►
From YouTube: CHAOSS DEI Working Group April 19 2023
Description
Minutes from this meeting can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MzDk84BL7FfHDxbFxJz39M72V2Hfc5Y6oCPhOl6woxo/edit#heading=h.n3rh3l1y6dv7
A
D
E
E
So
I
was
a
little
surprised
when
the
when
it
had
jumped
back
onto
the
agenda,
to
add
Equity
to
it.
So
so
my
issue
is
that
it's
it's
two
different
things,
so
it
kind
of
muddies
the
it
muddies
the
metric
in
the
same
way
that
event,
location
accessibility
is
a
different
metric.
I
think
event.
Location
Equity
is
a
different
metric.
E
B
B
B
We
have
this
other
metric
that
was
just
event
location,
that's
all
it
was,
and
in
the
the
body
of
that
metric
talked
a
little
bit
about
equity,
and
the
only
thing
that
that
metric
did
was
just
put
all
of
assuming
an
open
source
project
had
multiple
events.
It
put
them
all
out
on
a
map
to
see
if
they
were
all
located
like
in
one
place
if
they
were
spread
out
so
that
that
was
the
metric.
And
so
we.
B
B
Say
a
whole
lot
because
it
was
literally
just
like
a
list:
here's
your
events,
here's
where
they
are
and
and
like
how
many
open
source
projects
have
multiple
events
that
are
worried
about
that
enough
to
have
its
own.
That
was
my
kind
of
feeling
like
there's,
maybe
a
handful
of
projects
that
have
events
all
over
the
place
and
you
know
often
like
meetups
and
things
like
that,
I
think.
But
it
you
know
again:
I
don't
have
strong
feelings
about
it.
Either
way
so
I
could
be
talked
into
either
way.
E
So
I
am
familiar
with
the
other
metric
that
you're
talking
about
and
you're
right.
That
metric
was
that
metric
was
a
little
light
and
it
was
basically
just
a.
It
was
just
a
list
of
where
the
the
metric
is
Metra
or
where
the
events
we're
at
so
I
agree
that
that
metric
needs
some
attention
and
I
and
I
also
agree
that
adding
Equity
to
that
metric
would
be
would
be
really
good.
So
because
Equity
is
equity
is
not
just
about
the
location.
A
A
A
Like
these
original
three
things,
really
really
it's
these
these
additional
three
things
that,
like,
if
I,
wanted
to
know
the
first
three
things
I'm,
probably
curious
about
the
second
three
things,
and
so
it's
a
question.
I
mean
it's
a
granularity
question
for
the
metrics,
not
really
whether
we
should
have
this
Equity
part,
but
whether
it
should
be
part
of
this.
D
C
D
C
E
C
Yeah,
because
if
we
pull
those
out
as
an
event,
organizer
I
feel
like
I'm,
being
asked
to
consider
where
the
event
is
being
held
with
respect
to
an
inclusivity
perspective.
Full
stop
and
I
can
answer
that
question
like
as
an
event
organizer
if
I'm
like
every
time,
we
always
have
our
events.
You
know,
according
to
that
map
Sean,
if
you
scroll
up
just
a
little
bit
Yeah
like
we
always
have
our
events
in
or
this
event
is
in
any
of
those
blue
States,
Nebraska
Wisconsin
like
that's,
you
can
kinda.
C
D
B
What
I'm
hearing
is
we
want
to
return
back
to
the
event
location
metric
that
was
originally
and
I
I,
put
a
link
in
the
zoom
chat.
So
if
somebody
like
I,
don't
know
if
anybody
wants
to
work
on
that
like
we
can
just
close
this
out,
because
the
event
location
inclusivity
has
been
released
already.
So
we
can
just
like
delete
this
basically
or.
A
B
D
C
A
A
C
A
E
It
might
be
interesting
by
the
way
going
back
to
the
event
location
we
now
have.
We
now
have
three
event:
location
metrics.
It
might
be
interesting
to
see
what
those
look
like
together
in
a
model:
accessibility,
accessibility,
inclusivity
and
Equity.
Okay,
so
there's
something
to
think
about
in
the
future.
D
C
A
C
E
B
A
C
A
C
For
the
project
badging,
but
I
think
this
metric
way
more
focuses
on
things
like
access
to
technology,
access
to
meetings
like
Global
meetings,
like
even
the
regional
chapters
like
access
to
folks
kind
of
in
your
your
same
area,
and
we
this
metric,
doesn't
really
address
things
like
what
we've
talked
about
before.
Like
you
know,
the
use
of
screen
readers
or
colorblindness
and
we're
kind
of
just
shoving.
All
of
that
into
one
point
and
not
we're
just
kind
of
I
feel
like
we're
just
kind
of
glossing
over
it.
A
little
bit.
C
A
Yeah
I
think
I
think
in
the
future.
We
could
do
that.
I
I
think
it's
useful,
since
most
people
are
introduced
to
open
source
through
the
internet,
that
we
address
website
accessibility
in
a
small
way
like
we
have
here,
because
if,
if
you
speak
a
language,
that's
not
English
and
there's
no
translation
on
the
website.
You
can't
even
begin,
but
presumably,
if
you
don't
speak
English
that
well
and
you're
committing
contributing
to
open
source.
You
probably
know
the
computer
code
version
of
it
because
most
projects
use
English.
B
B
The
traditional
accessibility
is
a
component
of
it,
because
I
think
this
also
does
touch
on
things
like
chat,
platform,
inclusivity
and
different,
like
neurodiversity
accessibility
issues
that
are
are
also
explicitly
brought
out
and
mentioned
so
I
think
it's
okay
for
now,
and
then
you
know,
as
we
go,
I
would
I
would
rather
see
it
be
in
this,
and
this
be
part
of
the
dei.md
file
than
like
a
separate
metric.
That
kind
of
doesn't
get
in
involved.
C
B
B
E
E
C
So
on
this
on
this
metric
I
will
it
looks
like
the
comments
on
this
are
mostly
just
to
provide
Clarity.
To
be
honest
with
you
doesn't
look
like
there
were
any
fundamental
changes
to
the
metric,
so
I'll
just
kind
of
go
through
and
clean
that
up
and
then
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
share
it
in
Slack
later
today
for
folks
and
then
with
the
intention
of
kind
of
finalizing
it
next
week.
If
that
works,
for,
for
both
of
you.