post on boost-dev. I sent a
> reply last night which is in the moderation queue.
>
> --
> The Boost Steering Committee webpage:
> https://sites.google.com/a/boost.org/steering/
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Boost Steering Committee" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/boost-steering.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boost-steering/3b5b49df-b590-43a5-82db-5f51c326f834%40googlegroups.com
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
The Boost Steering Committee webpage: 
https://sites.google.com/a/boost.org/steering/
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Boost Steering Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/boost-steering.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/boost-steering/CAOxk40wBkTtDT2zyHz9yYcwtNEMjOKVmh8S3ySNbBCThqWzN%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to