Re: [issues] Heroins?
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 12:57:08PM -0700 or thereabouts, Justine Cubbage tenZeldam wrote: > Who, if any woman, has inspired you to be a Linux Chik? I'm trying > to develop a mentoring program for young women to meet & be inspired > by female high tech "success stories". Know any? > Thanks! I am not a high tech success story, although I am someone who is now comfortable taking my computer apart and adding/removing cards and memory, and I started out ten years ago absolutely terrified of touching things in case they broke and I had to pay for the replacing of them. (Really!) They still break, but now I know that it's not -my- fault if the printer driver sees a ^S and stops the printer queue. (This wasn't one of mine: a friend (male) did that many years ago. It was one of several incidents which taught me that actually the world didn't fall in and you weren't automatically presented with a £5 bill for a new university computer as a result...) Where I find hi-tech success stories: here, largely. It was so fabulous to find a place where other women were, who were interested in the same things, and the huge range of knowledge and interests was good too: from people who didn't care what happened inside but wanted to be able to change a default or two, to people who could cheerfully argue the usefulness or not of different compilers and compiler flags. I suppose systers is probably full of "success stories", in that all I know of it is that it's a group for women in IT (sysadmins in particular?) but I don't know a lot about it. I had heard of it some years ago, but it seemed that you actually had to work in the industry to join it, and I didn't, and have no qualifications remotely related to it. So I thought it was a bit above my sort of level :) Linuxchix seems to fit a different niche. Telsa ___ issues mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
Re: [issues] Conversation monopolization
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 11:55:33AM +1100 or thereabouts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Jenny Brown (was Gable) wrote: > > > To that extent, it's been somewhat helpful, but not as much as > > I expected. Mainly, I think, it's because I see women asking > > questions and guys answering... and they're still the experts... > > It's hard to summarize though because there just hasn't been > > that much traffic. Interesting thread to return to. I went away for a week. Before it, I was remarking that linuxchix posts seemed to be more than half from men these days. To me, that's a very recent development, and I've heard the suggestion (and voiced it myself) that it's not that the women are going away; it's that men are arriving because it's generally a fairly civilised environment. > (laughs) > I've a tendancy to not-answer unless I am absolutely certain I > know the answer, or there's not been an answer for 12 hours or so. > So if the guys don't have those hesitations, and other women do > the same thing I do... that's why it seems to be guys answering. > Can anyone explain to me why I do that? I do exactly the same thing. Even when I'm pretty sure, I hedge it around with "I think.." "On this distro.." "it's possible that.." These are not particularly self-deprecating; it's because I've seen too many different things to be entirely happy about generalising to systems I don't know. And yes, I have to be damn sure before I speak up in public. The thought of having it all wrong in the archives with my name on it is too much. I still feel embarrassed about one thing where I misunderstood badly, didn't check, and said a pile of stuff that, if not wrong, wasn't brilliantly right :) If I just have a -guess-, I mail off-list and ask the person to mail the list if my guess worked/put them in the right direction. :) Telsa ___ issues mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
Re: [issues] Conversation monopolization
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 07:40:54PM +1100 or thereabouts, Mary Gardiner wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 07:48:46AM +0100, Gina Lanik wrote: > > um, excuse me, maybe I didn't get your point but what is wrong about > > RTFM? I keep telling ppl on irc to do man this, man that, since the > > manuals mostly give the most decent/in-depth info... and can be more > > accurate than my description > > > > Well, Ms Newbie has just installed Linux for the first time. Presuming > the install went well, everything is fine for a few days. Ms Newbie > wants to find out something. > > On IRC: > MsNewbie21> How do I install/fix/get blah? > Random> RTFM, clueless newbie! > > Depending on how new you are, you don't know where the manuals are. Man > is useless if you don't know the command. There are some people > installing Linux these days who have *never* used a command prompt. Heh. Way back ten years ago (eeep, ten years of this stuff?), two tales I recall... First one, on a machine's local chat system, in the days when man was all you got: How do I...? rtfm I don't have a man rtfm entry. Second one: The sysadmin who wrote and installed a local 'rtfm' page which explained "what this stands for, what the person who told you 'man rtfm' meant, and how to use man, since man man is horrible" As I say, this is ten years ago, when people were assumed to know a little more than can be assumed now. I mean, if they knew who to ask to get a unix account, that was indication of a lot of knowledge -- the net wasn't exactly well-known at the time. And yes, people were equally rude then; yes, it was considered rude; and yes, lots of people had real trouble with man's less than obvious conventions. I was always disappointed no-one else borrowed the second idea, but there we are :) Telsa ___ issues mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
Re: [issues] Re: issues digest, Vol 1 #114 - 17 msgs
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 03:07:01PM -0600 or thereabouts, Vinnie wrote: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Simon Britnell wrote: > > > I don't recall seeing anything I thought was a troll, which makes me think > > that some of my posts may be considered trolls. > > That may predate you, too. I remember one person (definetly not you, he > knows who he is though) who actually asked why women might want to be > treated equally (or something equally as silly -- I'm sure he'll correct > me if I'm not remembering closely enough) I have memories of this too. I think it is long enough ago that it will be in the "old" archives: the site migrated and I think the list software changed or something; so the archives for all lists are in "old" and "new" groups. I can definitely remember one or two email addresses whose owners seemed more interested in explaining why there was no need for linuxchix to us than just going away or accepting that the lists existed. "What do you hope to achieve with this? You have it all wrong" and so on. Telsa ___ issues mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
Re: [issues] Conversation monopolization
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 11:38:01PM -0500 or thereabouts, Rick Scott wrote: > (psyche:) > > My general message to newbies (or semi-newbies, or even experienced > > folks who are not used to working at the command line much) is--don't > > be afraid to type in new commands just to try---just don't do it as > > root! The things to be careful of are changing any file permissions (do > > this only on test files you've written, when you're just practicing), and > > rm'ing or overwriting anything. If you stick to these rules the worst > > thing you're likely to do is make your console unreadable (setterm -reset > > fixes that usually). Be a brave adventurer, and just play with stuff and > > have fun. :) > > Profound advice. Keep backups of the stuff that is really > important, then go nuts. =) Absolutely. The other thing I'd add is, "make use of lots of users!" You don't need extra machines (although this is fun too). I have this hobbit account I do most stuff on. When I was at college I had a 'telsa' account which was separate which had all my work, notes, references, and assignments on it. I only used it for that. And with permissions, it meant that when messing as hobbit, I would not nuke telsa's "important stuff". Similarly now, I have test accounts with a variety of names where I try out changes (particularly in X and GNOME) before committing my hobbit account to putting up with it. And other accounts which are nothing more than useful ways to keep spam out of my mailbox. Lots of accounts with different defaults is great for learning the difference between what's underneath and unchanging, and what's on top and the pretties. It's a good way to get an idea of what controls what. > I think the whole attitude towards computers has changed since the > beginning of the PC era, and very much towards the worst, > unfortunately. I got my first computer, a Commodore Vic-20, > in 1982 or thereabouts. (I was 6.) I distinctly remember that > one of the first things that the manual said was that > > THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU CAN BREAK YOUR COMPUTER BY TYPING AT THE > KEYBOARD, UNLESS YOU ARE AN ELEPHANT. > > (pardon my caps.) Things have changed a bit, what with massive > amounts of important data being manipulated on computers these > days, but I still wish that more people of all genders wouldn't > be so damned afraid of the overgrown abaci. =) I wasn't afraid of computers when I was little. My mum (science/maths teacher) brought the School Computer (all one of it) home for holidays and my sister and I thoroughly enjoyed playing with it. I was afraid of the cost of replacing it if we broke it. I carried this over when I met ULTRIX years later at Aberystwyth university, which had a separate network for comp sci folks and actually allowed - gasp - non-cs folks to get real live accounts on the DECS. The damn thing cost thousands of pounds (and my desktop machine outspecs it now..), and I was pretty sure I couldn't afford that if I broke it. The two things that helped were the fact that I was enchanted by telnet and mail and write (and on the VAX, "phone" :)), and that big saviour, a wide network of friends who encouraged me, laughed when I did indeed break things, and reassured me that "the programmer should have expected that one day, someone would lean on the keyboard and type that particular sequence. Better find Alec (sysadmin) and tell him someone sent a ^S to the laser printer, and it's now sitting there waiting for a ^Q" That example really happened -- and it wasn't me, it was a comp sci person. Who of course didn't get a bill. Things like that helped no end! Telsa ___ issues mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
Re: [issues] Screenshots (even longer)
Warning: -horribly- long post though I've tried to snip sections. I've been reading the entire thread but have been too busy to get involved, much as I would have liked to, until now. For the record, I am in agreement with those who see this as more an issue of context than content. I have no problems with the idea of pictures of women with few clothes on, or none, or in positions which to some (all?) people are provocative, as a general category. To me, it's not the pictures, it's where they're found and the associations they carry in that area. I don't object to the pictures that come up (or would if I weren't using Lynx) if I click links off www.naughty.com or www.eroticstories.com. Because in the context of that, they're expected, and they're what people clicking those links are expecting to get. I would object if I went to a site which was purportedly about how to make a theme or use a graphical app and all the pictures were of scantily-clad women, because they're not necessary there, and they send the same "if you don't like this you'll have to put up with it" signals that some people say they find as women in generally male job. Similarly, icons like that for the irc client BitchX (woman in a bikini with a BitchX label) annoy me, because I think it's not a clever pun but vaguely offensive; and it only makes sense if you know what the program does. It's not exactly saying "irc program", is it? It's just a gratuitous female image to no point. Anyway, that said, On Sat, Oct 23, 1999 at 12:58:51AM +0200 or thereabouts, Jernej Zajc wrote: > Vinnie Surmonde wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Jernej Zajc wrote: > > > > > > What about changing your nick? > > > > First, I consider that response different from 'Well if you walk down a > > street in a short skirt after dark aren't you asking for it?' only in > > degree. > > Your militant stand seems to stand on your way of clear sight. I realise that you're not writing in your first language, but I have to say that you're not coming across too well here. You're coming across as abrupt, not inclined to listen to what people are saying, assuming a bit too much about them, and more interested in telling other people what you think than listening to what they think. I don't see anything militant in Vinnie's assessment, and as Alice said earlier, why should I have to change my name? It's my name, dammit. [chick] > > ask a hundred people and you'll get a hundred answers > You didn't give me even one. 'chick' means so many different things. Actually, to me (living in Wales), it sounds American, and I associate it with, hm.. the world as portrayed in "Grease", perhaps? That time period, and (young) men discussing women. [flaming and abusive language on lists] > Dunno; I haven't seen this on any list I am on. If I was, > I'd unsubscribe, or, if the list would suit me really well > otherwise, propose that list needs a moderator. I think Vinnie's right. As mailing lists go, this has been a very civilised and stimulating one so far. [from symbols to the symbolism of pictures] > The premise about such pictures "marking male territory" > is yours not mine. Where did you get it from? There are some work environments in which girlie pictures on the wall are more common. You mention later the situation of seering girlie pics in garages, which are here (UK) still mostly a male business. I think this one, in fact, is so common that it was used as a base in one of the X-files episodes? (People going mad and killing others, after paranoid attacks? "All done, bye bye" at the end.) That episode wouldn't have worked nearly so well if the initial environments (a production line, a queue for the cashpoint, taking your car for a service) hadn't been easily recognisable to viewers. Garage. Girlie pics. Intimidating in some vague way. (Okay, it gets more graphic in the episode, but..) > Also I don't see much difference between someone's home and > public display. If it was disrespectful it would have been > in either case, no difference here. Ah. Here I disagree, and again, I think it's the issue of context rather than content. What people choose to decorate their walls and computer screens with at home is their business. What people put up in their work environment or a place shared by other people is, to me, different. Whether the image is disrespectful is a matter of taste. If, knowing that others may find it so, someone puts a picture like that on a screenshot that other people at work can see, -that-, to me, is the disrespect: deciding that your opinion of it outweighs their opinion of it. > But that's not the point. You are comparing a website that > not even has a company standing behind it with work > environment which is supposed to be at least a bit formal. > Workplace ethics has some Net-paralell in formal sites > like www.sun.com -- you won't find a pin-up there -- and > informal sites compare to informal atmosphere in some > gara
Re: [issues] Linux Mag: 50 Linux People to Watch
Naomi wrote: > > This month's issue of Linux Magazine http://www.linux-mag.com has an > > article entitled The Linux Magazine50: 50 Linux People to Watch. They > > are ALL men, so I started thinking, well, if I write a letter about Robert Kiesling wrote: > > Andrea Archangeli is listed there with all of the guys. She's > the architect behind the 2.2 kernel's memory management. I disagreed with > the kernel-list centric bias of the list, but if there's nothing better Andrea as a male name is common in some countries. Italy is one of them. Andrea's a bloke. You're not the first to make this mistake: I think it's quite common. :) Is there any way to see this list on the web, or do I have to wait for the paper version? I didn't find any visible links to it. Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] linux women - the revenge? :-)
On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 09:27:32AM +0100 or thereabouts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Laurel Fan wrote: > > > > Ok, but why are all the women not contributing? > > > > Many are. It's just that like thousands of men and women, they aren't > > high profile, so you don't know of them. > > In Italy there aren't any, even low profile, so I'd like to show that > maybe in other countries there are some, and share their experiences. > > Eugenia Well, as Laurel said, it's entirely possible they're there but less well-known. As an example, I was looking at the manual page for useradd today, and at the bottom it says AUTHOR Julianne Frances Haugh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Now how one would search man pages for all the authors, I don't know :) But the programs which Linux distributions come with are generally free software, just as much as the kernel is. I was thinking about this the other day. When I say that I like Linux, I think really, the only thing I like about Linux, the kernel, is that I never really know it's there :) It doesn't crash, so I forget about it until I decide, for unaccountable reasons, that I want to add IRDA support or the kerneli.org patches (done one, one day I'll do the other :)) to the machine. That's the only time I really do anything with it. Oh, and occasionally someone tells me something funny about the kernel comments (Linus' birthday being incorporated into some important number somewhere, or "there's a poem in the documentation for arpnet". Yes, I'm easily amused.) The rest of the time I live in Mutt, Gnome and Lynx, with frequent forays into joe, grep, find, bash, more, cat, tinyfugue, etc. It's my impression that all of those will run on *BSD (although BSD has its own versions of some things I use, I think?) and many of them run on the commercial unixes too. So how much I 'use' Linux, and how much I use the programs which run on it, I don't know :) Anyway, just thought I'd point out one woman who clearly has written at least one thing -- a rather widely-used thing, too. Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] FAQ & Freudian Typos
On Tue, Dec 14, 1999 at 03:29:31AM + or thereabouts, Kirrily 'Skud' Robert wrote: [Caitlyn wondered if we were as many as 10% of the total Linux users] > Um, I was counting the people who, while not having Linux as their > primary OS, may use a Linux-based system for web serving, samba, etc at > work. Plus people who use their husbands/partners/etc systems to get > online, but who don't "identify" as as a Linux user. > > The last place I worked (a large university's computer centre) had about > 10% female linux users. > > Also, I'm seeing about 3-5% at conferences and user groups. I'm > imagining that there are a lot of others hidden due to having other > priorities than attending linux/unix/opensource activities (eg family, > social life, etc). > > I'd say 10% of people who use Linux or Open Source regularly are female, > but that a smaller proportion self-identify as linux users and involve > themselves in the linux community. > > How does that mesh with what other people have seen? When I saw the 10% figure I wondered, too :) You may be right about the number of women who just aren't visible - one of the things I love about linuxchix is that so many more have become visible to me through it - but Australia must have many more women attending conferences than has this side of the world. I've been to quite a few now, ranging from small events put on by LUGs to larger events with several thousand. And I would have put the proportion of women who have attended those as much nearer 1-2%, averaging out the numbers over the years. Even if you were to count the women working on stands and stalls (I am coming to hate the phrase 'booth babes', but that's how they are commonly described, grrr), it would still be low. That's for big events, though. There's plenty of LUGs in the UK but I have no idea how many women attend LUGs. The numbers might be different there. Since getting to more of these things I do look at the crowd (crowd! yea!) to see what it consists of, just from idle curiosity. One thing that I've noticed recently is a much wider mix of people, which I think is cool. And we're now able to book bigger halls which have things like sensible disabled access (well, crap disabled access, but at least more than before) compared with the small rooms in buildings we used to have, and people who simply couldn't get physical access to a room at the top of the stairs can now wander around an event floor. I do remember giggling at one show where the techie and business crowds, who were clearly identifiable, began to overlap for the first time: it looked so incongruous. Anyway, amidst all that noticing (nosing, if you prefer), I still don't see that many women. I'm sure you're right that more of us exist than attend shows. There's lots of things I do in my life where I don't attend the related events. Linux is surely the same for others. But I'd have said fewer than 5% of the attenders at a show are female. On the subject of the FAQ, I suppose you could say, "Estimates by different members of the list vary from (lower number) to (higher number)" :) Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] FAQ & Freudian Typos
On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 12:22:46PM - or thereabouts, Ian Phillips wrote: (with no linebreaks, Ian, what happened? :)) > > LUGs to larger events with several thousand. And I would have put > > the proportion of women who have attended those as much nearer 1-2%, > > That would be about right in my experience as well. The only time the > numbers have been consistently higher than that is when the groups have > been small enough that 1-2 women could register as quite a high percentage. Good point. That's my experience too. > > the women working on stands and stalls (I am coming to hate the phrase > > 'booth babes', but that's how they are commonly described, grrr), it > > "Booth Bimbos" was the term I'd heard used. Judging by the level of their > technical knowledge on average, I'd say it was more appropriate as well. Although I agree with the general point, in fairness I should add that I've met some fairly ignorant men on stalls at these things, too :) Typically it's the people who know all about their product, the product has just been ported to Linux, and they don't really know a lot about Linux. > I'm not even sure that they serve their purported marketing purpose well > either, as far as I'm concerned a much better draw for a stand would be > a cool give-away instead of the usual stress-ball or cheap biro. It > wouldn't be nearly as condescending either. Whilst I think that's a pretty common reaction, I regret to say that judging by what I have seen and heard (and this isn't just the Slashdot comments, this is at the shows), some people do indeed swap notes about which stalls to go to on the basis of the appearance of the women there. What peeves me, in effect, is not just that some companies are cynical enough to think that pretty women make a difference to the numbers who go to their stall; it's the fact that to at least some extent, they're right... Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] FAQ & Freudian Typos
On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 01:14:02PM - or thereabouts, Ian Phillips wrote: I know many people who would agree :) > > judging by what I have seen and heard (and this isn't just the Slashdot > > comments, this is at the shows), some people do indeed swap notes about > > I don't bother with slashdot anymore I'm afraid, in my opinion it has come > to exemplify most of what is wrong with our community. This is unfortunate, Yeah, I have to agree. The reason I used Slashdot as an example was not that I am a religious reader of it (very far from it, except to giggle or be appalled, these days) but because I thought if I said "Slashdot comments" you'd know what I meant and could fill in the blanks. :) I do read enough of it to have a reasonable idea of what the general attitudes are there. My favourite comment I ever saw sums it up and needs no further comment from me. It had been moderated to a total of "Score 5 (Troll)". Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] list of women in open source
On Sun, Dec 19, 1999 at 10:47:18PM +1100 or thereabouts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In netizen.lists.linuxchix.issues, you wrote: > > > >> Basically, the idea is to set up a web page which lists women who work > >> in Open Source in various capacities, such as: > > > >I think it would be a mistake to simply try to publicize women, > >because many of them would have personal or professional reasons > >not to have their names and credentials listed publicly. > > My thoughts were either that women should list themselves voluntarily, > or should be sufficiently well known that having their name one more > place on the web would be no big deal. Not to take our glorious > leader's name in vain, but I think Deb falls clearly into the latter > category, for instance. Two other examples I can think of are Elizabeth > wossname who is an editor of LWN, and Telsa Gwynne, whose diary is > extremely popular reading. My ears are burning :) I didn't think that you had originally meant, "trawl newsgroups and credits lists for female names and just stick them up regardless", no :) I wasn't sure about the idea at first, but then I thought of the pages like the one where I found a list of satisfied Lynx-users and their comments, and how encouraging I'd found it to see that I might be in a minority, but it was not that small a minority. (I have had some very cheeky comments about my preference for Lynx: people seem to assume that I must be a Luddite whereas it's not that: I prefer text, but also I have a very slow link and thus need to lose most pictures. After too many of those comments, you begin to think you're some kind of weirdo. Seeing how many others had the same thoughts as me was just wonderful.) I am thinking that something along the same lines for women who work with open source might be similarly encouraging, especially if people who come across it can submit their names, too. In fact, you might extend it (or add a different one) for women who don't work with it, but who just use it. I am becoming more and more convinced that there's a lot out there, but they don't advertise their existence. > Perhaps Telsa and Deb could give some thoughts on whether they'd mind > being listed "Linuxchix and OSWG leader" and "famed diarist" > respectively :) Laugh. I was going to protest "I'm not that famous" but I re-ran Analog the other day, and for the first time that I know about, I had been getting over a thousand hits a day. I suspect that's because most people find it through Alan's diary and Alan's diary was mentioned on Slashdot at one stage that week. Thoughts. Hmm. I have no problems with the idea, although I think writing a diary is a little frivolous compared with what other people do. I try to contribute back in other ways: I attempt to provide answers on mailing lists, I report dozens (literally :)) of bugs, I'm walking a friend through his first Linux steps, and after several successful additions or corrections to other people's documentation, my current project is to document a Gnome program that lacks any documentation. (The things you learn whilst trying to document something you -thought- you knew how to use are incredible, btw.) But it's definitely the diary that people notice. And it's a very silly diary :) > [Note that I personally dislike the idea of mentioning Telsa as "Alan > Cox's missus" or similar... her diary is a resource in its own right, > especially for those who want to hear what it's like for a non-hacker to > try to come to grips with Linux, and I personally loathe the practise of Aww, thanks :) > defining women by their relationships with men, *especially* when there > are plenty of other worthwhile attributes to define them by. But that's > just my not-very-humble opinion :)] I agree about not liking this practice myself, particularly when it extends to calling me by Alan's surname when mine is on my email and my home page. Even worse, I have recently discovered, is being mistaken for the other person :) I've recently been getting a lot of email that was probably aimed at Alan. I have no clue what some of it is even asking. Have I posted my rambles about the diary to the list before? I periodically think of doing so, but then hit 'postpone' or 'delete'. So I can't remember whether any of them made it past my censorship reaction. If I have, sorry. If not, now is a good time to say this: when I put the mailto link in, I expected (and got) a lot of feedback from non-hackers with hacker partners along the lines of "You too, huh?" There was also a bunch from the hackers saying "Eeek, just realised how my partner feels". And a noticeable amount of people who said that reading my diary and my attempts to get things to work had got them interested. My favourite was the one who was using it as ammo: "Look! _She_ has the root password on his machines! I want it too!" :) I hope she got it :) Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] list of women in open source
On Sun, Dec 19, 1999 at 10:47:18PM +1100 or thereabouts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > leader's name in vain, but I think Deb falls clearly into the latter > category, for instance. Two other examples I can think of are Elizabeth > wossname who is an editor of LWN, and Telsa Gwynne, whose diary is > extremely popular reading. On the subject of editors: Marjorie Richardson is the editor of Linux Journal, too. And here's an area where there's a huge amount of women: MUSHes. I cannot think -why- I didn't think of this earlier. But there's lots of women involved in MUSHes, and this isn't confined to playing them, and the occasional wiz-bit. One of the TinyMUSH maintainers is female: Lydia Leong. I gather that of the 'hardcode' group, there's lots of women (as I understand it, hard-code is the MUSH server and soft-code is code that works within the game, which has a programming language of its own). And people who know this world better than me tell me that it's always had lots of women in it. The MUSHing world has a substantial history behind it: it grew out of MUDs, and I was playing those ten years ago and meeting people who'd been MUDding for some years before that. It also has a fair amount of academic research into it, too. I find MUSHes a fascinating environment, personally. Cool, stimulating, you can let your imagination run riot, you can play with soft code, you can role-play, you can just make friends... Also very thought-provoking in a number of ways. Given that you need a unix-like machine to run a MUSH on, I'm really surprised no-one here thought of MUSHes. Or are Linux, BSD and MUSHes totally separate communities? I know there's at least one other poster to this list who knows a damn sight more than me about this: I'll leave it to her to come up with more reliable numbers :) But I'm sure there's a lot of women who are very well-known within that community for coding and running the things. Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Re; Despotic Demographics
On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 09:47:49AM -0500 or thereabouts, Deb Richardson wrote: > This might sound odd, but I find that the fastest way to learn new Linux > stuff is to try documenting it. Start by using available docs, but then > branch out a bit -- explore areas that aren't covered by the available > docs, write down all the fiddly-bits and details, etc. I definitely agree with this. It doesn't matter whether I am trying to write a document or explain something via email: I almost inevitably find I know more by the end of it. And have a longer list of unanswered questions, usually, but such is life. > You don't have to worry about having anyone read your docs, but if you > keep a notebook of all the stuff you learn, it makes for a handy > reference later on. I've got an old beat up notebook that has all the I really really wish I had kept the one I first started scribbling things in. I have started making sure I date and comment changes I make to config files (very handy when you want to change things -back-!) but it's not the same as my little notebook, somehow... Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Re: Demographics and such
On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 03:23:22PM +1300 or thereabouts, Simon Britnell wrote: > I wasn't originally stating that women in general or women at linuxchix > specifically are pushing quotas ( and you're right, quotas are what's worrying > me ). What I was trying to express is that I think complaining about > demographics leads to quotas which ( as you say ) are a *bad* quick-fix. Complaining about demographics leads to quotas? I don't see this, myself. > My original post actually had little to do with linuxchix and a lot to do with > some 'academic' individuals statement in an article published on a peice of > dead tree. I was (originally) looking to gauge opinion on the subject. You mentioned a comment by someone to the effect of "We need to encourage more women into IT". That's the one that set you off? I don't see anything wrong with that. "Encourage" doesn't mean "set quotas". To me, it means that when someone expresses an interest, they don't get a load of rebuffs but instead "Welcome aboard" or "Go for it". >From the comments so far, it seems that I am not the only one who thinks that way. For the record, I also think that women already in the industry are powerful role-models, that role-models are a good thing, and that more women visibly in IT would be a good thing, because it encourages others who perhaps might not have had the confidence without knowing that it could be done and there were people out there who showed that. (ugh, long sentence) If at least some of the women in IT were able to report that they had received none of the shit that most people here are all too well aware of, that would be -really- cool. At the moment, most women who have posted to the thread have stories of discrimination based on gender rather than ability; and many of the men posting have seen this in action, too. So although the first part is happening to some extent, the second half isn't. Yet. We can hope. And rather than living in hope, we can try to do something, though what that something is will vary from person to person. It might be bringing the issue of unconscious - or conscious - discrimination up in the workplace; it might simply be expressing approval or encouragement to a woman or schoolgirl who wants to work with computers and avoiding comments which make it sound like it's somehow an odd choice and that they should reconsider. I really do believe that as well as big movements towards change, little things make a cumulative difference; and consequently, the simple things like saying "Cool, go for it" rather than "Really? Why?" to people help. A bit. But it needs lots of people to do it :) > > They are NOT a creation of the women who are trying to get ourselves and > > our children a fair chance in the world. > > Are you sure you speak for that entire group of women? > I see that they are not something you approve of. Which aren't? The quotas, or that group of women? I am confused here :) Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Demographics (super long story)
On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 03:12:33PM -0500 or thereabouts, Cat wrote: I think you're quoting me, there, actually :) > > If at least some of the women in IT were able to report that they > > had received none of the shit that most people here are all too well > > aware of, that would be -really- cool. At the moment, most women > > who have posted to the thread have stories of discrimination based > > on gender rather than ability; and many of the men posting have seen > > this in action, too. > > Hi everyone -- > > In response to this paragraph, I would like to share my early and very > positive experiences in the IT industry as a 23-year-old female. I hear And am I glad you did! > so many bad things about what happens to women in this industry, and I > fully understand that it would only be by the best of luck if I did not > run into it eventually. Gosh, you sound almost like you're apologising for not having encountered them. :) I'm glad you posted this. It was great to read, and brilliant to know that at least some people find cool work environments and meet people who don't think that women into IT or CS are somehow strange. It makes it sound a lot more hopeful when as well as there being something we're trying to get away from, there is something to point to and say "And that's what we're aiming for; and see, it's not an impossible idea". :) Thanks a lot. > I said this would be long! I felt I had to speak up, because we talk and > talk about encouraging women into CS, but so often along with that the > only discussion is of the problems associated with it. We rarely talk > about the good things that have happened to us, the things that *would* > make women think CS might be a good place for them. So, share! Do :) Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] CPSR newsletter
On Sat, Jan 08, 2000 at 01:52:03PM +1100 or thereabouts, Claudine Chionh wrote: > Current Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility newsletter > (http://www.cpsr.org/) focuses on gender issues in computing -- I > found this link from Slashdot, which is a nice change from their usual > take on the place of women in computing. I'm in the process of > downloading a few articles; a fair bit of reading for the next few > days. Discussion, anyone? I haven't had time to read all those articles yet, but they looked good. The name of the submitter caught my eye: Ellen Spertus has a mass of stuff online about this topic, and it makes for interesting reading. I stupidly looked at the Slashdot discussion, which was a mistake. (Someone told me I should avoid it because it would irritate me, so naturally I had to look. How silly of me.) The link itself might be a nice change from their usual stuff, but the discussion there is the same as ever: "I'm a woman and I get no discrimination" gets moderated to five, and comments about "it's true; I see few women in my sci/math class" and "it's true; I have experienced this" are down at one and zero with the trolls and flamebait. Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Re: Demographics - Reprise
On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 06:52:39PM +1100 or thereabouts, Jenn V. wrote: > Kirrily 'Skud' Robert wrote: > > > > I'm with you on that one. It's not just dresses either... womens > > jackets and trousers often don't have pockets in them at all, let alone > > numerous or capacious ones. > > WHY are there no pockets in women's clothes? Are we assumed to not want to > carry things? I wish I knew. I end up carting a bag (not a handbag, a useful bag) around with me. Some people think it's silly, but what usually happens is that I end up with people saying, "Can you put this in there for me, too?". In the reenactment society I used to belong to, one of the articles everyone had was a smallish pouch on a belt. It was damn handy, and I still use mine routinely. Then again, I still wear the mantle (like a poncho), too :) The trouble is, I'm quite small. Things that my much taller partner can put in his pockets comfortably dig into me if I use my pockets, even I have those army-style trousers or shirts with about fifteen pockets in them. A bag is generally more useful: I can fit the important things in (purse -- money container rather than handbag --, tissues, hairbrush, my nice woolly hat, paper, book(s), torch and a swiss army knife in case I meet a horse with something in its hoof and finally get a chance to use the bit on it that has no apparent function, second book in case I finish the first at the bus stop...) Because I can never dig through this lot to find my keys, of course, I have them on a shoelace round my neck, which I've done for years. The two articles of clothing I had with useful sized pockets (leather jacket and a big hippie coat) now simply have pockets which are portals into the nether void of the lining of those coats, due to my sticking too much into them. I one had to empty my coat lining after the security thing bleeped at the airport, and it took ten minutes, and I amassed such a huge pile of general crud that everyone just stared. Then there was the time I "smuggled a bomb onto a space station" (a slightly odd party: everyone in costume and searches for weapons - water pistols etc - at the door). I had this old shell case that was the size and shape of the cardboard containers that whisky bottles arrive in. As I said, I'm small. I stuffed it into the gaping hole that once was a pocket of the leather jacket and now just a rip in the lining, and walked in, despite a search. I got laser-beamed whilst attempting to blow up the space station, though! I was one of the good guys, too :) The next party, I took an alien egg, but that didn't fit into my pockets, and besides, it was slimy. The point of all this is that pockets are very useful. Yes. Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Skud's new article on geek chicks..
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 07:46:43AM -0500 or thereabouts, Bad Mojo wrote: > On Sun, 6 Feb 2000, curious wrote: > > http://freshmeat.net/news/2000/02/05/949813140.html > > Wow, I couldn't seem to get away from this article all weekend. Every > place I went had a link to it. Not that I was avoiding it but I finally > found some time to read it. And I have one question. I think I've seen earlier drafts of it and said that I thought it was good then, but I'll add my agreement that it's well worth reading. I enjoyed it a lot. I have quibbles with some of it, but I think there's some really valid points in there. > In the third section about integrating women as they are into hackerdom as > they are, I suspect this is allready happening. Or has happened and is > still going on. But this part got me thinking ... > > "Female hackers (for some definition of hacker which is not necessarily > tied to "hard" projects) do exist. I know several of them. However, the > geek/hacker community doesn't seem to notice or acknowledge them. I'm not > saying this out of a sense of immature pique at having been overlooked, > but in response to numerous articles on Slashdot and other fora saying, in > effect, "Where are the female geeks?" Every time this occurs, numerous > female geeks and hackers say "Here we are!" and, largely, get ignored or > forgotten by the next time the question is raised." > > Maybe we should stop asking `Where are the female geeks?' Is it too early > in the new Open Source/Linux/whatever movement to be taking a tally and > trying to fix something that might be slowly fixing itself allready? I Ah, but is it fixing itself, or are a few people finally seeing fruit in their efforts to encourage other women to keep trying? I don't think it's so fixed that it's not worth hastening the process a little. (Um. Baaad sentence.) I think it's worth pushing this, myself. My husband attended the LinuxWorld Expo in New York last week, and he's used to my commenting on the lack of women when I attend these things. I wasn't at it, but demanded details when he returned. He thought there were more women attending (out of interest rather than being "booth babes") than there had been at previous ones. However, I've seen the photos of the crowds there, and it's entirely possible to find pictures where not a single woman is visible on them. Whether women are too bothered about attending the big expos is a question that came up on this list before, and I don't think there was any conclusion beyond "Perhaps we aren't so interested in expos and big events". Also, it's not just we who ask "Where are the other women?" I must admit that Linuxchix tells me where a lot of us are :) Loads of people notice it, and numerous magazines run stories about it when they're short of news. I do suspect it's a filler thing, but they also know they'll get loads of banner ad hits, too, from all the replies and rows that follow such a headline. I'm sure I can remember at least three "Ask Slashdot"s on it, and I'll bet they link to the freshmeat article, and we'll have exactly the same "I'm a woman and there's no prejudice; I hate whiny women" replies moderated to 5 and "My experience of sexism" lurking down at 0 or 1. If you're really lucky, you'll get marked down as flamebait for daring to suggest that hackers can be as exclusionary as any other group. Oh yes: eally enjoyed Laurel's (? -- sorry, lost attribution) article about the game development in the same thread, too. Telsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
