A quick update on #4 'Inclusive Open Governance'[1] call will happen on August 1st (speaker scheduling delayed it a little bit).
I have included a question based on a conversation with Henri, if anyone else would like to contribute a question please email me directly and I'll do my best to include it. Thanks! 1. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Diversity_and_Inclusion_for_Communities_and_Contributors/DI_Call_08_01_2018#June_27.2C_2018_-_Inclusive_Open_Source_Governance On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 12:33:39 AM UTC-7, Patrick Finch wrote: > On 6/7/18 11:39 PM, Mitchell Baker via governance wrote: > > Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and > > need to be set aside. I personally aspire to many aspects of our work > > being a meritocracy. And the original meaning I took for meritocracy in > > open source meant empowering individuals, rather than managers, or > > manager's managers or tenure-based authority. I still long to develop > > these things. > > > > However, it's now clear that so-called meritocracies have included > > effective forms of discrimination. This might be hidden bias, where some > > aspect of identity causes a person's contributions to be routinely > > devalued. It might be over discrimination or harassment. It might be > > threats that minimize the contributions even offered. Whatever the cause, > > open source "meritocracies" suffer from these problems -- open source > > projects tend to have less diversity than other software organizations. > > > > Fairly or not, the word "meritocracy" has come to signal systems where > > there is little effective restraint on perpetuating discrimination. It may > > even become a code-word for organizations that resist the need to build > > diverse and inclusive organizations. > > > > I personally long for a word that conveys a person's ability to demonstrate > > competence and expertise and commitment separate from job title, or college > > degree, or management hierarchy, and to be evaluated fairly by one's peers. > > I long for a word that makes it clear that each individual who shares our > > mission is welcome, and valued, and will get a fair deal at mozilla -- that > > they will be recognized and celebrated for their contributions without > > regard to other factors. > > > > Sadly, "meritocracy" is not that word. Maybe it once was, or could have > > been. But not today. The challenge is not to retain a word that has > > become tainted. The challenge is to build teams and culture and systems > > that are truly inclusive. This is where we focus. > > > > So in my role as Owner of the Governance module, I'm confirming that > > mozilla will retire the word "meritocracy" from our self-descriptions. > > I'll also take the opportunity to confirm that mozilla is fundamentally > > committed to making participation and leadership available to all. > > > > Mitchell > > > > Thank you Mitchell, and to everyone else for their contribution to the > discussion. > > > In addition to the proposal, six further issues have been raised. I’m > summarising them as: > > 1. Positive contribution in an area of the project is generally a > prerequisite for authority over that area of the project. > > 2. Authority in the Open Source project shouldn't be tied to being paid > by a particular entity. > > 3. Authority in an area of the project should involve continued > participation in that area of the project. > > 4. We should form a stance on the proactive sponsorship of > under-represented groups to future leadership positions. > > 5. The term “meritocracy” should be removed also from the Roles & Resp > governance page [0] per this discussion (this was pointed out to me > off-list) > > 6. The Super-Review Role should be removed from the Roles & Resp > governance page [0] per another on dev-platform[1]. > > > Issues 1 and 3 are deemed to be reasonably well covered. 2 is not > directly addressed in the previous proposal and I have updated the > wording of the new proposal, below. 4 will be debated further in a > discussion convened by Emma Irwin. 5 is addressed below. Removing the > Super-Review role (6) has been apparently agreed in dev-platform but not > discussed here nor acted upon. > > > I will therefore take these three actions: > > > A. To replace the current text on the governance main page[2] with: > > > Mozilla is an open source project. Our community is structured as a > virtual organization. Authority is primarily distributed to both > volunteer and employed community members irrespective of employment > affiliation as they show their ability through contributions to the > project. The project also seeks to debias this system of distributing > authority through active interventions that engage and encourage > participation from diverse communities. > > > B. To replace the current introductory paragraph on the Roles and > Responsibilities page [0] with: > > > The Mozilla project is governed by a virtual management team made up of > experts from various parts of the community. Some people with leadership > roles are employed to work on the Mozilla project and others are not. > Leadership roles are primarily granted to individuals based on how > active they are in the community, as well as the quality and nature of > their contribution. This is a resilient and effective way to guide our > global community. The different community leadership roles include: > > > C. And to remove from the Roles and Responsibilities page [0]: > > > Super-ReviewersSuper-reviewers are a designated group of strong hackers > who review code for its effects on the overall state of the tree and > adherence to Mozilla coding guidelines. Super-review generally follows > code review by the module owner, and the approval of a super-reviewer is > generally required to check in code. More information on code review can > be found in the mozilla.org code review FAQ. > > > > I’ll action these as soon as possible with the Mozilla.org team. > > > Many thanks, > > > > Patrick > > > > 0. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/roles/ > > 1. > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.platform/fCJMf9hBGHQ > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21topic/mozilla.dev.platform/fCJMf9hBGHQ> > > 2. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/ _______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
