Hi Ted,
On 10/1/18 3:10 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:
>
> We expect our leaders to value and promote diversity
of all kinds.
No we don't. Many kinds of diversity have no bearing on
the IETF.
And there are documented cases where people in high tech
would like
less diversity.
Like what you ask? Well, Mozilla was doing OK under
Brendan Eich. Then
it came out that he gave money to an anti-gay marriage
campaign. Was
diversity of opinion on the topic of gay marriage
important to Mozilla?
Apparently not. Even demonstrated competence at the CEO
level was not
enough to counter-balance the mono-culture on opinion of
gay marriage
that Mozilla wanted, so out he went.
I think it may be worthwhile to read Mitchell Baker's
post on Brendan's decision. It is here:
It highlights that it can be a struggle to support both
equality and free speech, but that doing so helps
organizations committed to the potential of the Web (or
Internet) see them reach that potential. While I have never
worked for Mozilla, the given summary of their mission:
"our mission will always be to make
the Web more open so that humanity is stronger, more
inclusive and more just: that’s what it means to protect the
open Web."
So a mono-culture of opinions on gay marriage ensures Mozilla
can put
it's "focus back on protecting the Web." Which is odd. We will
have a
mono-culture on this issue and ... protect the Web! There's a
certain
"underpants gnomes" [1] thing going on. Or perhaps they mean some
people
would not want to use a product developed by "those people" and
would stop
using Mozilla which would... stop protecting the Web? Whatever.
"Humanity
is stronger when Brendan Eich is not our CEO" is quite a
statement!
seems to fit will the ethos of those
I know who have worked there.
Simplifying their struggle to achieve
balance while furthering that mission does not seem to me to
advance our own discussions much. I think it would be
better if we focused our discussions on our own efforts.
I was not simplifying their "struggle", only pointing out that
there are
examples of tech valuing a mono-culture so we can't say we want
"diversity
of all kinds." We need to say what kinds of diversity we want. And
I'd hope
it won't be done with statements designed to avoid discussion such
as:
"diversity is a competency."
Just my personal opinion, of course,
And, again, I am a better person for having received it. Thank
you.
That said, I was actually trying to focus the discussion on our
own
efforts. And would like to know which of the almost infinite
possibilities
we are seeking diversity in. I'm hoping it's not just a catch word
for
giving points to people based on how far away from some idealized
version
of a "majority culture" they are-- e.g. the lesbian muslim from
Tashkent
gets more "diversity" points than the black man from Los Angeles.
regards,
Dan.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO5sxLapAts
|
