This is getting off topic. We don't pay for development. We are not here to develop code. We are here to build communities.
The problem isn't that we don't pay for code. It's that the industry is not paying people from as diverse a background as we would like. We can impact that by providing mentors only available to minority interns. Internally we have the problem that we are not building diverse communities. We won't fix this by changing a policy of not paying for code. Ross Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> ________________________________ From: Sage Sharp <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 10:57:48 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Outreachy framework proposal On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 6:43 PM Ross Gardler <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Patricia, I think your point really illustrates what I am trying to > say. > > The ASF doesn't pay *anyone* to work on our software. There is no > discrimination in that. Sure one can argue it creates less opportunity than > paying for a few individuals, but that's not the same as discrimination. > Discrimination doesn't have to come in the form of blatant racism or sexism. Systemic discrimination comes from a long series of missed opportunities. One person in a long series of people says, "I don't want to change this behavior/policy that negatively impacts people from marginalized groups in tech." For example, take hiring discrimination. Behavior can contribute to systemic hiring discrimination. One recruiter disregards a person of color's resume because it doesn't have a GitHub profile link. Another recruiter notices a Black person's listed hobbies signal they're from a lower socio-economic class and doesn't pass it on. A hiring manager can't understand someone's African-American vernacular accent in a phone interview, so they're not given an on-site interview. Policies can contribute to systemic hiring discrimination. A company has a policy of not paying for interview travel and not allowing virtual interviews. People of color are less likely to be able to afford to fly on-site for an interview. People mobility disabilities may not be able to afford to fly for a job interview because the airline has a policy that they must buy a companion fare to have someone help them with their wheelchair. Companies have a policy that requires interviewees to do white board coding. Students from majority white universities succeed because they're offered college classes on how to ace the white board portion of the interview, while people of color have their white board coding session rated poorly. These small behaviors and polices add up to systemic discrimination. https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eeoc.gov%2Feeoc%2Fsystemic%2F&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cd1c595c1965040acf87808d6fb2907a4%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636972550986652529&sdata=zvI%2Bch3huXCcxusffV%2FuIv%2B9xYfHEIKMjeyPuAF9tC8%3D&reserved=0 "Systemic discrimination involves a pattern or practice, policy, or class case where the alleged discrimination has a broad impact on an industry, profession, company or geographic area." What you see as a "lack of opportunity" I see as a symptom of systemic discrimination. I also find it interesting that the ASF board recognizes the impact of lost opportunity in a selective way. For example, take this explanation of the ASF board's exceptions to paying community members: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2Fb6f7f723e08a3e643c0629ce08368bf7c4ee2824769abd3fc2eae319%40%253Cdev.diversity.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cd1c595c1965040acf87808d6fb2907a4%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636972550986652529&sdata=azjS0%2BZDreUzt4CZWQQhP0LAAU1%2BK6croXCM7wQK8nQ%3D&reserved=0 "Travel Assistance Committee (general fund) - here we paid for travel and expenses for attendance at events. No code was expected. Applicants were not chosen based on their general profile rather than activity in projects. Travel Assistance Committee (directed fund for a minority group) - as above with some provisions to ensure nobody outside the minority group lost a spot because of the addition of minority group applicants" In creating the Travel Assistance fund for minority groups, the ASF board's stipulation was that "nobody outside the minority group should lose a spot because of the additional of minority group applicants". They recognized that missing a conference was a loss of opportunity for community members to network, to find a job, to promote their work. So a policy was put in place in order to protect the opportunities for the majority demographic in ASF communities. The thread has good examples of why the ASF policy of not paying for code negatively impacts marginalized groups in the ASF community: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2Fae537465c80e2d61d9ee26092ab789babde63cd429dc62c497b3dab6%40%253Cdev.diversity.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cd1c595c1965040acf87808d6fb2907a4%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636972550986652529&sdata=lKHwB%2Bp%2BvP%2FxPCy4ZWtQEuQz8Q5UaQs%2FsOjl3m9EKwo%3D&reserved=0 https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2Fd024e2b8327772901a06c69e7b31df4e04662a01450b8d2390ac1ca1%40%253Cdev.diversity.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cd1c595c1965040acf87808d6fb2907a4%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636972550986652529&sdata=9N1c%2B2GOQzXdodkMDYpqHBcZvYNbJP2hu1PvAshblWk%3D&reserved=0 It's not a good look to refuse to discuss an exception to a policy that negatively impacts marginalized groups as "a loss of opportunity" while creating polices that protect opportunities for the majority groups in the ASF community. > The ASF can, and should, do more to help people overcome the > discrimination that *does* exist in the industry as a whole. > > I maintain that the ASF will make close to zero difference to the industry > wide problem by taking on a few interns. Sure, having some interns is > going to be valuable from an educational point of view and will undoubtedly > help a few individuals, we should do it in the most friction free way > possible. Fighting to overturn a working policy in order to enable a > handful of internships isn't worth the effort or the perceived risk. Work > around it. > This discussion is more important than Outreachy. This discussion sets the tone for all discussions about how ASF policies may negatively impact marginalized groups in free software. Some board members are unwilling to grant an exception to a discriminatory policy because it may impact vendor neutrality. Other people have pointed out that there are already exception to this policy for Google Summer of Code and for paying for website work (which could include software development). That resulting in further discussion of whether the "we don't pay for code" policy is a core tenant of the ASF community. The discussion then became an argument over who has seniority and who best understands with the Apache Way. That does not address the main issue: Will the ASF board be willing to discuss policies or cultural norms which may negatively impact marginalized groups in its communities? We have a solid proposal in place for how to evaluate which projects to list in Outreachy that is vendor neutral, and focuses on giving the interns the best experience possible: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2Ff790fa5bffd7c2aac3fb495593456d55bed940815891511c6d3fd039%40%253Cdev.diversity.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cd1c595c1965040acf87808d6fb2907a4%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636972550986652529&sdata=BlLjav4P8%2BRaSNWdtn5Fvj%2Fy5eupGosdMHG3BszlgpQ%3D&reserved=0 I've proposed a plan for dealing with the case where there is not enough funding to accept all interns. This is vendor neutral and focuses on selecting internships that will be successful. Outreachy organizers will then evaluate which projects we can afford to fund from the Outreachy general fund, prioritizing ones that meet that criteria: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2F291c99821cecb05e5dedbd3818ac19c73b9584c6795f602928780b14%40%253Cdev.diversity.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cd1c595c1965040acf87808d6fb2907a4%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636972550986652529&sdata=QaSkFLAbiPar5S%2FPokS%2FnKiyewoGhdY%2FF49%2BMo26CLw%3D&reserved=0 With those proposals in place, the discussion has shifted to the policy's intent. That is not my purview, as I'm not a part of the ASF. I will leave that up to everyone else to discuss. However, I did want to point out that policies can be a part of systemic discrimination. I would hope that the ASF board is willing to review and change/grant exceptions to policies that are discriminatory. Sage Sharp Outreachy Organizer
