On 3/28/19 10:44 AM, Naomi Slater wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 15:41, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
I find this to be nitpicking. We have a diversity problem, and should be
seeking ways to improve the situation.
We are *lightyears* away from a situation where it would be relevant
whether we have a diversity problem vis-a-vis the global population. I
suppose that might be interesting, academically, but has no practical
relevance in terms of what we need to be *doing*.
I don't agree
something that comes up repeatedly is the idea that "perhaps women are just
not that interested in computer science" or something like that. this what
Jim was alluding to in his email about "global" populations
there's a lot of interesting stuff that could be said about why so few
women do go into tech. but, and here's where I do agree with you, that's
completely irrelevant to us. and *the way we demonstrate that* is by
pointing out that our diversity issues are with respect to industry
averages, not global population
Well, ok, but ...
I fail to see how this would affect the actual work that needs to get
done. I have long since stopped caring about *persuading* our skeptic
members about the need to do this work. They're not going to help
anyways, why bother? And we already have the full support of the
President and the Board on this, so they can't interfere in any
meaningful way.
*That* is why I think that this nitpicking is irrelevant. If other folks
wish to discuss whether it's 2% or 3%, sure, go ahead. It feels like
debating the brand of mop we should be using when we're 8 feet under water.
--
Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com
http://rcbowen.com/
@rbowen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
