4 ms·

> You don't need a "diversity initiative", you just need leadership willing to enforce some very simple rules of civility. If a project doesn't have that leader

> You don't need a "diversity initiative", you just need leadership willing to enforce some very simple rules of civility. If a project doesn't have that leadership, then find one that does. I find projects that seem to care enough to kick uncivil members out by the presence of a code of conduct (very basic document that says "we welcome people, harassment is bad folks" and points at a resolution process most of the time) and leadership that's willing to talk about the issues that members of the community face. There's no other way to tell whether a community will have my back, and yet that gets classed as a "diversity initiative". > I'm not sure how your hacklab worked (is it privately owned, a non-profit, etc.? I don't know), but surely there was some upper management to complain to? It's a small group, 30-odd members, completely bootstrapped. Eventually I managed to gain enough political capital to convince a couple of people to talk to him, and it was eventually resolved - not before a lot of harm was done. > This sounds like a money problem to me. I've only seen a couple of hacklabs (and never got too involved) but basically they seemed to take over old buildings in a downtown area where the rent was really cheap (because the building was old), meaning these hacklabs didn't exactly have a lot of cash to spend on renovations. Sure - but the point is that at the very least, we acknowledged this as an issue (and continue to do so every AGM) and kept an eye out for more accessible locations, rather than - as a union that a friend is part of and that has plenty of money is doing - ignoring the needs of their members despite having the capital. I believe the hacklab is moving to a more accessible location in the near future primarily due to the increased accessibility, despite it costing them a little more money and potentially needing to raise membership costs or spend effort on recruiting new members, which is great. > It might be possible to identify them and raise their behavior with whatever organization they're representing (if any) at this conference. That's a wonderful way to receive more harassment from a wider group, unfortunately. The only reason people get away with this crap is that when anybody tries to do something about it, they have enough political capital that they can have it waved away as someone wanting to hurt them. It's more painful to try and do something about it and then see the same person at the next conference anyway with no apparent resolution than to just try and heal privately.

magduf 8y ago
I think we may be talking about different things. A simple CoC is fine: "act civility and decently or there will be consequences" is what any decent CoC should boil down to. It's sad that any project feels that it needs such a thing, but if the project has an incident with a toxic member, it's understandable that they would feel the need for one. A "diversity initiative" is something else altogether, attempting to do some kind of social politics rather than focus on the work. Pushing to recruit people of certain genders or ethnicities is an example here. IMO, there should be no such thing: members should be welcomed no matter their background or physical features, as long as they can follow the simple CoC (i.e., act civility and don't harass, abuse, etc.). >Sure - but the point is that at the very least, we acknowledged this as an issue (and continue to do so every AGM) and kept an eye out for more accessible locations I see no problem here. You have to be realistic though, but it doesn't hurt to keep your eyes open to other possibilities. >That's a wonderful way to receive more harassment from a wider group, unfortunately. The only reason people get away with this crap is that when anybody tries to do something about it, they have enough political capital that they can have it waved away as someone wanting to hurt them. Hmm.. definitely a tricky problem, and an indication of a toxic culture in some places. Maybe whatever organization that person is from should be disinvited from future conferences if they apparently condone such behavior? Otherwise, your organization could refuse to attend, citing such behavior. It does seem that some people (particularly those in leadership positions) need to take a stand here. Unfortunately, it does seem that usually, positive social change only comes about because of sacrifices made by some brave individuals.

magduf 8y ago

I think we may be talking about different things. A simple CoC is fine: "act civility and decently or there will be consequences" is what any decent CoC should boil down to. It's sad that any project feels that it needs such a thing, but if the project has an incident with a toxic member, it's understandable that they would feel the need for one. A "diversity initiative" is something else altogether, attempting to do some kind of social politics rather than focus on the work. Pushing to recruit people of certain genders or ethnicities is an example here. IMO, there should be no such thing: members should be welcomed no matter their background or physical features, as long as they can follow the simple CoC (i.e., act civility and don't harass, abuse, etc.). >Sure - but the point is that at the very least, we acknowledged this as an issue (and continue to do so every AGM) and kept an eye out for more accessible locations I see no problem here. You have to be realistic though, but it doesn't hurt to keep your eyes open to other possibilities. >That's a wonderful way to receive more harassment from a wider group, unfortunately. The only reason people get away with this crap is that when anybody tries to do something about it, they have enough political capital that they can have it waved away as someone wanting to hurt them. Hmm.. definitely a tricky problem, and an indication of a toxic culture in some places. Maybe whatever organization that person is from should be disinvited from future conferences if they apparently condone such behavior? Otherwise, your organization could refuse to attend, citing such behavior. It does seem that some people (particularly those in leadership positions) need to take a stand here. Unfortunately, it does seem that usually, positive social change only comes about because of sacrifices made by some brave individuals.