Since a few people have asked, here's a rough guide to the diversity discussion. No specifics allowed.
1. diversity list created to (among other things) ponder an official diversity statement for Python. List is closed-archive but open for general subscription.
2. Various diversity list discussions become heated. Some people (including myself) leave list in response. Sigh of relief, back to normal life; is that a good response?
- A few weeks pass.
4. Diversity list discussion hunts me down on psf-members and tries to pounce. Narrow escape.
5. Proposed diversity statement from diversity list posted to psf-members for discussion and hopefully? approval; diversity discussion engulfs psf-members list like a revenant whale.
6. 1000s of messages pass. Or at least many dozen. People agree, disagree, agree to disagree, disagree on their agreement, and otherwise cause trouble by collectively failing to accept any part of the proposed diversity statement. (Tho it's actually much more complicated than that.) Troubling and unprovable accusations of widespread anti-diverseness in the Python community are softly bowled across the lawn.
7. Diversity discussion from psf-members cross-posted to diversity list. Non-PSF members on diversity list freak out at the idea that the PSF might adopt a diversity statement that did not take into account some of the issues they had discussed. Hurt feelings ensue, including frustration by various people that other people are doing things they don't want them to do, in complete violation of expectations. Troubling and unprovable accusations of fairly specific anti-diverseness in the Python community are left, steaming gently, on the lawn. Closed nature of both lists engenders and amplifies confusion.
- Still no diversity statement from the PSF on the horizon.
Things have quieted down for the evening.
Personally, it's been the most unpleasant set of interactions to watch and (occasionally) participate in that I've seen in the Python community in a long time; one can only hope that we reach some form of passionate agreement in the future:
Agreement in a group setting is truly a wonderful thing. But we should be wary of agreement that comes without any work, any disagreement, and disruption. We must never mistake quiet civility for passionate agreement.
(See this link for the whole post from which that quote is taken; Godwinning is unintentional but, frankly, a rather ironic endpoint to my meanderings.)
My new theory? It's all a plot instigated by the Perl community to distract the Python community so that Perl 7 can get the jump on Python 4k. It's the only way I can make sense of it all.
Comments closed, because I just don't care what anybody thinks any more.