On 6/27/2019 10:39 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > You are making assertions about what the founders agreed on. > > I'll quote another Apache moto: "If it didn't happen on a mailing > list, it didn't happen." > > Prove it. Otherwise, accept that it didn't happen.
Sorry but no, that feels like fetching a rock as a false argument. However, where are the list archives for the board prior to May 2005? They don't appear on lists.apache.org. Was it a different mailing list at the time? >> >> I like the roadmap we have in place right now with 19.5K coming from a >> sponsor to outreachy providing us 3 interns at which point we can report >> on the success of that initiative and look to expend if successful or >> contract if it isn't. > > I'm very concerned about the optics of this. The ASF has a > demonstrable diversity problem. The board is refusing to take an > small, obvious, and careful first step. A sponsor has stepped forward. > > Now imagine you are a journalist for a trade rag looking to increase > your click rates. How would you spin this? That sounds dangerously close to a threat. But assuming good will, do we care about external optics or how some journalist might spin something for clicks? If so, I recommend you get with M&P and get a PR drafted sooner than later so at a minimum it is in the can for a quick response. > My request is that the board consider matching this sponsor's small > donation and monitor the experiment. And mine is that the board should not use our own funds for outreachy but agree that the board should A) monitor the experiment specifically by asking for monthly reports from D&I and B) ask Fundraising to look into getting another sponsor to come on board with 10.5K to match the original budget request for Outreachy in the same manner the other sponsor did so. Regards, KAM
