[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian's Freenode IRC channels

On Jan 12, 2008 8:36 AM, Melissa Draper <melissa@meldraweb.com> wrote:

> I don't recall claiming that I was promised that there were no jerks. I
> was not promised anything to that degree. It was merely indicated to me
> often that Debian-Women had achieved what Ubuntu-Women had not. To me,
> Ubuntu-Women has achieved a far further reach than the inner circles.

Before Debian-Women started, there were only 3 female DDs and the
atmosphere at #debian-devel and at the debian-devel mailing list was
not friendly towards women.

After a few years of Debian-Women we have about 10 female DDs, and
others in the making, and the atmosphere at most developers places is
welcoming towards females.  These results are what we have achieved.
We changed Debian (well, at least, I feel we did).

You might feel that this is not much compared to Ubuntu-Women (I have
no idea what Ubuntu-Women has achieved, can you tell us?), but I feel
that since many UD are DDs, the influence of Debian-Women on the
DDs/UDs has allowed Ubuntu-Women to focus on other areas, since the
developing areas had already been "fixed" by Debian-Women.

Also the "inner circles" as you call it, involve quite a lot of
people.  It might not reach towards the full user community, nobody
denies that, but I really feel that Debian-Women has made a big change
in the whole Debian Developer community, not only in an "elite"
circle, but in all people related to development.

As was already stated, we don't oppose to making this effort broader,
and reaching user communities as well, but for doing that, we would
have to have a lot of time and put a lot of effort into it, which we
currently don't have, and it was never one of our priority aims.

If it's your priority, you have the time and the will to do it, then
you are more than welcome to do it.  But I don't think it's fair to
come here demanding that we should do something that we never claimed
we would do.


Reply to: