+ ComDev Com Dev we intend to move the D&I responsibility to a separate Presidents committee. The outputs will be fully integrated with ComDev, but actions will be separate in order to allow a scalpel like approach independent of the broader interests of ComDev which should focus on all community, not just some.
I want to be very clear about why I phrase my request this way, and why I am sorting this move. I speak as the original VP of ComDev, past director and president, current EVP and, most importantly, white, middle aged and male, with a somewhat unique experience and over 30 years of advocacy for equality (including a politically and diversity motivated music career, living as part of a 3% minority, running a consultancy with a partner specializing in accessibility, dealing with D&I issues in my day job and my home life and generally being aware that despite all this I'm full of unconcious bias). I was the point of contact for the CoC here at the ASF for a number of years and as a result was involved with a number of cases, three of which involved law enforcement. I repeat, the of which involved law enforcement. What most people fail to understand is that there is a "build up" of isms. What might be small (like saying "you guys") is one droplet of "ism" that fills the pool that ultimately either drowns people or drives them away in self preservation. Most of the issues we have are droplets like this (though please remember three cases involved law enforcement). Very few of us, if any, are outright sexist or racist or "ableist". Yet the majority of us contribute, inadvertently, to the problem through unconscious bias. Nobody is asking us to be perfect. But we are asking for people to recognize they are imperfect. Just these discussions about the need for D&I are examples of the problem. ComDev should support the separation of the D&I initiative so that it can continue to focus on community all-up. D&I should be a Presidents committee where things can get done without participants having to face the pointless and endless discussions over whether there is even a problem. I know that's not how the Apache Way works, but we have precedence all over the place. The key is to ensure there is oversight to prevent overstepping. Even ComDev itself, which was set up to run GSoC engagements, ran for years as me being a BD organizing GSoC, otherwise we would have spent all the GSOC planning time arguing about how to evaluate projects and how the process is unfair. ComDev was created when I had solidified the process, not before. PR, which devolved into a shooting match unable to progress eventually became Sally and the board kicked everyone out and let Sally rebuild. ConCom also failed because of the noise. It took years of Rich being a BD before we got into a healthy state, even today with a committee, we have leads for each event. Legal, trademarks, finance - all are structured this way. All remain answerable to the board, sometimes via Prez, and thus the membership regardless of structure. 2015 was the first year I spoke about D&I as Prez. It was far too late. Others had been trying for years. I considered the fact that I would be attacked for doing it (and I was). I did it anyway (and I was right to do so). Since then we've done alot, but not enough. Time to step up or get out of the way. I welcome oversight, I reject obstructionist behavior. ComDev please acknowledge we need to spin the D&I effort off. We need to empower the creation of finely tuned activities to help our communities understand this space. We need that to be a part - of the broader ComDev effort, but it should not be subject to the unconscious bias of the majority, like me. Ross Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> ________________________________ From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 4:46:13 AM To: divers...@apache.org Subject: Re: Requesting the creation of a Diversity and Inclusion committee reporting to the President Hi, On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:44 PM Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > ...I guess the main question is whether or not ComDev, which has D&I in its > charter and mandate, is OK with another cmmt taking on its role in this > area... Good point, I agree that the comdev PMC needs to agree to "spin off" D&I to a distinct committee or PMC. > ...That seems very, very wonky to me and quite out of form.. I see it as just one thing that needs to be fixed and is easy to fix, by a comdev PMC vote for example - no big deal. -Bertrand --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: diversity-unsubscr...@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: diversity-h...@apache.org
