Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>]

Since my question was left unanswered, I would like to bring it up again.

Since D&I now seems to get extended with "Equity", I would like to get
answered what is "Equity" in the scope of the ASF?

As I am reading up on the subject, it always comes back to a "GET" for a
group or an individual. The fence analogy is touted, so that everyone get
to see (mind you the problem with the paying vs non-paying viewers) is
about "get an opportunity to see", receiving something.

I have always viewed the ASF as a place to "GIVE". I have an opportunity to
"give contributions" to others, not a matter of what I "GET", which is
largely a function of how I amalgamize contributions of others to my own
life and career.

What am I missing? What is the "Outcome" for a person or a group of people,
that the "Equity" argument is trying to address, in the ASF context?

Thanks

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>]

That’s one of the things we’re studying in our surveys. Data should help
inform us of where there are anomalies and potential areas of improvement.

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 23:31 Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:45 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I am far from expert in either the problems or solutions. I think this
> list
> > is probably best for identifying problems and working towards solutions.
> >
>
> If the desired outcome is not understood, how can problems be identified
> and solutions found?
>
-- 
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 3:01 PM Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> The misspelling of your name is a persistent spelling correction that I
> sometimes catch and sometimes do not.
>
> I apologize for the error.
>

Apology accepted.


> Matt's summary is the best. This group has done a survey and is working to
> analyze it to determine where there are anomalies and propose possible
> solutions. It is premature to say that the current situation must already
> be fully understood and that goals must already be clear.
>

I think my question is misunderstood, possibly because of all of our
diverse backgrounds and point of views. I leave it at that.

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>]

Niclas,

The misspelling of your name is a persistent spelling correction that I
sometimes catch and sometimes do not.

I apologize for the error.

You are correct that I omitted the IF (and highlighted the fact that I did).

The point remains that there are many interpretations to the original usage
of EDI and it is unwarranted to draw much significance to the E.

Matt's summary is the best. This group has done a survey and is working to
analyze it to determine where there are anomalies and propose possible
solutions. It is premature to say that the current situation must already
be fully understood and that goals must already be clear.




On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 10:41 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:

> Ted, (please stop referring to me as Nicolas)
> the phrase you criticize was an answer to "maybe this belongs elsewhere",
> not "a conditional that I take as a rhetorical device".
>
> I assure you that there is good intention from me here, BUT I would also
> like to point out that you construct a strawman of what I said, which is a
> typical "bad intention" move, and I could claim that you left out "IF..."
> to make your point more strongly.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:04 PM Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Nicolas,
> >
> > It seems like your thread is thus:
> >
> > - somebody used the acronym EDI instead of D&I, possibly because this is
> a
> > common element of jargon
> > - it turns out that E commonly stands for Equity
> > - you asked about Equity in the context of Apache
> > - you got a partial answer from someone who claimed not to be an expert
> > - you conclude that "the desired outcome is not understood" (phrased as a
> > conditional that I take as a rhetorical device)
> >
> > This seems to be a very strong conclusion to be drawn from such a very
> thin
> > broth of fact.
> >
> > To me, other conclusions that might be drawn:
> >
> > - the use of EDI was simply an echo of usage in other communities and has
> > very little reference
> >
> > OR
> >
> > - the use of EDI was unintentional and, in fact, erroneous
> >
> > OR
> >
> > - the usage was intentional, but there is a well understood meaning in
> this
> > group (by people other then Ken and me)
> >
> >
> > With so many possible interpretations, it seems premature to draw any
> > conclusions about this, especially if we are guided by assuming good
> > intentions as we should.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 9:31 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:45 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am far from expert in either the problems or solutions. I think
> this
> > > list
> > > > is probably best for identifying problems and working towards
> > solutions.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If the desired outcome is not understood, how can problems be
> identified
> > > and solutions found?
> > >
> >
>

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>]

Ted, (please stop referring to me as Nicolas)
the phrase you criticize was an answer to "maybe this belongs elsewhere",
not "a conditional that I take as a rhetorical device".

I assure you that there is good intention from me here, BUT I would also
like to point out that you construct a strawman of what I said, which is a
typical "bad intention" move, and I could claim that you left out "IF..."
to make your point more strongly.



On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:04 PM Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nicolas,
>
> It seems like your thread is thus:
>
> - somebody used the acronym EDI instead of D&I, possibly because this is a
> common element of jargon
> - it turns out that E commonly stands for Equity
> - you asked about Equity in the context of Apache
> - you got a partial answer from someone who claimed not to be an expert
> - you conclude that "the desired outcome is not understood" (phrased as a
> conditional that I take as a rhetorical device)
>
> This seems to be a very strong conclusion to be drawn from such a very thin
> broth of fact.
>
> To me, other conclusions that might be drawn:
>
> - the use of EDI was simply an echo of usage in other communities and has
> very little reference
>
> OR
>
> - the use of EDI was unintentional and, in fact, erroneous
>
> OR
>
> - the usage was intentional, but there is a well understood meaning in this
> group (by people other then Ken and me)
>
>
> With so many possible interpretations, it seems premature to draw any
> conclusions about this, especially if we are guided by assuming good
> intentions as we should.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 9:31 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:45 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I am far from expert in either the problems or solutions. I think this
> > list
> > > is probably best for identifying problems and working towards
> solutions.
> > >
> >
> > If the desired outcome is not understood, how can problems be identified
> > and solutions found?
> >
>

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>]

Nicolas,

It seems like your thread is thus:

- somebody used the acronym EDI instead of D&I, possibly because this is a
common element of jargon
- it turns out that E commonly stands for Equity
- you asked about Equity in the context of Apache
- you got a partial answer from someone who claimed not to be an expert
- you conclude that "the desired outcome is not understood" (phrased as a
conditional that I take as a rhetorical device)

This seems to be a very strong conclusion to be drawn from such a very thin
broth of fact.

To me, other conclusions that might be drawn:

- the use of EDI was simply an echo of usage in other communities and has
very little reference

OR

- the use of EDI was unintentional and, in fact, erroneous

OR

- the usage was intentional, but there is a well understood meaning in this
group (by people other then Ken and me)


With so many possible interpretations, it seems premature to draw any
conclusions about this, especially if we are guided by assuming good
intentions as we should.






On Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 9:31 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:45 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I am far from expert in either the problems or solutions. I think this
> list
> > is probably best for identifying problems and working towards solutions.
> >
>
> If the desired outcome is not understood, how can problems be identified
> and solutions found?
>

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:45 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:

> I am far from expert in either the problems or solutions. I think this list
> is probably best for identifying problems and working towards solutions.
>

If the desired outcome is not understood, how can problems be identified
and solutions found?

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 8:25 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:

> Thanks for answering, appreciate it greatly.
>
> However, isn't the "ramp into ASF" more of an "equality in opportunity"
> than "equality of outcome", the latter being (IIUIC) is the definition of
> Equity?
>

This distinction between "equality in opportunity" and "equality in
outcome" is a common one to explain equity. It is helpful to avoid the
"rugged individualism" detour. But it is forcing reality to fit into words.
I don't think debating the difference in words is helpful, once you get
into specifics. One can often be easily turned into the other. For example,
imagine no ramps. Every human being has an equal opportunity to use the
sidewalks and roads that exist. But every human being does not have equal
opportunity to cross a road at an intersection.

I am far from expert in either the problems or solutions. I think this list
is probably best for identifying problems and working towards solutions.
For more general discussion of what it is all about, we have left
diversity@apache.org, yes? I am not trying to push you to the different
list, but just to be clear about their purposes and make sure to have the
right audience.

Kenn


>
> Cheers
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:12 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for the clear question. I think it is well and thoughtfully
> > phrased.
> >
> > An example from everyday life where I live is that sidewalks are
> generally
> > expected to have adequate ramps for persons using wheelchairs to cross
> > streets.
> >
> > For me, working in open source and being recognized for my contributions
> is
> > a great privilege, a longstanding dream that I was lucky enough to find a
> > path into (as a middle age cis white male with a PhD in a lucrative
> > discipline). I would like to share that privilege with many different
> sorts
> > of people, particularly those with fewer advantages. That is one outcome
> I
> > have in mind. I hope this shows an example of how D & E & I are related.
> >
> > I see the work of this list & group to include the search for what are
> the
> > undiscovered things analogous to "ramps". Also to gather the evidence
> > needed to communicate these discoveries to others. I think the Outreachy
> > project is a great example. Perhaps you would be interested in also
> helping
> > with that?
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:36 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Since my question was left unanswered, I would like to bring it up
> again.
> > >
> > > Since D&I now seems to get extended with "Equity", I would like to get
> > > answered what is "Equity" in the scope of the ASF?
> > >
> > > As I am reading up on the subject, it always comes back to a "GET" for
> a
> > > group or an individual. The fence analogy is touted, so that everyone
> get
> > > to see (mind you the problem with the paying vs non-paying viewers) is
> > > about "get an opportunity to see", receiving something.
> > >
> > > I have always viewed the ASF as a place to "GIVE". I have an
> opportunity
> > to
> > > "give contributions" to others, not a matter of what I "GET", which is
> > > largely a function of how I amalgamize contributions of others to my
> own
> > > life and career.
> > >
> > > What am I missing? What is the "Outcome" for a person or a group of
> > people,
> > > that the "Equity" argument is trying to address, in the ASF context?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
>

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>]

Thanks for answering, appreciate it greatly.

However, isn't the "ramp into ASF" more of an "equality in opportunity"
than "equality of outcome", the latter being (IIUIC) is the definition of
Equity?
And that we since day one haven't care about your background to contribute,
isn't the "opportunity" aspect already covered?

Cheers

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:12 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:

> Thank you for the clear question. I think it is well and thoughtfully
> phrased.
>
> An example from everyday life where I live is that sidewalks are generally
> expected to have adequate ramps for persons using wheelchairs to cross
> streets.
>
> For me, working in open source and being recognized for my contributions is
> a great privilege, a longstanding dream that I was lucky enough to find a
> path into (as a middle age cis white male with a PhD in a lucrative
> discipline). I would like to share that privilege with many different sorts
> of people, particularly those with fewer advantages. That is one outcome I
> have in mind. I hope this shows an example of how D & E & I are related.
>
> I see the work of this list & group to include the search for what are the
> undiscovered things analogous to "ramps". Also to gather the evidence
> needed to communicate these discoveries to others. I think the Outreachy
> project is a great example. Perhaps you would be interested in also helping
> with that?
>
> Kenn
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:36 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> > Since my question was left unanswered, I would like to bring it up again.
> >
> > Since D&I now seems to get extended with "Equity", I would like to get
> > answered what is "Equity" in the scope of the ASF?
> >
> > As I am reading up on the subject, it always comes back to a "GET" for a
> > group or an individual. The fence analogy is touted, so that everyone get
> > to see (mind you the problem with the paying vs non-paying viewers) is
> > about "get an opportunity to see", receiving something.
> >
> > I have always viewed the ASF as a place to "GIVE". I have an opportunity
> to
> > "give contributions" to others, not a matter of what I "GET", which is
> > largely a function of how I amalgamize contributions of others to my own
> > life and career.
> >
> > What am I missing? What is the "Outcome" for a person or a group of
> people,
> > that the "Equity" argument is trying to address, in the ASF context?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>]

Thank you for the clear question. I think it is well and thoughtfully
phrased.

An example from everyday life where I live is that sidewalks are generally
expected to have adequate ramps for persons using wheelchairs to cross
streets.

For me, working in open source and being recognized for my contributions is
a great privilege, a longstanding dream that I was lucky enough to find a
path into (as a middle age cis white male with a PhD in a lucrative
discipline). I would like to share that privilege with many different sorts
of people, particularly those with fewer advantages. That is one outcome I
have in mind. I hope this shows an example of how D & E & I are related.

I see the work of this list & group to include the search for what are the
undiscovered things analogous to "ramps". Also to gather the evidence
needed to communicate these discoveries to others. I think the Outreachy
project is a great example. Perhaps you would be interested in also helping
with that?

Kenn

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:36 PM Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:

> Since my question was left unanswered, I would like to bring it up again.
>
> Since D&I now seems to get extended with "Equity", I would like to get
> answered what is "Equity" in the scope of the ASF?
>
> As I am reading up on the subject, it always comes back to a "GET" for a
> group or an individual. The fence analogy is touted, so that everyone get
> to see (mind you the problem with the paying vs non-paying viewers) is
> about "get an opportunity to see", receiving something.
>
> I have always viewed the ASF as a place to "GIVE". I have an opportunity to
> "give contributions" to others, not a matter of what I "GET", which is
> largely a function of how I amalgamize contributions of others to my own
> life and career.
>
> What am I missing? What is the "Outcome" for a person or a group of people,
> that the "Equity" argument is trying to address, in the ASF context?
>
> Thanks
>

Re: Definition of Equity in ASF context

[Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>]

Giving can bring with it a sense of satisfaction. That is what one 
"gets" from many volunteer activities, including, at least for some 
people, open source. That sense of satisfaction can be lost if 
contributions are not accepted or not valued.


On 1/16/2020 7:35 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> Since my question was left unanswered, I would like to bring it up again.
> 
> Since D&I now seems to get extended with "Equity", I would like to get
> answered what is "Equity" in the scope of the ASF?
> 
> As I am reading up on the subject, it always comes back to a "GET" for a
> group or an individual. The fence analogy is touted, so that everyone get
> to see (mind you the problem with the paying vs non-paying viewers) is
> about "get an opportunity to see", receiving something.
> 
> I have always viewed the ASF as a place to "GIVE". I have an opportunity to
> "give contributions" to others, not a matter of what I "GET", which is
> largely a function of how I amalgamize contributions of others to my own
> life and career.
> 
> What am I missing? What is the "Outcome" for a person or a group of people,
> that the "Equity" argument is trying to address, in the ASF context?
> 
> Thanks
>