July 2017 - diversity - mailman.ripe.net

Experiences from the Django community
by Erik Romijn 26 Sep '17

26 Sep '17

Hi everyone, I’m delighted to see that the RIPE community is taking important steps to improve diversity and inclusivity. As some of you might remember, I worked for RIPE NCC until 2011 and attended most RIPE meetings back then, though none since. Since then I’ve been doing a lot of volunteer work around diversity and inclusivity, in particular in the Django community. Django is the most popular web framework for Python, developed as an open source project for the last 12 years. In recent times, the Django (and to a different extent, Python) community has made large steps in diversity and inclusivity. It is not uncommon for Django conferences to have an approximate 50/50 split between men and women on stage, even though talk selection is usually blind (i.e. without information identifying the speaker). There is much work left to do though. I felt there may be resources, experiences and best practices that can be helpful for this group too, so I laid out a few things below. (I couldn’t reply to the existing thread, as I only just joined the list.) A fundament is that the Django community and events have a Code of Conduct[2] with a strong process behind it, including things like tracking repeat offenders and (limited) sharing of information between conferences. I recently became a member of the CoC committee that manages part of this. For example, prior to accepting speakers, conferences often send their list of names so the committee can compare that to their list of past incidents. In the interest of transparency, the enforcement manual[3] along with most internal documentation[4] is public. A CoC with a proper process is only a first step. Other efforts in the Django community include extensive outreach to marginalised groups, offering speaker mentors, financial aid programs, ensuring people moderate their alcohol consumption, accessibility information, live transcription, quiet rooms, childcare, and so on. As a side project, I maintain the Less Obvious Conference Checklist[1] which has a lot suggestions of this kind for conferences - most easy, some very hard - many of which can make an impact on inclusivity. Some of the lessons I learned along the way that I thought may be relevant, reading your other discussions: - D&I is more than “at this conference we claim you won’t be harassed or assaulted, or we will take action if it happens”. For many marginalised groups, experiences in tech and tech communities are so poor, that it requires building a lot more trust in that a community is actually doing better in being a nice and safe place, and not just saying so. Personally, I think building this trust is the single hardest issue. - Related to this, if people aren’t reporting incidents under your CoC, it doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. People (including me) can be very reluctant to report, and if they don’t trust the process enough might just end up leaving and telling their friends to stay away. In Django events, we’ve noticed a small increase in minor incident reports - not because more are happening, but because we’ve built enough trust that people report them. - Statistics can be helpful, for example in tracking whether there is progress compared to before. They can also give an indication of whether things you’ve done seem effective. However, I’m skeptic of having direct numbers as single absolute goals. On the other hand, you can probably say that if 2% of speakers are women, something isn’t going right somewhere. On intersectionality: any D&I initiative that wants to stay away from the complexity of intersectionality is dead in the water, as is an initiative that wants to treat everyone equal. My position, even being part of some marginalised groups, and my ability to participate in a community and attend events, is incomparably privileged compared to (for example, on average) a trans woman of colour or someone with housing or income insecurity. We can not treat everyone the same, because we are doing this in a society where marginalised groups and many others are already not treated equal or provided equal opportunities. And simplifying efforts to “sex discrimination” is simply way too narrow. I hope that some of this was useful input. I also do a talk at a number of conferences on empathy in tech, which touches upon D&I and how experiences from marginalised people can be so different, and why this matters so much, among other things. A video should be out soon. In August I’ll be doing a talk at DjangoCon US about the Django CoC, the processes behind it and some of the myths, which might be interesting to this group too. Erik PS: Could someone update the XX/XY labeling on the attendee gender graphs on RIPE labs[5]? Guessing gender from names is hard and inaccurate already, but sometimes all we have and I understand that. However, unless you have an algorithm that actually guesses their chromosomes, labeling the groups as XX and XY is wrong and completely erases transgender people. [1] https://github.com/erikr/lessobviouschecklist [2] https://djangoproject.com/conduct/ [3] https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/enforcement-manual/ [4] https://github.com/django/code-of-conduct [5] https://labs.ripe.net/Members/agowland/diversity-discussions-at-ripe-74

7 23

On-line video meeting invitation: Diversity TF meeting, 30-08-2017, 11:00 am EST
by Vesna Manojlovic 06 Sep '17

06 Sep '17

Dear all, here is the information about our next meeting: *Diversity TF meeting* Wednesday, August 30, 2017 11:00 am | Europe Summer Time (Amsterdam, GMT+02:00) | 1 hr Draft agenda: - introduction of new members/volunteers - update on actions & milestones - discussing the draft charter - next meeting Hope to see you there! Please read the previous meeting notes, and the discussions on the lists archives: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/diversity/ Regards, Vesna Manojlovic Community Builder RIPE NCC Meeting number (access code): 702 314 786 Meeting password: 3Ds5sHZB Add to Calendar <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m9f15a8d7612c53f498156082a3d0b…> When it's time, join the meeting <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m468344e272a67b50c3cc32ba0e553…>. *Join by phone* *0800-051-3810* Call-in toll-free number (UK) *+44-203-478-5289* Call-in toll number (UK) Global call-in numbers <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=555601…> | Toll-free calling restrictions <https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf> Can't join the meeting? <https://help.webex.com/docs/DOC-5412> IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please note that this WebEx service allows audio and other information sent during the session to be recorded, which may be discoverable in a legal matter. By joining this session, you automatically consent to such recordings. If you do not consent to being recorded, discuss your concerns with the host or do not join the session.

4 6

Women account for 34% of ICT workers in India - something to aim for!
by Amanda Gowland 28 Jul '17

28 Jul '17

"Out of the many economies in the Asia Pacific region, India has a larger number of women working in the ICT industry than most others, ataround 34% <https://anitaborg.org/news/perspective/indian-women-in-technology-barriers/>. More women are undertaking STEM courses, witharound 42% of female undergraduates doing computer science and computer engineering <https://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Discussion_Paper_Powel…>and46.8% undertaking postgraduate degrees in and IT and Computing <http://gsm-it.com/userassets/Publications/GSM-IT_SCORECARD-INDIA_Spring_201…>during 2014-2015." Read more on APNIC's blog: https://blog.apnic.net/2017/07/28/women-ict-fostering-leadership-potential-… Thanks, Amanda

1 0

Tips from SIGPLAN report: reducing (climate) costs of conferences, increasing diversities
by Vesna Manojlovic 21 Jul '17

21 Jul '17

Dear all, here is an interesting example from a different-but-similar community: ACM’s Special Interest Group on Programming Languages (SIGPLAN), and their report on "reducing the costs of its conference-focused approach to promoting exchange of ideas." While their initial reason for looking into this was to reduce the impact on climate change & global warming, the conclusions are very much aligned with the practical tips for increasing various diversities - and I think we can use this in the RIPE conferences too. Below are some short quotes, and a link to the whole report. I hope you will find it relevant and interesting. Regards, Vesna https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VLIjocofEzDkjFBvHj3i7YeW9h14weWkG7DRw2e… > SIGPLAN is particularly invested in air-travel-intensive > international conferences. There is good reason for this, as > in-person communication is highly effective for sharing and > developing new ideas and carrying on collaborations. > SIGPLAN sponsors or co-sponsors 17 conferences. > Each of these events attracts between 300 and 600 attendees. > According to our own experience and conversations with peers, SIGPLAN > members often attend more than one conference per year, resulting in > multiple flights. > SIGPLAN has strong communities in both Europe and North America, > which means that major conferences require a significant number of > trans-Atlantic flights. As SIGPLAN has expanded in size in recent > years, it has sought to expand geographically as well, necessitating > flights to more far-flung places for those in the current core > communities. Expansion is a laudable goal: science benefits from a > diversity of views. > clear responsibility to understand and explore ways of reducing the > costs of its conference-focused approach to promoting exchange of > ideas. This conversation is also timely in view of other emerging > concerns about travel, as well, including restrictions on visa rules, > infectious disease outbreaks, and questions about fair access for > computer scientists from less wealthy regions. > We could, for instance, merge two or more existing conferences into > larger mega-conferences — in the limit, perhaps even colocating all > SIGPLAN conferences. Or, conversely, we could encourage smaller, > regional conferences. We could hold a single conference > simultaneously at two or more sites, with arrangements for > live-streaming talks from one location to the other(s). In the longer > run, we could consider creating entirely virtual conferences.

1 0

How to not to continue electing only white men (ARIN Board of Trustees)
by Vesna Manojlovic 20 Jul '17

20 Jul '17

Dear all, I find this example from another RIR community relevant for our efforts on increasing diversity and inclusion: http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2017-July/000891.html This time, it's about choosing the board of trustees; but it could be any panel, group of presenters at a conference, C-level directors, working-group chairs, programme committee... I am forwarding this message with a permission of the original author, Bill Woodcock. Thank you, Bill, for your brave stand & great example of being an ally! Regards, Vesna > [ARIN-consult] 2017 Call for Nominations: ARIN Board of Trustees > > From: Bill Woodcock (woody at pch.net) > Date: Tue Jul 18 04:22:09 EDT 2017 > This year I conclude my fifth term as an ARIN board member, and I > have just declined nomination to run again. > > I decline not because I have less to give to the community, but > because my presence on the board is contributing to the most > persistent problem the organization is facing. > > I have nominated six candidates for the board, all of whom are at > least as qualified as anyone presently serving, myself included. > NONE OF THEM ARE WHITE MEN. And the only hard thinking I had to do > was how to narrow it down to just six. There is no shortage of > qualified women, nor shortage of qualified people of other > ethnicities. As a community, we have NO EXCUSE to continue electing > only white men. We know that, we acknowledge it in meetings, yet > when it comes time for the nomcom to build a slate and the electorate > to vote, you keep picking me and people who look like me, rather than > better-qualified women and men who could be representing your > interests better than I do. > > I’m giving up my seat for one reason, and one reason only. Do not > waste this opportunity. Do not screw this up. Do not think that you > can just wait one more year before addressing it. I need you all to > stop making excuses, stop rationalizing that only a white man really > understands your problems, and REPLACE ME AND TIM WITH TWO OF THESE > EXCELLENT CANDIDATES. Their experience is more current, their > perspective is more valuable, and they’ll be more fun at socials. > Once you’ve taken this step, I promise you you’ll be wondering why > you didn’t replace us sooner. > > -Bill http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2017-July/thread.html#887

1 0

Poll to choose the date of the next (online) meeting
by Vesna Manojlovic 18 Jul '17

18 Jul '17

Hi, in order to keep progressing with the work of this task force, several meetings are planned. Next one should be in August, using WebEx. This is an invitation to express your preference for a date & time: https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/RIPE_Diversity_TF_August_2017/ It's vacations/holidays season, so it might be difficult to get many people to join. Last time we had 8 people, and the notes were published. General agenda is - to report on progress of multiple actions. More detailed agenda will be sent later. Please let us know if you are interested to participate by taking a poll. Deadline is next week Tuesday, 25.7., noon CEST. Thanks, Vesna Etherpad: http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/ripe-diversity-tf-2017

1 0

Guesswork gender stats for RIPE 74
by Shane Kerr 11 Jul '17

11 Jul '17

Hello all, I updated the code used to guess gender of RIPE meeting attendees to also work for RIPE 74. (The format of the attendee list changed yet again, so I had to update the code to deal with the new format - we now have 11 formats for 74 meetings!) The code is in the same place: https://github.com/shane-kerr/ripemtggender The results for RIPE 74 are: 500.89 men 97.11 women 35.00 unguessable This makes our historical RIPE gender diversity table look something like this: 1 14 13.80 (98.57%) 0.20 ( 1.43%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 2 22 20.77 (94.41%) 1.23 ( 5.59%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 3 16 15.81 (98.81%) 0.19 ( 1.19%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 4 26 25.56 (98.31%) 0.44 ( 1.69%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 5 31 28.42 (91.68%) 2.58 ( 8.32%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 6 31 30.51 (98.42%) 0.49 ( 1.58%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 7 31 29.42 (94.90%) 1.58 ( 5.10%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 8 30 28.62 (95.40%) 1.38 ( 4.60%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 9 56 51.88 (92.64%) 4.12 ( 7.36%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 10 65 59.69 (91.83%) 5.31 ( 8.17%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 11 63 56.43 (89.57%) 6.57 (10.43%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 12 55 49.47 (89.95%) 5.53 (10.05%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 13 80 71.19 (88.99%) 8.81 (11.01%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 14 91 81.88 (89.98%) 9.12 (10.02%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 15 63 54.87 (87.10%) 8.13 (12.90%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 16 62 54.61 (88.08%) 7.39 (11.92%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 17 82 66.56 (81.17%) 15.44 (18.83%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 18 72 63.04 (87.56%) 8.96 (12.44%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 19 75 61.24 (81.65%) 13.76 (18.35%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 20 98 83.06 (84.76%) 14.94 (15.24%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 21 101 80.84 (80.04%) 20.16 (19.96%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 22 95 78.74 (82.88%) 16.26 (17.12%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 23 108 89.68 (83.04%) 18.32 (16.96%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 24 117 98.54 (84.22%) 18.46 (15.78%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 25 153 128.66 (84.09%) 24.34 (15.91%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 26 122 105.18 (86.21%) 16.82 (13.79%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 28 120 95.39 (79.49%) 24.61 (20.51%) 0.00 ( 0.00%) 29 220 165.77 (75.35%) 44.23 (20.10%) 10.00 ( 4.55%) 30 232 184.92 (79.71%) 37.08 (15.98%) 10.00 ( 4.31%) 31 270 215.26 (79.73%) 44.74 (16.57%) 10.00 ( 3.70%) 32 279 219.37 (78.63%) 47.63 (17.07%) 12.00 ( 4.30%) 33 236 191.90 (81.31%) 34.10 (14.45%) 10.00 ( 4.24%) 34 294 234.13 (79.64%) 47.87 (16.28%) 12.00 ( 4.08%) 35 341 279.32 (81.91%) 52.68 (15.45%) 9.00 ( 2.64%) 36 58 39.98 (68.93%) 15.02 (25.90%) 3.00 ( 5.17%) 37 341 279.32 (81.91%) 52.68 (15.45%) 9.00 ( 2.64%) 38 120 99.31 (82.76%) 17.69 (14.74%) 3.00 ( 2.50%) 39 330 244.32 (74.04%) 71.68 (21.72%) 14.00 ( 4.24%) 40 373 299.33 (80.25%) 59.67 (16.00%) 14.00 ( 3.75%) 41 384 307.24 (80.01%) 65.76 (17.13%) 11.00 ( 2.86%) 42 341 260.69 (76.45%) 68.31 (20.03%) 12.00 ( 3.52%) 43 289 217.60 (75.29%) 58.40 (20.21%) 13.00 ( 4.50%) 44 342 267.97 (78.35%) 55.03 (16.09%) 19.00 ( 5.56%) 45 323 254.12 (78.67%) 55.88 (17.30%) 13.00 ( 4.02%) 46 309 245.00 (79.29%) 45.00 (14.56%) 19.00 ( 6.15%) 47 329 254.18 (77.26%) 54.82 (16.66%) 20.00 ( 6.08%) 48 294 220.72 (75.07%) 57.28 (19.48%) 16.00 ( 5.44%) 49 320 255.15 (79.73%) 45.85 (14.33%) 19.00 ( 5.94%) 50 363 284.58 (78.40%) 54.42 (14.99%) 24.00 ( 6.61%) 51 378 299.72 (79.29%) 55.28 (14.62%) 23.00 ( 6.08%) 52 314 242.47 (77.22%) 57.53 (18.32%) 14.00 ( 4.46%) 53 317 260.77 (82.26%) 39.23 (12.38%) 17.00 ( 5.36%) 54 294 245.32 (83.44%) 36.68 (12.48%) 12.00 ( 4.08%) 55 426 349.63 (82.07%) 56.37 (13.23%) 20.00 ( 4.69%) 56 460 394.55 (85.77%) 44.45 ( 9.66%) 21.00 ( 4.57%) 57 352 276.39 (78.52%) 50.61 (14.38%) 25.00 ( 7.10%) 58 475 390.09 (82.12%) 52.91 (11.14%) 32.00 ( 6.74%) 59 349 289.28 (82.89%) 35.72 (10.23%) 24.00 ( 6.88%) 60 485 395.22 (81.49%) 62.78 (12.94%) 27.00 ( 5.57%) 61 476 382.41 (80.34%) 54.59 (11.47%) 39.00 ( 8.19%) 62 495 428.01 (86.47%) 39.99 ( 8.08%) 27.00 ( 5.45%) 63 496 405.61 (81.78%) 60.39 (12.18%) 30.00 ( 6.05%) 64 440 360.38 (81.90%) 57.62 (13.10%) 22.00 ( 5.00%) 65 464 385.83 (83.15%) 48.17 (10.38%) 30.00 ( 6.47%) 66 569 465.54 (81.82%) 82.46 (14.49%) 21.00 ( 3.69%) 67 466 374.39 (80.34%) 68.61 (14.72%) 23.00 ( 4.94%) 68 566 452.66 (79.98%) 80.34 (14.19%) 33.00 ( 5.83%) 69 606 484.62 (79.97%) 98.38 (16.23%) 23.00 ( 3.80%) 70 676 533.99 (78.99%) 96.01 (14.20%) 46.00 ( 6.80%) 71 522 404.96 (77.58%) 83.04 (15.91%) 34.00 ( 6.51%) 72 669 523.89 (78.31%) 104.11 (15.56%) 41.00 ( 6.13%) 73 668 515.95 (77.24%) 112.05 (16.77%) 40.00 ( 5.99%) 74 633 500.89 (79.13%) 97.11 (15.34%) 35.00 ( 5.53%) Don't be fooled by the 5-digits of precision I used here - our "completely unguessable" column is almost 6% after all, and everything else is also a guess. Still, we can probably say that there did not seem to be a lot more women attending RIPE 74 than had attended in the past few years. I am also willing to guess that saying roughly 4/5 or 5/6 of the attendees were men is probably not too far off the mark. I am eager to conduct the same measurement at RIPE 75, and compare it to self-reported data to see if we can start making guesses about the error rate and extend that backwards in time. (I am also curious if the portion of women attendees changes drastically due to the unusual location of the meeting - especially since we have roughly stable portions of women attendees in the last couple of years.) Cheers, -- Shane

1 0

Notes from the RIPE Diversity Task Force on-line meeting, 27.6.2017
by Vesna Manojlovic 07 Jul '17

07 Jul '17

RIPE Diversity Task Force (on-line meeting, 27.6. 10:30 CEST) 1. Introduction of (new) members/volunteers =============== Participants were asked what brought them to this Task Force, what is there background and how do they want to contribute. Denesh Bhabuta (UKNOF / DNS-OARC): wants to learn from the RIPE Community; could possibly bring efforts back into other communities / conferences; also has a personal interest, as a father of a daughter. Donal Cunningham (HEAnet): notices that at most technical conferences he is surrounded by white males, and is interested in fixing that problem. Malcolm Hutty (LINX): background in Internet Governance and community organisations; was prompted by the the feedback at RIPE74, which was mostly welcoming the efforts to increase breadth of participation, but the comment was repeatedly made from the floor that RIPE participants "do not support diversity for diversity's sake", and he would like to address the concerns that underlie such a comment. Gergana Petrova (RIPE NCC / RACI): finds diversity an important issue; it's challenging to work on it without offending anyone; wants to work on improving the current situation. Brian Nisbet (HEAnet): is active in working on the issues of increasing diversity, and wants to contribute to it in RIPE Community (also PC "representative" and WG co-chair) Amanda Gowland (RIPE NCC): non-techie, helping organise these technical conferences; can help with writing (working as Technical Writer) Vesna Manojlovic (RIPE NCC): used to be an engineer, then trainer & now Community Builder; exposed to lack of diversity in hackers community, and helped addressing the issues there; wants to exchange experiences between them & RIPE community. Shane Kerr: interested in the topic of increasing diversity; did the measuring to find out what the actual situation is. (also WG co-chair) 2. Discussing the draft charter =============== A suggested draft charter was on the Etherpad. Malcolm Hutty made the most substantial recommendations on how to modify it and was asked to clarify his suggestions: http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/ripe-diversity-tf-2017 Malcolm said he thinks we should be careful not to be too political, but remain practical, and focus on the concrete actions. He added that we should strive towards increasing accessibility for everyone, instead of singling out specific groups and that we should be welcoming to everyone, regardless of differences. Gergana said she suggests to be more than just "welcoming”. Instead we should be "inviting" and "encouraging". Denesh noted that with the introduction of the RIPE Meeting Code of Contact, the RIPE NCC has already started the overall inclusion programme; now are are moving to the next steps. Shane was wondering why Malcolm also objected to using metrics. Malcolm responded that we should focus on individuals, and not divide people based on demographics or other grouping methods. Brian commented that no matter what, there are clear differences that place all people into certain groups. Malcolm said that he thinks we should not explicitly exclude anyone, and not do any active discrimination, but instead we should remove the reasons for individuals not taking part. Amanda asked Malcolm what he thinks the reasons are that RIPE's representation of women within the community is 5%, while the "tech industry" female participation rate is 15%? Malcolm thinks that we should investigate whether there are systemic reasons in RIPE's own practices and approaches that inhibit women from participating, and if so seek to address them. But we also need to be open to individual agency, and so setting any particular target for gender balance is inappropriate. Brian asked for clarification and wondered if Malcom means that "they are just not interested in taking part"? He thinks that we have passed that stage of discussing *if* there is a lack of diversity within RIPE Community - we are now working under the agreement that there *is* a need for increasing diversity. Donal added that it has been shown that companies with more diverse boards have greater "return on investment". Also, for our focus group, since we have limited resources (such as time and attention) , we need to choose which actions will be helpful to most people; therefore, we should focus on _groups_ rather than on individuals. Malcolm asked what is the meant by "under-represented groups" - and what would be the goal of balancing the "over-represented" and "under-represented"? Vesna: (long story...) 50% Malcolm said that he doesn’t think this is an acceptable goal, it is artificial and numerical; our goal should be for everyone to feel welcome and respected enough to take part, as individuals, and not as part of a grouping. Donal suggested that the RIPE community could commit to, at first, have at least *the same* ratio of female participation as the technical industry; and later, maybe, to even go for 50%. Vesna closed this agenda topic and suggested to continue to wordsmith the charter on the list. 3. Actions & milestones =============== Amanda reported that one of the suggested actions was to get more metrics. The registration for RIPE 75 will open soon, and there will be an opt-in question added at the end of the registration form. The text was shared on the diversity list and on RIPE Labs. The data collection was made as anonymous as possible (opt-in, collected by the 3rd party, no personal info requested, IP-tracking disabled) in order to minimise the danger for the participants. The goal is to collect at least some data about gender ratios of participation, in order to measure, over time, if our actions have improved the situation. Vesna added that furthermore, we can always repeat the analysis Shane did before RIPE 74 (based on public registration data and participant’s names. Shane confirmed that he would be willing to runt his again.. Action on Shane to repeat the analysis for RIPE 73 and RIPE74 participants, and share the results with the list. Amanda said that a new idea is to invite one of the women who lead the diversity workshop before RIPE 74 to submit a talk proposal for RIPE 75, on why diversity is important (this has been done in the meantime). Amanda also said that the RIPE NCC is investigating on-site child-care options for RIPE 76. Denesh noted that as a conferences organiser, he has been asked by female participants about policies for the breastfeeding in public. Since they want to be as inclusive as possible, they said that this is not a problem. Vesna asked if they have been looking into providing a separate room, for those women who prefer the privacy & comfort (for nursing), rather then accessibility & inclusion? But having a separate room might be a logistical challenge. Denesh responded that they always have a separate space available, for various purposes, so that can also be used for nursing in private. Donal volunteered to take on the suggestion of contacting Aaron Hughes, to work on the "mentoring" programme for newcomers. 4. Scheduling next meeting: =============== Next meeting: sometime in August. Here is the poll for dates & times: https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/RIPE_Diversity_TF_August_2017/ 5. New actions: =============== Shane: re-run metrics Donal: contact Aaron Hughes All: work further on the charter Someone? : come up with the numbers of "tech industry gender ratio" Vesna: admin: send notes; schedule next meeting

6 9