Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Saturday, February 22, 2020 1:31 PM, Steffen Möller wrote: > @Debian, we should find ways to objectively discuss what has been > brought up. For instance - Ken reporting on someone attending DebConf, > finding a mentor and jointly sketching a project they want to work > together - I mean, that is why we have DebConf in the first place - > @Ken, this is a success story. I am not sure if Outreachy then needs to > fund this any further, but from a Debian perspective - please do. An Outreachy who was privileged to be in that discussion at DebConf has an unfair advantage over other candidates. That is contrary to the values Outreachy claims to promote a level playing field. Women suffer from these disadvantages and lack of networks. Outreachy promised to provide a fix for that. Debian has short-circuited the process. If posts are designed that way the Outreachy is redundant. Nobody is claiming the woman did something bad. The candidates are not expected to understand everything about the integrity of this process. That is the mentors job. It must be the men. It's always the men and their money.
Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
Sigh, On 22.02.20 14:31, Steffen Möller wrote: > Don't > we have someone in our midst to dissect truths in Ken's rants from > fictions? And maybe to even admit when something went wrong? Maybe *you* could to the dissection work, you seem to be interested. "Ken" mentions a violation of the Debian constitution. The constitution stipulates that "Developers are volunteers". Now, who is a Debian "Developer"? Debian Developers are people who are members of the Debian project, i.e. what we commonly refer to as "being a DD". - To my knowledge, no Outreachy participant was a DD at the time they did Outreachy. - On top of that, many DDs are paid by their employers to do Debian work, are still they volunteers in the sense of the constitution? (Please don't reply to this, I don't care about it at all.) "Ken" asks if women (he omits that GSoC and Outreachy don't care about anyone's gender) who are already involved in Debian or FLOSS should still be able to get an Outreachy internship. Why not? Don't people do internships in the private IT sector just alike, even if they have already done work elsewhere? None of this does matter, because "Ken"'s goal here is not to criticize a wrong, or to make truth visible, nor to bring productive transformation (which, despite the tone of your email, seems to be a suggestion of your email, Steffen), but to defamate a woman whom he does not name, and to slander the Debian project. "Ken" has a publicly accessible history of doxing women, defamating free software projects and their members, using ever different pseudonyms, while linking his stories on diverse websites he operates. So what do you suggest, Steffen, shall "Ken" still "pump it up"? Happy popcorn-eating, - ulrike
Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 11:15 PM Ulrike Uhlig wrote: > > Hi! > > On 21.02.20 14:33, Aron Xu wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 3:51 AM Ken Starr wrote: > >> > >> We fully support spending money on diversity but not with results like > >> these. Sever ties with outreachy and find another way to spend the > >> outreachy money in 2020. > > The above quotes email is another example of the ongoing smearing > campaign against Debian, so I have not replied to it previously. > However, I feel I need to reply to this now: > I understand Debian is sufferring a lot smearing campains but I think this is kind of over reacting. We don't need to take an arbitery challenging opinion as smearing campaign. It could become a good thing if misunderstandings are clarified properly while discussion remains clam. > > I'm not quite sure about other parts of this email, but I understand > > that outreachy for Debian itself might have already served its > > original purpose as an experiment of attracting more diversity. > > It was hopefully not just an experiment. > It depends on how you interpret, I would regard it as a social experiment in open source and free software community. > > Because people's interests are always changing, it appears that Debian > > people are less motivated to work on organizing and mentoring paid new > > comers nowadays than a decade before, this includes GSoC which does > > not cost Debian money. So it would be a good thing to evaluate whether > > we consider a longer term commitment to outreachy is profitable and > > desirable, or we find the gap between expectation and reality suggests > > something else. > If you, Aron, feel the need to properly discuss Outreachy's benefits for > Debian, I propose to do that not over a mailing list, but in a BoF at > whichever DebConf, together with the people who actually take care of > Outreachy and GSoC, as well as with the Debian Diversity and (remains > of) the Debian Women team. > I have prior experience with GSoC and I know we are transparent on the whole process, there's no need to try to keep this kind of discussion offline, if the question is already raised publicly and the discussion remain reasonable. > Oh, and to finish with, I know several Outreachy interns who still > contribute to Debian - I am one of them. > It's great and thanks for your work. I want to clarify that I didn't suggest that no intern has continued to contribute to Debian for extended time, in contrast to what you might understand. > Ulrike > > Please do not feed more trolls here. Thank you.
Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
On 22.02.20 10:15, Ulrike Uhlig wrote: Hi, On 21.02.20 17:09, Ken Starr wrote: Debian spends $25,000 every year on just four women This is entirely wrong as far as I can tell: Outreachy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit under their parent organization, Software Freedom Conservancy. Outreachy internship stipends, travel fund, and program costs are supported by donors. Debian itself does not pay any intern. Furthermore, Outreachy is open to all "people from groups underrepresented in tech". Thank you for this reply, Ulrike. Debian spending money to support Outreachy would not be completely inconceivable. As a DD I have full (very close to ultimate) trust that I would not have missed a discussion about it. But as a regular user of Debian project? No idea what this "Ken Starr" (name chosen after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Starr ?) is after. At best we are the subject of a study on how well defamation campaigns work in ideals-driven tech environments. @Ken, pump it up! Something evil in me is enjoying this. Much like skimming through the tabloids when all you wanted to do is to go and fetch some fruit from the supermarket. @Debian, we should find ways to objectively discuss what has been brought up. For instance - Ken reporting on someone attending DebConf, finding a mentor and jointly sketching a project they want to work together - I mean, that is why we have DebConf in the first place - @Ken, this is a success story. I am not sure if Outreachy then needs to fund this any further, but from a Debian perspective - please do. Don't we have someone in our midst to dissect truths in Ken's rants from fictions? And maybe to even admit when something went wrong? Steffen
Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Saturday, February 22, 2020 9:15 AM, Ulrike Uhlig wrote: > Hi, > > On 21.02.20 17:09, Ken Starr wrote: > > > Debian spends $25,000 every year on just four women > > This is entirely wrong as far as I can tell: > > Outreachy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit under their parent organization, > Software Freedom Conservancy. Outreachy internship stipends, travel > fund, and program costs are supported by donors. Debian itself does not > pay any intern. When people donate money to Debian, it goes into SPI and other bank accounts. There is no Debian bank account, as you say, Debian itself does not pay any intern nor does it pay anything else. The Debian money is transferred from the SPI bank account to the Outreachy bank account directly. People give this money to SPI because of the great work that all Debian volunteers are doing. SPI and Outreachy both take commissions for handling this money. The remainder goes to maybe 2 or 3 interns each round.
Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
Hi, On 21.02.20 17:09, Ken Starr wrote: > Debian spends $25,000 every year on just four women This is entirely wrong as far as I can tell: Outreachy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit under their parent organization, Software Freedom Conservancy. Outreachy internship stipends, travel fund, and program costs are supported by donors. Debian itself does not pay any intern. Furthermore, Outreachy is open to all "people from groups underrepresented in tech". - ulrike
Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 04:09:20PM +, Ken Starr wrote: > On Friday, February 21, 2020 3:14 PM, Wise Person wrote: > > Please do not feed more trolls here. Thank you. > > Everything in this email is known and verifiable fact Ken, Messages like } } Please do not feed more trolls here. Thank you. should be recieved as "Enough, go do something constructive" Regards Geert Stappers -- Silence is hard to parse
Re: Outreachy and smearing campaign
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Friday, February 21, 2020 3:14 PM, Ulrike Uhlig wrote: > Hi! > > On 21.02.20 14:33, Aron Xu wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 3:51 AM Ken Starr kenst...@protonmail.com wrote: > > > > > We fully support spending money on diversity but not with results like > > > these. Sever ties with outreachy and find another way to spend the > > > outreachy money in 2020. > > The above quotes email is another example of the ongoing smearing > campaign against Debian, so I have not replied to it previously. > > Please do not feed more trolls here. Thank you. Everything in this email is known and verifiable fact Debian spends $25,000 every year on just four women The constitution says Debian is a voluntary organization. Paying these women is a violation of that core principle. If people ask questions about that money or anything else you want to avoid, why do you call it smearing and trolling? Ken
