+1 to everything Ross said On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 16:20, Ross Gardler <[email protected]> wrote:
> Doing something with outreachy has a direct impact on being minority > people, safely, into the ASF ecosystem. > > Not doing it does not do so. > > Doing something with outreachy means those of us watching and learning can > watch and learn. > > Not doing it does not offer this opportunity. > > Doing something with outreachy means we can help some otherwise > inaccessible people learn about the ASF and our mission. > > Not doing it does not offer this opportunity. > > Personally I think this educational value is obvious stuff and it's part > of our mission. I'm guessing the lack of argument about whether it's a good > idea or not is because others believe it's a good idea too. > > What is not obvious is why we wouldn't do it. Perhaps I am missing > something that others can see. As is the Apache Way the onus is on those > who see issues to raise them so they may be addressed. > > So what concerns must the committee address that are not already being > addressed in the developing proposal? > > Ross > > Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> > > ________________________________ > From: Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 6:48:28 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Outreachy thread part 0 of 3 - Why and what do we get out of > it > > Thx. Forgot to do that. > > > On Jun 19, 2019, at 9:38 AM, Sam Ruby <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Moving board to bcc. Don't mix public and private lists[1]. > > > > - Sam Ruby > > > > [1] > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fincubator.apache.org%2Fguides%2Fcommitter.html&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7C857de30b6c69447c90ee08d6f4bcdb22%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636965489302072443&sdata=9M3iYtPOuBvMj89ZJXbgZHVjExP8%2F2GMWwdNiSvwmWs%3D&reserved=0 > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:25 AM Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Sure. I just didn't see any thread that focused and was directed at a > foundational question: Why Outreachy. > >> > >> All threads just seemed to assume that sponsor/support of Outreachy was > important/critical/useful and that doing so was just a 'given'; I just > thought that somewhere there should be some discussion 'proving' (or at > least providing a basis for) that assumption. Basically, why and what do we > expect to get out of it. > >> > >> I think it's a valid question to ask since it has the potential to > change and alter a lot of things. As such, I'm adding dev@diversity to > this thread in hopes that people respond. > >> > >> Cheers. > >> > >>> On Jun 19, 2019, at 8:41 AM, Sam Ruby <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:08 AM Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Is some sort of engagement w/ Outreachy really that critical and > crucial to our success related to D&I? I am still not understanding this > perceived need that somehow we 'need' to figure out some way to > sponsor/support Outreachy; of it being some sort of priority. A lot of > energy seems to be going into this and I'm not sure I grok the actual value > to the ASF and our projects being worth it. > >>> > >>> Perhaps that should be discussed on dev@diversity? > >>> > >>> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2Fa02217bcc050fe713d33fe73fa14503c173db92a1e1a6c0b174a338c%40%253Cdev.diversity.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7C857de30b6c69447c90ee08d6f4bcdb22%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636965489302072443&sdata=mPqx7LE%2FktJrRMkXARLiY%2FE89xMxKTBrt%2BPR6lQocMM%3D&reserved=0 > >>> > >>> - Sam Ruby > >> > >
