Subject: Re: IETF Diversity

From: Randy Presuhn <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:13:43 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

Hi -

It seems as though participants in this thread are operating
with different understandings of what constitutes "institutional
bias."  A critical difference is whether *intent* is necessary
for bias to exist.  As I understand it, institutional bias
can exist in the absence of ill intent, and can even be an
unintended consequence of efforts to *reduce* bias.

If something about the way we do business makes it more difficult
for otherwise qualified individuals from some group to participate
at a given level, then we have to admit the possibility that
we have a case of institutional bias.  The available remedies
might be worse than the problem, but we shouldn't fool ourselves
into thinking that we're any better at this stuff than any other
well-meaning bunch of people, and we shouldn't pretend that
privilege doesn't exist, no matter how much that conflicts
with our self-image fantasy of being a meritocracy.  Embracing
an ideal does not mean ignoring reality.

For a hopefully non-controversial example, consider how excessively
idiomatic English, over-reliance on sports metaphors, and obscure
cultural references all serve as barriers to participation.
It doesn't matter whether I intend to exclude anyone through,
for example, my use of long sentences.  But if my long sentences
make it too much harder for others to participate, then I *am*
part of the problem, and need to think about how that effect might
be mitigated.

Randy

---

From: Doug Barton <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:32:33 -0700

> unintended consequence of efforts to *reduce* bias.

I would disagree with your definition, but that's a minor issue. I don't 
care if you want to call it a "barrier to entry," as you did later in 
your post, bias, or whatever other term is trendy atm. Personally, I 
have been explicitly addressing the issue of intent, which has rather 
strongly been hinted at, if not an accusation directly leveled.

Meanwhile, I personally have said explicitly that we can do better at 
removing the barriers to entry that unquestionably do exist, so one 
wonders what your point may be.

Most importantly however, the reason I think we need to focus more on 
positive actions around outreach and equal opportunity is that by 
focusing on "bias" we run the very real risk of making self-flagellation 
its own goal.

Doug (and its own reward)