Some notes on participation/inclusion:
1) It can be difficult integrating yourself into a group where you may feel
like more or less of an outsider. An on-boarding experience of some sort -
even so simple as a web page for new users might help. The code4lib website
has little pieces of advice sprinkled around, two separate articles on the
wiki and then there is a pretty good document on how to make code4lib
inclusive. I would be happy to contribute to this effort, by the way.
2) The listserv front-end isn't new user friendly. It isn't overly complex
in order to get subscribed/started, but it definitely isn't intuitive
either.
You're also always going to have trouble with getting people to ask
questions, unless the concept of asking for help/guidance has been drilled
into them as not stupid, but constructive, for a very long time. I'm
talking life span.
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Julie Swierczek <
julie_swierc...@harvard.edu> wrote:
> I just want to respond to let people know that Kyle and I have been
> discussing this further through private channels, and we agree on many
> points. My earlier response was not meant to be a criticism of what Kyle
> said specifically; rather, I was responding to what I see are the larger
> challenges to the idea that codes of conduct should still be a main focus
> (as evidenced by Sue’s contribution about the backlash against diversity in
> the Naval War College). We also talked about how people want to talk about
> things on-list and off-list, privately or anonymously. Kyle’s main issue
> was really a question about what to do with private and anonymous feedback
> – not that we should avoid it, but rather we should discuss how that should
> be handled. For example, could someone summarize it, remove identifying
> details, and report back to the group? Not about the Duty Officer
> candidacy, since those are personnel issues, but rather about other
> feedback about harassment, etc. If we !
> have those channels, what do we do with the information that is received
> through them?
>
> We also agreed that listservs – both here and elsewhere – seem to have
> shrinking participation over time, and there does seem to be a drive to
> pull more conversations out of the public eye. There is no question that
> some matters are best discussed in private channels, such as feedback about
> individual candidates for duty officers, or matters pertaining to physical
> and mental well-being. But when it comes to discussing technology or other
> professional matters, there seems to be a larger trend of more responses
> going off listservs. (I, for one, generally do not reply to questions on
> listservs and instead reply to the OP privately because I’ve been burned to
> many times publicly. The main listserv for archivists in the US has such a
> bad reputation for flaming that it has its own hashtag: #thatdarnlist.)
>
> Maybe we can brainstorm about common reasons for people not using the
> list: impostor syndrome (I don’t belong here and/or I certainly don’t have
> the right ‘authority’ to respond to this); fear of being judged - we see
> others being judged on a list (about the technological finesse of their
> response, for instance) so we don’t want to put ourselves in a position
> where we will be judged; fear of talking in general because we have seen
> other people harmed for bringing their ideas to public forums (cf. doxing
> and swatting); fear of looking stupid in general.
>
> That last one has me really puzzled because it seems to be a growing
> problem. Whenever I teach basic tech stuff to people, I spend a lot of
> time telling them that they are not stupid and I will never judge them if
> they ask me questions. I give them lots of excuses so they can ask for my
> help and not feel stupid. I tell them that they should ask me questions
> because I'm easier to access than the product help manual. I tell them to
> ask me because sometimes software does, in fact, have bugs in it, and the
> problem is not the user, it's the software. I tell them that if they are
> 'too busy' to do something themselves, they should just ask for my help. I
> tell them to ask me because it is *my job* to answer their questions and
> make this thing easier for them to use. I give them so many ways that they
> can think of themselves as 'not stupid' for asking a question, and they
> *still* contact me and say, "This is a stupid question, but..." I feel
> like I need to start going to trainin!
> g sessions and tell people that I have a 'tip jar' online, and every time
> someone says "This is a stupid question", they have to put 0.05 bitcoin in
> the tip jar. I could retire.
>
> I think this is something we need to talk about, and I’d be happy to talk
> about it at the conference with anyone who is interested. (Kyle
> unfortunately will not be in attendance this year.) I’d also be interested
> to know if anyone has any info about psycho-social studies, reports,
> whatever, on
