Open Stack

+1 on keeping it open to ALL, not just men, not just women, ALL no matter
what your sex is, as long as you are helping and with the cause :)

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Linda Skrocki (lskrocki) <lskrocki at cisco.com
> wrote:

>  +1 to…
>
>    - Keeping it open and accessible to all
>    - Logging to align with the governance Courtney cites
>    - Not letting trolls dictate naming or anything else for that matter
>
> I don't have a strong preference on the name.
>
>   From: Rainya Mosher <rainya.mosher at gmail.com>
> Date: Monday, June 1, 2015 at 4:42 PM
> To: Courtney Ferry <cferry at carpathia.com>
>
> Cc: "women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org" <
> women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Women-of-openstack] IRC channel followup from working
> breakfast.
>
>    +1 for keeping it as open and accessible as possible. I have said in
> the past how a room full of women is no more diverse than a room full of
> men, though I do understand the desire to have groups of all one gender or
> the other in certain situations. Given the relatively few number of women
> in tech and how we were not even 10% of the Vancouver summit population, we
> need as many advocates as we can find to take up the cause of diversity of
> thought through different genders and cultures. Making it as simple as
> possibly to our male and female advocates and champions to find us and
> interact with us seems like a great start.
>
>  As for trolling, I do worry about it, but also don't like making
> decisions based on what might happen. Additional administrative overhead
> won't stop the trolls and it adds extra work to the channel leaders. In
> fact, having such a policy could actually attract more trolls. If they know
> there is an open channel that makes you agree to something to stay, they
> might seek it out for a cheap thrill knowing they can get a reaction
> easily.
>
>  #openstack-opw makes a lot of sense to keep it simple. We could also
> consider -wos (*W*omen [of] *O*pen*S*tack, acryonymFinder
> <http://www.acronymfinder.com/WOS.html>), but I do love -woo!
>
> Merrian-Webster defines *woo* as "to try to attract (someone, such as a
> customer, voter, worker, etc.) : to attempt to persuade (someone) to buy
> something from you, vote for you, work for you, etc." Seems like part of
> our goal might be to attract and persuade more women to join the community?
>
> In the Clifton StrengthsFinder
> <http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/721/woo.aspx>, "WOO" is an acronym
> for "winning others over" and is all about getting to know people and
> making sure strangers don't remain so for long. I think it is also very
> fitting for Women of OpenStack.
>
> (Disclaimer, WOO is in my top 10 strengths so I think it's just peachy!)
>
>
>  Rainya
> 210.316.5065
>  *Not all of us can save the world. Some of us have to make it worth
> saving. - RFM*
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Courtney Ferry <cferry at carpathia.com>
> wrote:
>
>>  I'll add one more voice for keeping it open.  Preemptively excluding
>> anyone smacks too much of the opposite of what we are trying to accomplish.
>>
>>
>>  Rocky's idea of using an acronym instead of –women is also pretty good,
>> just to keep down trolls searching for a dating channel.  I know the name
>> of the group has changed, but since the –opw already exists, how about we
>> just use it to save the hassle?
>>
>>  Regarding logging, it looks to be required by the foundation.  "All
>> OpenStack related channels shall be logged and made publicly accessible and
>> attempts to notify channel users of that fact shall be undertaken."
>> http://governance.openstack.org/reference/irc.html
>>
>>  Susie mentioned needing documentation.  I wrote a good bit of the "how
>> to use IRC" wiki page for my office, so I already have a lot of material.
>> I'd be glad to help.
>>
>>  Cheers,
>>
>>  C-
>>
>>   From: Rochelle Grober <rochelle.grober at huawei.com>
>> Date: Monday, June 1, 2015 at 4:20 PM
>> To: Anne Gentle <annegentle at justwriteclick.com>, "Gray, Susie" <
>> susie.gray at hp.com>
>> Cc: "women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org" <
>> women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [Women-of-openstack] IRC channel followup from working
>> breakfast.
>>
>>    I’m in agreement with Anne.  I don’t know how much trolling happens
>> on OpenStack channels, but I don’t think it’s a lot.  That said, there is a
>> higher likelihood of trolling on a channel identifying itself as for
>> women.  Maybe we should consider a little lower profile such as
>> #openstack-woo.  Put info in the mailing list, the wikis, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would not like to limit the channel to just women.  If men are
>> interested in our problems/solutions/discussions, they should be free to
>> participate.  As long as they agree to and abide by the terms of
>> participation.  I participated in the training session for women in tech
>> dealing with trolling and other issues and it was heavily male, and
>> extremely sympathetic and supportive of reducing the problems encountered
>> by women in tech.  They can have valuable insight into defusing situations
>> and supporting us in handling situations.
>>
>>
>>
>> On the issue of keeping a record of the channel, I’m undecided.  I lean
>> towards not recording the channel, but if someone has a good argument for
>> it, I can easily be swayed.
>>
>>
>>
>> My 2 cents.
>>
>>
>>
>> --Rocky
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Anne Gentle [mailto:annegentle at justwriteclick.com
>> <annegentle at justwriteclick.com>]
>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 31, 2015 19:27
>> *To:* Gray, Susie
>> *Cc:* women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Women-of-openstack] IRC channel followup from working
>> breakfast.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Gray, Susie <susie.gray at hp.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey y'all
>>
>> So I pretty much found out straight away that the "rules" for channels we
>> manage on freenode should allow us to have a private channel as it's for a
>> "diversity type" reason.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Susie,
>>
>> Well... but the TC just passed a resolution to prevent private IRC
>> channels. [1] I'd like to see us agreeing to that guidance.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was going to propose we use the existing open #openstack-opw channel,
>> which we use for the Outreach Program for Women, now named Outreachy. Since
>> -opw isn't the name of the program any more, we could rename the channel
>> #openstack-women.
>>
>>
>>
>> I've talked to people who run channels with a requirement upon entry of
>> answering the question in the affirmative, "Do you agree to our terms (with
>> a link to the terms)?" If someone doesn't answer or hedges, then they are
>> kicked. If they still come back, but won't agree to the terms, they are
>> banned. Thing is, that turns into a trollbait channel and you have to have
>> 24x7 coverage to ask and if you don't get the answer you need, to kick,
>> then ban the person who won't agree to the terms. I'm not sure we need that
>> level of filter.
>>
>>
>>
>> My proposal would be to re-use the existing #openstack-opw channel,
>> renaming to #openstack-women (keeping with some other patterns in open
>> source [2]), and keeping it public. We should also decide if an agreement
>> upon entry is the way we want to go with this to help with the goal of
>> ensuring the channel remains open but with known goals for interaction.
>>
>>
>>
>> What do you all think?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Anne
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. http://governance.openstack.org/reference/irc.html
>>
>> 2. http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/IRC
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Technically I've found a person with admin rights who is willing to help
>> set this up. I'm happy to help with any maintenance if there is any also. I
>> think it should also be non-logged to add to it being a "safe-space" for us
>> to just chat.
>>
>> We will also need volunteers to write up some documentation with links to
>> websites which are appropriate to 000 baby/completely non technical folk in
>> order to help them get set up and running. A lot of the technology us
>> techies take for granted is very very scary to non-technical people and we
>> need to support all our colleagues not just the techies.
>>
>> Currently I was told we needed to run this past the foundation and get it
>> okayed before going ahead. I am not aware of who to speak to or how this
>> needs to be approached. Can the organisers help with this please?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -grue-
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Women-of-openstack mailing list
>> Women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/women-of-openstack
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Anne Gentle
>> annegentle at justwriteclick.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Women-of-openstack mailing list
>> Women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/women-of-openstack
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Women-of-openstack mailing list
> Women-of-openstack at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/women-of-openstack
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/women-of-openstack/attachments/20150602/0d964c6c/attachment.html>