On 25 Oct 2013 11:49, "Venkat Mangudi" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It has nothing to do with FOSS. I think this is totally off topic.
Unionization has nothing to do with FOSS.
>
In partial support of the person posting the news item, I disagree that
this has nothing to do with FOSS.

Partial only, because while timely reports are always welcome, they are
more welcome with commentary rather than blank relay.

We have seen in various lists relating to FOSS that even the most
well-meant comments are seen on introspection to be weighted with the most
egregious gender bias, definitely off-putting to minority participants who
must face issues of acceptance before serious matters are discussed on a
level playing field. I need hardly add that the biased comments are
overwhelmingly from men, when the discrimination is about gender inclusion.

FOSS organisations have the extraordinary and rather unique attribute of
recognised success without the traditional trappings of capital,
hierarchies and so on, that are taken for granted in traditional business
and even government outfits.

Unions are necessary for those kinds of outfits, primarily due to
hierarchies. What solution is needed outside them? There are many important
issues, worth thought and trial as well, that may ensure more outstanding
examples of successful creation than, say, Wikipedia. Simply dismissing the
unions factor out of hand is short-sighted, I suspect.

Vickram
_______________________________________________
network mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in

Reply via email to