Diversity / Inclusion

Hi Apache Community, This is related to recent discussions, but I'm looking for practical suggestions for a concrete initiative, so not jumping in on those threads. Working with the administration at a local community college - looking at methods for training some English as a second language -

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

My ethics teacher in high school summed it up well I thought in stating your rights end where mine begin. Owen Rubel oru...@gmail.com On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 1:14 PM Eric Covener wrote: > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:32 PM Daniel Gruno wrote: > > > > On 30/03/2019 13.23, Jim Jagielski wrote: >

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

Jim, you have correctly identified that context is important when interpreting someone's words On Sat 30. Mar 2019 at 22:43, Jim Jagielski wrote: > If you heard on the TV that the Mayor was charged with > discrimination, your first reaction would not be to > assume that she is choosy about her

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

If you heard on the TV that the Mayor was charged with discrimination, your first reaction would not be to assume that she is choosy about her golden mustard. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org For

Re: on "meritocracy"

Top posting. "you're on the sidelines; the President said so". None of the quotes you provided were my words, nor do they support the claim that I made that statement. I'm pleased that we agree on Griselda's plan. - Sam Ruby On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:23 PM Wade Chandler wrote: > > > > On Mar

Re: on "meritocracy"

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 3:37 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:57 PM Wade Chandler wrote: >> >> And mine was there is a line in this thread attacking the way a lot of very >> inclusive people work here, and that line is like "your points have no >> merit, but we'll make changes

Re: Continuing conversation on Apache Swag

Sharan Foga wrote on 3/30/19 11:44 AM: > Hi Gris > > Thanks for the introductions. I seem to remember that Sally outlined a > possible process of how a central Apache swag store could work so let's > review that and plan the next steps. ComDev runs a RedBubble store, so some things are already

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:32 PM Daniel Gruno wrote: > > On 30/03/2019 13.23, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > > > >> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener wrote: > >> > >>> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against > >>> anyone. But I will protect your right, as an

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:50 PM, Naomi Slater wrote: > > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> >> Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial. >> > > simplistic and incorrect > > discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:57 PM Wade Chandler wrote: > > And mine was there is a line in this thread attacking the way a lot of very > inclusive people work here, and that line is like "your points have no > merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org, > while using

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:17 PM Ross Gardler wrote: > I think the problem is that *I* used the term "positive discrimination". That > has led to an interpretation of someone elses words through a cloudy lens. > Before making assumptions about that other persons intent you should listen > to

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

Yes. I'm making accommodations. I plan to take affirmative action (I note that Wikipedia calls out the UK, my native country, as having a different meaning to other places, so perhaps that's why I like the term and you don't). I will comply with the CoC and I will continue to try to assert the

Re: on "meritocracy"

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:37 PM, Naomi Slater wrote: > > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz > wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> >>> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater wrote: I've done a lot

Re: on "meritocracy"

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 11:57 AM, Wade Chandler wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 14:44 Naomi Slater wrote: > >> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

Making accommodations. IMO, 'affirmative action' should be avoided too much political baggage. > On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:55 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Let use the term "affirmative action" from now on... > > > From: Naomi Slater > Sent: Saturday,

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 14:44 Naomi Slater wrote: > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater > wrote: > > > > > > > > I've done a > > > > lot of work for Apache

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

Let use the term "affirmative action" from now on... From: Naomi Slater Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 11:50 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy") On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23,

Re: on "meritocracy"

Hi - One observation is that those who seem trollish may also have something else going on somewhere else in the overall Apache Community and it might be those annoyances for which they may or may not ever have resolution that may be “coloring” their interaction. If you are aware of it then

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial. > simplistic and incorrect discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell apart we discriminate when we determine who "has merit". but most people

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Myrle Krantz wrote: > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater wrote: > > > > > > I've done a > > > lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your > > > name. so I hope

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities

On 30/03/2019 13.23, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener wrote: I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you protect my right to help you achieve the right

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater wrote: > > > > I've done a > > lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your > > name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation > carries > >

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener wrote: > >> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against >> anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as >> you protect my right to help you achieve the >> right balance in our broader

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

I think the assumption that anyone is intending to violate the code of conduct is a bad one. Lets not make that assumption. I think the problem is that *I* used the term "positive discrimination". That has led to an interpretation of someone elses words through a cloudy lens. Before making

Re: on "meritocracy"

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater wrote: > > I've done a > lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your > name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation carries > much weight > Please don't go there. For the record, I've done more

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 1:33 PM Eric Covener wrote: > > > I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against > > anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long > > as you protect my right to help you achieve the > > right balance in our broader

Re: on "meritocracy"

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:25 AM, Naomi Slater wrote: > > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > >> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in >> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise, >> > > we don't need to get

Re: on "meritocracy"

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:21 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 9:33 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in >> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise, >> our reaction should not be "you

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone. > But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you > protect my right to help you achieve the > right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of any > discrimination

Re: on "meritocracy"

:-) Get Outlook for Android From: Naomi Slater Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 9:54:52 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Cc: Wade Chandler Subject: Re: on "meritocracy" my mistake! thanks for clarifying On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:52, Ross

Re: on "meritocracy"

my mistake! thanks for clarifying On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:52, Ross Gardler wrote: > You said "this is the last time I will reply to you". I intended to say > there is great honor in doing that. > > > > > > Get Outlook for Android > > > > From: Naomi Slater > Sent:

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

Thanks for this post, Shane. You share a number of my concerns. I am absolutely not blind to opposition to some of the things I've suggested, but I would argue that the thread on the topic has become so negative and heated that informed discussion isn't useful. Again I encourage others to listen

Re: on "meritocracy"

You said "this is the last time I will reply to you". I intended to say there is great honor in doing that. Get Outlook for Android From: Naomi Slater Sent: Saturday, March 30, 9:45 AM Subject: Re: on "meritocracy" To: dev@community.apache.org Cc: Wade Chandler On

Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

+1 for JFDI I am generally not supportive of positive discrimination. But I recognize that I can afford not to be. As Shane says it's irrelevant what I think unless I'm going to put effort into an alternative (remember a -1 around here means you object and will work on a better alternative).

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Ross Gardler wrote: > "this is the last time I will reply to you" > > Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive debate. > I apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent" > I don't know why you keep singling *me* out

Re: [DISCUSSION] ComDev Event Participation for 2019

Hi Gris Do you have any more details on the Open Source Summit in Mexico that you mentioned is happening this year? I checked the Linux Foundation website and only see a summit in San Diego - is this the one you were talking about? Thanks Sharan On 2019/01/16 16:05:23, Griselda Cuevas wrote:

Re: on "meritocracy"

"this is the last time I will reply to you" Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive debate. I apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent" Ross Get Outlook for Android From: Naomi Slater

Re: Google Season of Docs 2019

Excellent and thanks Maxim! :-) Thanks Sharan On 30. 03. 19 16:45, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: Hello Sharah I can help :) On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 22:33 Sharan Foga wrote: Hi Kenn No not yet - applications open on 2nd April and close on 23rd April. Will aim to get a draft together this weekend.

Re: [DISCUSSION] ComDev Event Participation for 2019

Hi All I'm bringing this topic back up again so we can finalise the main events we will be participating in this year.). I've put together a wiki page with all the suggestions and will start completing the details of dates and location. https://s.apache.org/qz0d We can then look at seeing

Re: Google Season of Docs 2019

Hello Sharah I can help :) On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 22:33 Sharan Foga wrote: > Hi Kenn > > No not yet - applications open on 2nd April and close on 23rd April. Will > aim to get a draft together this weekend. > > We also need to have two organisation administrators for GSoD so I am > still

Re: Continuing conversation on Apache Swag

Hi Gris Thanks for the introductions. I seem to remember that Sally outlined a possible process of how a central Apache swag store could work so let's review that and plan the next steps. For the branding - there is a style guide that might help:

Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")

Joan Touzet wrote on 3/30/19 12:52 AM: ...snip... > Precisely the point. I'm in favour of this, though I know others are > actively against it. I talked about this at length during my > ApacheCon 2018 talk, proposing options that are well thought-out and > fair, drawing from a wide variety of

Re: Google Season of Docs 2019

Hi Kenn No not yet - applications open on 2nd April and close on 23rd April. Will aim to get a draft together this weekend. We also need to have two organisation administrators for GSoD so I am still looking for another volunteer to help out with that. Thanks Sharan On 2019/03/29 23:21:16,

Re: on "meritocracy"

On 30/03/2019 09.57, Wade Chandler wrote: In another message I ask about a wiki page etc. That might he helpful, and seems if this issue has been attempted to be addressed for such a long period of time in the context of Apache, there will be plenty of material to help us all do more than argue

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:57, Wade Chandler wrote: > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater wrote: > >> >> >>> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After >>> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be >>> all about community and then

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater wrote: > > >> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After >> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be >> all about community and then disenfranchising huge swatches of people? >> > > you are doing the

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:33, Wade Chandler wrote: > "that sucks and is evil, is the cause, that also makes Apache suck" > this is the second time you've alluded to vaguely nationalistic-type rhetoric to, essentially, accuse me of not caring about Apache. I've done a lot of work for Apache and

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 08:01 Naomi Slater wrote: On Sat 30. Mar 2019 at 07:02, Wade Chandler wrote: But, I'm sure you'll have a good D initiative if you continue to marginalize people like you did there; treat others as insignificant or peripheral. "marginalize" *Inigo Montoya voice* you

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Jim Jagielski wrote: > I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in > from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise, > we don't need to get buy-in from everyone. thank God. because it would never happen. all we need

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 9:33 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in > from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise, > our reaction should not be "you are wrong; you just can't see it. So STFU." > Instead, help

Re: on "meritocracy"

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:21 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > I ask that everyone reading this far take a moment to think the above > through. It means the issues that cause us to have poor diversity are mostly > invisible to us. Therefore we assume the problem doesn't exist or isn't as > severe

Re: on "meritocracy"

On Sat 30. Mar 2019 at 07:02, Wade Chandler wrote: > > But, I'm sure > you'll have a good D initiative if you continue to marginalize people > like you did there; treat others as insignificant or peripheral. > "marginalize" *Inigo Montoya voice* you keep using that word. I do not think it means

Re: reporter service error

anggraeni7690.nmkl ,. Pada tanggal Sel, 26 Mar 2019 22.25 Zoltán Borók-Nagy Hi, > > I am an Impala PMC member, and tried to use the Apache Reporter Service to > report the 3.2.0 release, however I got the following error message: > > Could not save. Make sure you have filled out all fields and

Re: on "meritocracy"

Much of your response was negative in many ways. You're talking about D initiatives, and at the same time stating "it's" a big deal, and we're moving forward, and you're on the sidelines; the President said so. Good campaigns sell the message, and have a strategy to touch the problem, not shove