Cameron, Yes, your point was very hard to miss. I don't think you need to police this thread quite so hard though. :-)
For what it's worth, it makes good business & innovation sense to do more than 1% or so. YMMV though, Andrea On May 30, 2016 10:54:06 PM EDT, Cameron Shorter <[email protected]> wrote: >Marc, Andrea, >My point I'm hoping to make is that I think we might be spending more >time discussing ethical code-of-conduct type questions than I think we >need to. Yes it is important. Yes we need to flag bad behaviour and >resolve it. But hopefully we can limit such discussions to 1% (or so) >of >our bandwidth - which we achieve by referencing our code-of-conduct. > >Disclaimer - I'm a privileged white male, living in a democratic >country, and I'm used to expecting good behaviour to be the norm. > >Warm regards, Cameron > >On 31/05/2016 9:48 AM, Andrea Ross wrote: >> That's an unexpected response. Was someone suggesting OSGeo should be > >> a forum for human rights? > >On 31/05/2016 9:28 AM, Marc Vloemans wrote: >> Cameron, >> >> I think you misunderstood the aim of my comment. >> I am not talking about human rights as such. (Unless they are >> threatened, of course) >> >> I am addressing the need to guard and promote our inclusivity. If we >> want to grow and develop as a community we need to take any >> past/present/future concern about it seriously. >> >> That is an integral part of our marketing and communications effort: >> avoid wrong perceptions and manage our public image where/when >> possible. Whether such perceptions address the nature of our code, >our >> projects, our members, our organisation and its policies or our >> activities. >> >> Hope this clarifies, cheers, >> Marc Vloemans >> >> >> Op 30 mei 2016 om 23:28 heeft Cameron Shorter >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> het >> volgende geschreven: >> >>> All, >>> >>> While I'm hugely in favour of mutual respect, and I personally >>> co-authored the OSGeo Code-Of-Conduct, I feel that OSGeo shouldn't >>> aim to be a forum for human rights. (There are other places for >this). >>> >>> Our primary focus should be on supporting the creation of great >OSGeo >>> code, and supporting the communities doing this. >>> >>> Having a Code-Of-Conduct in place is a small part of supporting a >>> community, and we should refer to it in cases where conversations or > >>> interactions deviate from good behavior, but I'm hopeful that we can > >>> leave it at that, and focus our time on our core code writing >passions. >>> >>> Warm regards, Cameron >>> >>> On 30/05/2016 7:30 pm, Marc Vloemans wrote: >>>> Thanks Andrea, >>>> >>>> You are quite right, unfortunately. Sharing and discussing >>>> experiences and insights on this could come across as negative. >>>> >>>> The same happened when I read an earlier discussion on a Code of >>>> Conduct for conferences. Frankly I was abhorred that such code was >>>> deemed necessary. Until I realised that I was perhaps ignorant >>>> (living in Amsterdam is such a privilege). >>>> >>>> Can I invite you to share your list-of-thoughts regarding potential > >>>> pitfalls for a Conference at least with me >>>> (marcvloemans1[at]gmail.com <http://gmail.com>)? It would be such a > >>>> shame if we unintentionally overlook the obvious! >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Marc Vloemans >>>> >>>> >>>> Op 30 mei 2016 om 03:49 heeft Andrea Ross <[email protected]> > >>>> het volgende geschreven: >>>> >>>>> Marc, >>>>> >>>>> I started to write a whole bunch of thoughts related to this but >>>>> instead decided against as I felt it was stating the obvious and I > >>>>> didn't want the thoughts to be perceived as negative. >>>>> >>>>> The essence was that these things you have listed are great, and >>>>> they help keep things from being screwed up, but they're not the >>>>> hard work that it takes to really make a difference. So good, but >>>>> so much more is needed. >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> >>>>> Andrea >>>>> >>>>> On 28/05/16 11:26, Marc Vloemans wrote: >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> To build upon the positive results as mentioned in the thread >>>>>> below, I invite anyone to supply any suggestion that may support >>>>>> the LOC FOSS4G 2016 in Bonn Germany, regarding diversity related >>>>>> policies during the actual Conference. Either directly to me or >>>>>> via this list. >>>>>> >>>>>> As LOC we strive to be aware that public policies and personal >>>>>> experiences vary per continent, region, country and/or province. >>>>>> However, living in Western-Europe we sometimes are unaware how >>>>>> fortunate we are! That could hinder us in anticipating potential >>>>>> fears, uncertainties and doubts that visitors to Bonn may have. >>>>>> >>>>>> For starters, please note the following from >>>>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Germany : >>>>>> >>>>>> "Germany has become the first country in Europe to enact a law >>>>>> that allows German citizens to choose to neither identify as male > >>>>>> or female on their birth certificate, which has been said to >>>>>> specifically benefit hermaphrodites >>>>>> <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermaphrodites> and intersex >>>>>> <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex> persons." >>>>>> >>>>>> Unfortunately same sex marriage is still 'under construction', >but >>>>>> that does not reflect negatively on a number of laws protecting >>>>>> the rights of the LGBTI community (including registered >partnership). >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards and hopefully we meet in Bonn, >>>>>> Marc Vloemans >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Vriendelijke groet, >>>>>> Marc Vloemans >>>>>> >>>>>> Op 28 mei 2016 om 03:04 heeft Andrea Ross >>>>>> <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Kristin, Everyone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The sex/gender split was similar for FOSS4G NA 2016 as FOSS4G NA > >>>>>>> 2015. In the range of 25 to 30 percent women for both speakers >>>>>>> and attendees. We don't ask people their gender as part of >>>>>>> submitting or registering, so this is obviously a best effort >>>>>>> from having met a number of folks, and discretely >Google-stalking >>>>>>> them just a little. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We probably had a record high number of trans people >participate, >>>>>>> despite North Carolina's HB2. Also because of HB2, many LGBT >>>>>>> people reached out to me before the conference to understand >what >>>>>>> was being done, and to help decide whether to boycott or not. We > >>>>>>> are so grateful that so many did not boycott, and came anyway. >It >>>>>>> was a moving experience for me to learn how big the LGBT part of > >>>>>>> the community is and get a bit of the sense of how important the > >>>>>>> work they're doing is. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, I want to call out the exemplary work of the Raleigh >>>>>>> Convention Center. They really went above and beyond to ensure >>>>>>> our attendees were safe and comfortable. So far as I know, there > >>>>>>> were zero instances of harassment of LGBT people. Laurie Okun >>>>>>> from the Convention Center in particular was a superstar and so >>>>>>> impressive & professional from our first contact when trying to >>>>>>> assess Raleigh, through the chaos that HB2 inflicted, and to the > >>>>>>> post-conference follow-up. We are grateful. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So many good things to note. I also want to note that it is >still >>>>>>> a mostly white conference. So the job is not done, and there's >>>>>>> still much more important work to be done. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andrea >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 27/05/16 17:28, Kristin Bott wrote: >>>>>>>> Thanks for sharing the synopsis; I'm especially encouraged by >>>>>>>> (1) gender (identity) parity in the planning committee (2) >>>>>>>> strong presence of female-identifying folk at the conference >and >>>>>>>> (3) continued financial support for attendees. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'd be curious what the gender split was across attendees v. >>>>>>>> speakers -- possibly something worth tracking across years of >>>>>>>> conferences to get a sense of any shifts in attendee >demographics. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> cheers - >>>>>>>> -k.bott >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mark Lucas <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I had the pleasure of serving as the OSGeo representative >>>>>>>> for the 2016 FOSS4G NA conference selection and planning. >I >>>>>>>> thought the team did an excellent job in selecting, >planning >>>>>>>> and running the conference. The team made the decision to >>>>>>>> not pursue a 2017 NA conference so as not to compete for >>>>>>>> resources with the OSGeo international conference. Our >>>>>>>> efforts will focus on 2018 planning and selection for the >>>>>>>> next NA regional conference. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On a personal note I was initially concerned about how the >>>>>>>> relationship with Location Tech and OSGeo would evolve. >Our >>>>>>>> teaming has resulted in yet another successful conference >>>>>>>> that I believe plays to the strengths of both >>>>>>>> organizations. I was very pleased with the openness and >>>>>>>> collaboration that I witnessed. >>>>>>>> — Mark >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The synopsis from Andrea Ross is included below: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> FOSS4G NA 2016 Synopsis (please feel free to re-use this >data) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> The conference ran from May 2-5, at the Raleigh >>>>>>>> Convention Center, in Raleigh North Carolina. The code >>>>>>>> sprint & unconference ran May 6 & 7 at Red Hat’s >>>>>>>> headquarters, a few blocks from the convention center. >A >>>>>>>> Tour of the NCSU OSGeo Research and Education lab took >>>>>>>> place on May 6th. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> The conference featured 1 day of workshops, 3 days of >>>>>>>> sessions, a code sprint, an unconference, and social >>>>>>>> events every night. There were 93 full length (35 >>>>>>>> minute) sessions, 36 short length (15 minute) sessions, >>>>>>>> 10 workshops, and 3 keynotes. This represented an >>>>>>>> increase in full length. The rooms were generally >always >>>>>>>> near full or slightly overflowing for particularly >>>>>>>> popular talks, despite them being big rooms. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> The conference grew by 33% . There were 558 attendees. >>>>>>>> This level of increase is very positive, when so many >>>>>>>> other conferences are in decline. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> Like 2015’s team, 50% of the 2016 committee were women. >>>>>>>> Also like 2015, a significant proportion of speakers >and >>>>>>>> attendees were women (in the 30% range), which is great >>>>>>>> to see. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> 23 people were at the conference who wouldn't have >>>>>>>> otherwise been without the financial support we gave >them. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> From the attendee survey, people were clearly thrilled >>>>>>>> about the conference... 99% positive feedback. (n=102). >>>>>>>> The one negative response said they were disappointed >>>>>>>> there was no lunch served. We’re not sure how they >>>>>>>> missed it! The venue, the strong program, and the >>>>>>>> positive & supportive atmosphere were the things people >>>>>>>> commented (positively) on most. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> People loved the keynotes, and especially Tamar Cohen's >>>>>>>> entitled Extreme Mapping. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> The video recordings of sessions are being uploaded to >>>>>>>> Youtube, with dozens up, and more each day. >>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>> 90% of sponsors rated the value excellent. 10% rated it >>>>>>>> very good. The layout of the conference was especially >>>>>>>> appreciated as it meant plenty of traffic for sponsors >>>>>>>> at all times. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This year’s conference was produced by Andrea Ross and the >>>>>>>> team at the Eclipse Foundation, the same as 2015. Sarah >>>>>>>> Cordivano served as Community Chair. Rob Emanuele was >>>>>>>> Program Committee Chair, repeating the same role he >>>>>>>> performed in 2015. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Discuss mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> -- >>> Cameron Shorter, >>> Software and Data Solutions Manager >>> LISAsoft >>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, >>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009 >>> >>> P +61 2 9009 5000, Wwww.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > >-- >Cameron Shorter, >Software and Data Solutions Manager >LISAsoft >Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, >26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009 > >P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
