| spotz | fungi I can see the words going together but the action items? There should have only been 2 word lists | 14:55 |
|---|---|---|
| fungi | there are three word lists in your e-mail, the first "terminology to which special attention should be paid" has three entries and is embedded just before the final paragraph of the statement, the next "words to focus on" mostly duplicates it, and then the third "other words to consider" has some more | 14:57 |
| fungi | i'm suggesting all those get collapsed into a single list, pulling the "terminology | 14:58 |
| fungi | to which special attention should be paid" suggestions out of the statement of support | 14:58 |
| fungi | it just seems really out of place there now that we have a more complete set of suggestions to attach | 15:00 |
| fungi | we can show some implied importance in how the list is sorted, but the terms and possible replacements don't really seem like part of the statement of support since it's still up to project leaders as to which of those might be a concern within their respective communities | 15:06 |
| fungi | as it stands in the latest draft it could, for example, easily be interpreted that the board sees use of "master" for a git branch name as a bigger problem than using the term "crippled" | 15:08 |
| spotz | Oh we get rid of terminology... It was replaced with word to focus! | 15:31 |
| spotz | But yeah we can combine the 2 remaining ones. | 15:32 |
| fungi | ultimately i think it's going to be best received by communities if the statement of support from the board doesn't presume which specific words are a concern for all communities, and then the d&i wg is including a list of words we've researched as an addendum requested by community leaders | 15:35 |
| fungi | that sets a clear separation between the prose of the general statement the board is voting on, and the wordlist we're attaching to get people thinking broadly about the problem | 15:36 |
| fungi | and also avoids the board members having to get into debates over including or omitting specific entries | 15:36 |
| spotz | I'm on your side there which is why we didn't originally have words. What we can do is stance from the board and lists from D&I | 15:40 |
| fungi | yes, i think that way we get the best of both worlds. we have a general statement the board wants without diving into implementation details, and then a list of potential problems and some possible solutions as requested by community leadership | 15:42 |
| fungi | they're complimentary artifacts, but with distinctly different authority behind them | 15:43 |
| fungi | the prose we have and the lists we have are, on their own, good and polished at this point in my opinion, so it's really just pulling the terminology example out of the statement of support and smashing the lists together into their own thing | 15:44 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!