Add Diversity and Inclusion working group #48
Conversation
sabderemane
left a comment
sabderemane
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🚗 passing-by but look nice! I have some suggestions.
template.md
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it a mistake? It would preferable to keep the template for others :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes pls it was a mistake
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No worries, if you re-add the template it will be no longer in the changes.
Co-authored-by: Sarah Abderemane <sarahabderemane@gmail.com>
Change .org to .com in the the WG email address
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking promising! Some changes to make for clarity. Something that isn’t clear to me generally is how much the group would work on implementation of the policies / initiatives it decides on.
@Arya-AD @AfiMaameDufie when you have the chance, could you add a description or comment to the PR that explains the status of this proposal? It’s not clear how much reviews you’re expecting at this stage from interested contributors or board members / how much you want new members?
|
|
||
| ## Scope of responsibilities | ||
|
|
||
| The working group's purpose is to support the DSF in supporting and facilitating the growth of a diverse and international community of Django programmers, and especially to make sure that the voices of Underrepresented groups are heard in order to foster a more inclusive and diverse Django community. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| The working group's purpose is to support the DSF in supporting and facilitating the growth of a diverse and international community of Django programmers, and especially to make sure that the voices of Underrepresented groups are heard in order to foster a more inclusive and diverse Django community. | |
| The working group's purpose is to support and facilitate the growth of a diverse and international community of Django programmers, and especially to make sure that the voices of Underrepresented groups are heard in order to foster a more inclusive and diverse Django community. |
more direct = better? The DSF doesn’t do much currently so I think we need a group that drives.
| - Discussing policy, initiatives, grant proposals and membership to recommend to the DSF Board of Directors in line with the group’s purpose. | ||
| - Communicating and collecting feedback from the Django community to understand how the DSF can better serve and grow a diverse membership. | ||
| - Measuring, evaluating, and sharing the DSF’s progress towards its diversity initiatives on a regular basis. | ||
| - The Working Group reserves the right to consult with outside experts. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This feels evident so I don’t think this needs to be in the group’s responsibilities?
| - Communicating and collecting feedback from the Django community to understand how the DSF can better serve and grow a diverse membership. | ||
| - Measuring, evaluating, and sharing the DSF’s progress towards its diversity initiatives on a regular basis. | ||
| - The Working Group reserves the right to consult with outside experts. | ||
| - Serving as the Djangonaut Space other mentorship programs D&I liaison. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don’t understand what a D&I liaison is, I think this needs either more specific "liaison" tasks, or on the opposite replace with a more generic "Supporting mentorship programs like Djangonaut Space to achieve diversity and inclusion goals"?
When I see "liaison" I generally think of a single person, not a group.
| The Working Group will pursue this goal in several ways including: | ||
|
|
||
| - Recruiting globally representative Working Group members that will advocate for and provide insights on behalf of their local communities. Our members will, where possible, include representatives from each continent/ region. | ||
| - Discussing policy, initiatives, grant proposals and membership to recommend to the DSF Board of Directors in line with the group’s purpose. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this would be clearer as:
| - Discussing policy, initiatives, grant proposals and membership to recommend to the DSF Board of Directors in line with the group’s purpose. | |
| - Recommending policy, initiatives, grant proposals and membership to the DSF Board of Directors in line with the group’s purpose. |
But for grant proposals, I don’t understand if we mean the DSF as grantor or grantee? Same question for membership, is the group recommending members for the DSF, or things the DSF should join?
| - Measuring, evaluating, and sharing the DSF’s progress towards its diversity initiatives on a regular basis. | ||
| - The Working Group reserves the right to consult with outside experts. | ||
| - Serving as the Djangonaut Space other mentorship programs D&I liaison. | ||
| - Performing Audit or report on D&I of Django events and contributors. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don’t understand the difference between audits and reports in this context? And how this point is different to:
- Measuring, evaluating, and sharing the DSF’s progress towards its diversity initiatives on a regular basis.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not even sure how the group would audit D&I. If we are going to measure the "inclusion" of "underrepresented" groups, that metric is almost guaranteed to be performative (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law). The best I think we can do is not fall into the trap of convenience and playing into the majority, and trying to accommodate a wide range of needs, but that means a significant increase in operational costs. Still not sure how that could be audited.
| - Folks that would like to join the Diversity and Inclusion Work Group should send an email to the WG `diversity-inclusion@djangoproject.com` introducing themselves. The WG will vote on new member requests verbally at meetings, and the board can take part to the vote. | ||
| - The working group adopts the DSF [Code of Conduct](https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/) . | ||
| - Any actions made against the principles in the Code of Conduct (found by a simple majority of 51%+) will result in the acting person being removed from the working group. | ||
| - Diversity and Inclusion working group voting members are required to confirm their intent to continue participating in the Working Group within one month of a new DSF Board election. This will be led by chair/vice-chair. If there is no response within two weeks, then the individual is automatically removed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This feels pretty harsh (depending on how literally you interpret this I suppose?). Not sure if that’s your intention. Also note yearly elections of the DSF Board are held close to the christmas period where lots of people are away, and there can be other elections in theory if Board members left during the year.
|
|
||
| ## Budget | ||
|
|
||
| - TBA |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I’m not sure if the plan is to complete this before or after the group’s initial formation?
|
|
||
| ## Reporting | ||
|
|
||
| - The Diversity and Inclusion Working Group will submit by email a monthly report to the DSF board of Directors. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
None of our other WGs do monthly reports, this feels very ambitious. Why do you suggest this frequency?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 on @thibaudcolas 's comment.
My additional comments;
- I couldn't catch what will be reported here. What type of output will be generated monthly?
- Also, why just share it only with the board? It would be a report that interests everyone in and outside of the community, why don't we share it publicly and allow all related parties to see it?
| - The working group will consider outside input, edit the document, then vote for final approval. | ||
| - The working group will vote on new standards and will require a quorum of two-thirds of the voting members for approval of motions / content. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don’t understand the difference between "final proposal" and "new standards" when it comes to "new policy recommendations"?
| ## Appendix | ||
|
|
||
| ### Decision Making Procedures | ||
| - Discussions will happen via online communication platforms, video chat, or mailing list. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This just repeats "comms" above?
|
|
||
| ## Reporting | ||
|
|
||
| - The Diversity and Inclusion Working Group will submit by email a monthly report to the DSF board of Directors. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 on @thibaudcolas 's comment.
My additional comments;
- I couldn't catch what will be reported here. What type of output will be generated monthly?
- Also, why just share it only with the board? It would be a report that interests everyone in and outside of the community, why don't we share it publicly and allow all related parties to see it?
| ## Scope of responsibilities | ||
|
|
||
| The working group's purpose is to support the DSF in supporting and facilitating the growth of a diverse and international community of Django programmers, and especially to make sure that the voices of Underrepresented groups are heard in order to foster a more inclusive and diverse Django community. | ||
| Our primary goal is to increase participation from underrepresented groups, create an inclusive community environment, and promote diverse leadership within the Django project. We also aim to provide guidance to the DSF Board of Directors in line with this mandate. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't this pretty vague? What does it mean to increase participation, and what is our understanding of an underrepresented group? I have several related concerns here:
- We focus on gender and nationality-based "inclusion" a lot, but we neglect the inclusion of neurodivergent individuals. Our current processes (speaking from experience) and approach to communication can easily burn out a neurodivergent individual. I'd expect those issues to be addressed in this group.
- What action would the group take the increase inclusion?
| - Measuring, evaluating, and sharing the DSF’s progress towards its diversity initiatives on a regular basis. | ||
| - The Working Group reserves the right to consult with outside experts. | ||
| - Serving as the Djangonaut Space other mentorship programs D&I liaison. | ||
| - Performing Audit or report on D&I of Django events and contributors. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not even sure how the group would audit D&I. If we are going to measure the "inclusion" of "underrepresented" groups, that metric is almost guaranteed to be performative (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law). The best I think we can do is not fall into the trap of convenience and playing into the majority, and trying to accommodate a wide range of needs, but that means a significant increase in operational costs. Still not sure how that could be audited.
| - The Working Group reserves the right to consult with outside experts. | ||
| - Serving as the Djangonaut Space other mentorship programs D&I liaison. | ||
| - Performing Audit or report on D&I of Django events and contributors. | ||
| - Supporting the organisation of regional Django related events around the world in line with the group's purpose. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1. Also, what does that mean for the event? Would the group provide assistance with D&I-related workload (I'm not sure which tasks that would include)
|
|
||
| - Folks that would like to join the Diversity and Inclusion Work Group should send an email to the WG `diversity-inclusion@djangoproject.com` introducing themselves. The WG will vote on new member requests verbally at meetings, and the board can take part to the vote. | ||
| - The working group adopts the DSF [Code of Conduct](https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/) . | ||
| - Any actions made against the principles in the Code of Conduct (found by a simple majority of 51%+) will result in the acting person being removed from the working group. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 on simplifying language, but I don't support the majority being able to remove a person just with their votes. I believe there should be a really good reason to remove someone from a group, such as failing to fulfill their responsibilities defined by the charter or violating the CoC.
4 participants
See #45