4 ms·

I'm going to be ridiculously blunt: Assuming the following: - the amount of women in tech is a fraction of the amount of men - the intelligence/experience/sk

I'm going to be ridiculously blunt: Assuming the following: - the amount of women in tech is a fraction of the amount of men - the intelligence/experience/skills of all of these men and women is about even - percentage-wise there are just about as many men as women that are crap at public speaking - the intent is to put more women in front of crowds Assuming these, teaching none but women how to speak (or, none but men, for that matter) only serves to make the level of these events lower. You want the best, not the /best of this or that minority/. This goes both ways, and that's what the OP pointed out, with an unhealthy dose of sarcasm. That said, I think having some women up there might actually help. It gives the youth a better impression, perhaps even inspiring some women to have a go at IT.

michaelmior 13y ago
I don't understand why you suggest that teaching public speaking will make the quality of events lower.
jessedhillon 13y ago
To illustrate the problem with your point, go one step further. If women are 1%, say, of the developer community, why not only give them 1% of stage time -- maybe 24 minutes on a 3 day conference? Your argument is predicated on the idea that the only fair allocation is a pro-rata distribution of time, resembling almost perfectly the demographics of the audience. Consider instead that the echo chamber effect is real, and it is to the benefit of the community that people with fundamentally different backgrounds will introduce perspectives which, when mixed with those of the majority, will make the entire community more robust. Second, your concept of applying quality standards, while ostensibly a desirable thing, is problematic in application. In a community where majority/minority dynamics apply, invariably the assessment of quality will tend towards what the majority feels is most aligned with its own sensibilities. Those of course are informed by their own experiences, and to the extent that there are strongly overlapping elements, the consensus view will contain blind spots. I don't know what the answer is to that, but it's something to think about if you want to take the issue seriously. So yeah, if you think that the best thing for a conference, or a community in general is to only hear from perspectives in equal proportion to how they occur in the population at large -- which is the effect of so-called meritorious approaches such as yours -- then by all means you should count the allotment of every second. Black programmers should be invited to give 30-second lightning talks whereas smart, young white males from middle class backgrounds should pontificate for hours. I personally think that the quality of your conference will be much worse. I would rather see someone decide to give a woman a chance, yes because she's a woman but also because she's smart, so as to give a voice to people who don't normally get a chance to be heard much.
- richforrester 13y ago
  Read the last line. The one starting with the words I think. I was just pointing out what the OP meant. In other words, don't address your comment to me. I'm on your side.

michaelmior 13y ago

I don't understand why you suggest that teaching public speaking will make the quality of events lower.

jessedhillon 13y ago

To illustrate the problem with your point, go one step further. If women are 1%, say, of the developer community, why not only give them 1% of stage time -- maybe 24 minutes on a 3 day conference? Your argument is predicated on the idea that the only fair allocation is a pro-rata distribution of time, resembling almost perfectly the demographics of the audience. Consider instead that the echo chamber effect is real, and it is to the benefit of the community that people with fundamentally different backgrounds will introduce perspectives which, when mixed with those of the majority, will make the entire community more robust. Second, your concept of applying quality standards, while ostensibly a desirable thing, is problematic in application. In a community where majority/minority dynamics apply, invariably the assessment of quality will tend towards what the majority feels is most aligned with its own sensibilities. Those of course are informed by their own experiences, and to the extent that there are strongly overlapping elements, the consensus view will contain blind spots. I don't know what the answer is to that, but it's something to think about if you want to take the issue seriously. So yeah, if you think that the best thing for a conference, or a community in general is to only hear from perspectives in equal proportion to how they occur in the population at large -- which is the effect of so-called meritorious approaches such as yours -- then by all means you should count the allotment of every second. Black programmers should be invited to give 30-second lightning talks whereas smart, young white males from middle class backgrounds should pontificate for hours. I personally think that the quality of your conference will be much worse. I would rather see someone decide to give a woman a chance, yes because she's a woman but also because she's smart, so as to give a voice to people who don't normally get a chance to be heard much.

richforrester 13y ago
Read the last line. The one starting with the words I think. I was just pointing out what the OP meant. In other words, don't address your comment to me. I'm on your side.