Re: diversity (was: Re: [nomination]for Fellowship Council renewal and activism)
Hi Florian, Am 21. Oktober 2019 07:03:32 MESZ schrieb Florian Snow : >Agreed. I hope what I wrote didn't come off that way. I meant to >describe a challenge, not make an excuse. Yes, I know. We both know that's a challenge. :-) >When in comes to the FSFE, there are also additional issues to consider: For >us, diversity should >probably also involve geographic or cultural diversity. These are >tough questions to solve, but I think very important for the future of >our movement. I cannot agree more. When I look at fsfe.org/about we don't cover many regions in Europe. We should really improve on that. >One of the ideas to reduce barriers was to examine the >use >of mailing lists vs something without as many implicit rules (and >potentially more inviting design), such as our Discourse instance >(community.fsfe.org). I would be interested to hear what you and >others >on here think. Have you tried out the platform yet? If yes, what do >you think. If not, why not? I didn't really know that this tool exists. I have to check it out. Best Christian ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: How FSFE is organised
Hi Bernhard, "Bernhard E. Reiter" writes: > The "VIP track" is called "volunteer". :) Really nicely said. It took me half a paragraph to express the same idea. Happy hacking! Florian ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: How FSFE is organised
Hi Paul, Paul Boddie writes: > The problem with this from the perspective of an outsider, who is or > has been supporting a community-oriented organisation like FSFE, is > that it doesn't give me anything more than "indicators". I agree that we should be more transparent about the Legal Network. I am sure it does great work, but even as a GA member, I still have a very limited perspective. I noticed that on several occasions. I think there have been some improvements in that regard, but not enough yet. I think something that would be good is news items about the work there. Without knowing exactly what happens in the LN, it is hard for me to say if that would be feasible, but I would imagine there are success stories that all parties involved would be happy to talk about. Happy hacking! Florian ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Fairphone 3
Hi Bernhard, "Bernhard E. Reiter" writes: > What are your experiences? I had a terrible experience with the FP2 (broken case, terrible battery life, random restarts, promised upgrade took forever) and so I switched to a used phone. As long as the damand on the market for used phones is not large enough to encourage people buying new phones, that is a viable alternative. Happy hacking! Florian ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
diversity (was: Re: [nomination]for Fellowship Council renewal and activism)
Hi Christian, Christian Imhorst writes: > If you want more diversity, the first question must be: Why doesn't it > work? The answer, that there are simply no woman, for example, just > white cis man is imho something made easy. Agreed. I hope what I wrote didn't come off that way. I meant to describe a challenge, not make an excuse. When in comes to the FSFE, there are also additional issues to consider: For us, diversity should probably also involve geographic or cultural diversity. These are tough questions to solve, but I think very important for the future of our movement. > We have to remove any and all barriers for speakers and activists to > share their expertise and knowledge with the community. Also agreed. One of the ideas to reduce barriers was to examine the use of mailing lists vs something without as many implicit rules (and potentially more inviting design), such as our Discourse instance (community.fsfe.org). I would be interested to hear what you and others on here think. Have you tried out the platform yet? If yes, what do you think. If not, why not? Happy hacking! Florian ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: How FSFE is organised
Hi Paul, Paul Boddie writes: > I am sorry for the confusion here. In fact, I wasn't referring to the > FSFE with my remark, but the following crowdfunding campaign promoted > on this mailing list four years ago by a FSFE General Assembly member: > > https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/roundcube-next--2#/ I am also very unhappy with how that went. I backed the campaign as well and got nothing out of it. I need to go back and find the original announcement e-mail on this list, but I sincerely hope there was no advertising *as* as GA member. I would expect this to be clearly marked as a private opinion. If it was not, we need to communicate that better for the future. > Although I wasn't referring to the FSFE, I do wonder whether anyone > else feels that there are certain common themes involved. For > instance, a lack of transparency and a lack of responsiveness to > genuine concerns. People can easily perceive these situations as > "thanks for the money so that we can do our thing", at which point > meaningful engagement ends. That is indeed something we need to watch out for. I personally feel that people who engage with us, either here on the list or in our teams, have access to a lot of information. We usually share it within teams because those teams work on those topics. And if it sounds interesting to everyone, we make it a news item or so. We also work hard to make those ways to engage more visible: That is why we have a redesigned contribute page on our website and why we don't have guest accounts anymore. If someone supports us by dedicating time, they get the same benefits as a supporter and I feel that is a meaningful way to engage. I know this is all anecdotal, but I very much felt that when I started engaging with the FSFE. I very quickly became part of many teams and my opinion is always valued, especially because I tend to disagree. So what I understand from you is that we should do the same for people who don't engage with us in our work, but who give us money. What would you feel is a good way to achieve that? Happy hacking! Florian ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
