Dear Ross, Thanks for this - let me unpack it a little:
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org> wrote: > This information you request can be harvested, but it takes time, a very > precious commodity. The information may already be published somewhere > publicly (someone may point us in the right direction if they are still > reading). > Being able to generate this type of data may be useful for managing lists in general - as ever, my focus here is on process - i.e how is the rolling of one list into another being done - and so is a process that is likely to come up again and again as projects get rolled into other projects, activities get rolled into other activities, resources get rolled into other resources. So the question of how something gets "rolled" into something else, and the example here of what this has entailed in practice, may well have an effect on morale and motivation beyond the immediate circumstance. As such, it is important that the process is taken seriously as a process in and of itself, so others in line for being "rolled" at some point can reassure themselves that if this happens to them, the process can be trusted if not whoever happens to be in charge of that process when the time comes. At present, this specific instance of how women@ is being "rolled" into d...@community, is setting a precedent as we speak, so lets try setting as good a precedent as we possibly can, because we may not be here a next time round to help with due diligence of process, and this archive may be the only thing that others will have to refer back to as one of the key examples of accepted practice that it may become. > If your concern is about a lack of support for women in the ASF then please > understand this change gives a proper home for activities in support of all > participants in the ASF. > Am all for supporting all participants, whether they happen to be categorised as "women" or not - hence my proposal for womAn@ > I would like to make a suggestion. Why not help us celebrate the success > of women here in the ASF. Here at comdev we'd be really happy to publish a > blog item on the increasing importance of women here at the ASF. > A blog item is not going stop the discerning visitor from reviewing the published archives for themselves - if you practice what you aspire to practicing, it should be self evident from each and every conversation we have with eachother - and if something else is evident from that, then how about we try seeing that for ourselves first? > A little research into the achievements of women here in the ASF would, in > my opinion, produce very positive results. I'm sure folk here will be happy > to help with thus kind of activity, as long as you are willing to produce > something of us to us, such as a celebratory blog post. > Let's see what a diagnostic tool like womAn@ throws up and take it from there. You may like what you find, and then again, you may not. But that's the nature of curiousity-driven work in contrast, perhaps, to some hired consultant or PR agent that may be inclined to give you what they are being paid for. Nobody's being paid for this one, and likely there'll be no thanks for it either, let alone point scoring against the prevailing form of meritocracy - positive, or otherwise. > I think the ASF can be very proud of the many women who are driving our > projects and foundation forward. Let's not waste time on an activity which > we have decided was not working and instead celebrate and learn from the > activities that are working. > Including womAn@ - if only a proposal for now ;-) Best, A PS - forgive me for cross-posting to women@ - am still hoping that some may be persuaded to give d...@community a go as we continue to talk through what may otherwise be rendered missed understandings only. > > Sent from my mobile device. > > On 31 Jul 2010, at 09:19, Anjana G Bhattacharjee < > a.g.bhattachar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Jean, > > > > Thanks for replying to this here at women@ - the post was in response to > a > > message posted to women@ only, and so technically, my reply was > necessarily > > in response to the post at women@ and then cross-posted to d...@community > , > > rather than vice versa, with all due respect ;-) > > > > Am conscious that there may be subscribers to women@ that have yet to > decide > > whether or not to bother subscribing to d...@community at this stage, > > although may yet decide to do so as we speak. > > > > So just to check: > > > > 1. As moderator for this women@ list, do you know how many subscribers > to > > women@ there are in total as at today? > > 2. Can you tell how many are currently subscribers to both women@ and > > d...@community? And so can you work out how many subscribers will no > > longer be subscribed to either list if women@ were to be closed today? > > 3. Would you then be able to compare this number to a possibly > different > > number in, say, 7 days time? > > > > Best, A > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Jean T. Anderson <j...@bristowhill.com > >wrote: > > > >> Anjana G Bhattacharjee wrote: > >> > >> <snip/> > >> > >> Have just come across a curious parallel to this, perhaps, in the arena > of > >>> Golf tournament sponsorship - IBM sponsored "the Masters" (i.e. men's > >>> only) > >>> tournament in April this year with a flurry of justification [1] whilst > >>> this > >>> weekend's "Women's British Open" was left to its own devices, albeit > >>> rather > >>> carefully done imho [2] > >>> > >>> The equivalent explanation wanting here, therefore, is why IBM would > >>> sponsor > >>> the Masters whilst missing the "gender balancing" [3] opportunity to > >>> sponsor > >>> both for possibly marginal marginal cost afaik given the relevant > >>> technologies would already have been tried and tested by then? > >>> > >>> More generally, what does "sponsorship" mean for a corporate like IBM > in > >>> this case - and what could it mean a next time around? Specifically, a > >>> next > >>> time around with regards open community development? For example, could > HP > >>> be our Ricoh? > >>> > >>> > >> > >> I doubt there's anyone subscribed to these apache lists who can speak on > >> behalf of IBM -- or any other company, for that matter. I did a quick > search > >> at www.ibm.com and a better option might be for you to check the > resources > >> at http://www.ibm.com/diversity. There might be somebody you can > contact > >> with your questions/concerns. > >> > >> Please stop cross-posting to wo...@. Once somebody on the > infrastructure > >> team frees up time to take care of > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2883 , posts to wo...@will > >> start auto-responding with a message to subscribe to > d...@communityinstead. It would be confusing for a conversation on > wo...@to stop midway, so best to keep the conversations moving forward > entirely on > >> d...@community. > >> > >> That much said, I left women@ on this reply deliberately as a reminder > to > >> women@ subscribers that it will stop accepting posts sometime soon -- > we > >> don't know exactly when. So please subscribe to > d...@community.instructions are at > >> http://community.apache.org. > >> > >> regards, > >> > >> -jean > >> > >> <snip/> > >> > >> [1] > >>> > >>> > http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/040610-ibm--the-masters-technology.html > >>> [2] http://www.ricohwomensbritishopen.com/Ricoh.aspx > >>> [3] > >>> > >>> > http://www.openworldforum.org/attend/agenda/diversity-summit-why-women-matter > >>> [4] http://www.rydercup.com/2010/ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> >
