paw3c@krebs.UUCP (04/15/87)
Will there be a *scheduled* BOF for Women in UNIX at the Phoenix Conference? There was a small one in D.C., but it didn't get much advance press... can it be more official this time? I'd be willing to help out (I *think* I'm going to get to go...). -- Pat Wilson, UVa Medical School UUCP: seismo!virginia!paw3c CSNET: paw3c@acc.virginia.edu BITNET: paw3c@virginia.BITNET
jsq@im4u.UUCP (04/18/87)
<148@krebs.acc.virginia.edu> by paw3c@krebs.acc.virginia.edu (Pat Wilson): >Will there be a *scheduled* BOF for Women in UNIX at the Phoenix >Conference? Yes, there will be one. It will be listed in the preprinted agenda. Contact Liz Sommers, soup!liz, sommers@topaz.rutgers.edu. John S. Quarterman, usenix!jsq
liz@unirot.UUCP (04/18/87)
In article <1746@im4u.UUCP> jsq@im4u.UUCP (John Quarterman) writes: ><148@krebs.acc.virginia.edu> by paw3c@krebs.acc.virginia.edu (Pat Wilson): >>Will there be a *scheduled* BOF for Women in UNIX at the Phoenix >>Conference? > >Yes, there will be one. It will be listed in the preprinted agenda. >Contact Liz Sommers, soup!liz, sommers@topaz.rutgers.edu. > Soup is NOT on the network right now. The proper addresses to reach me at are sommers@topaz.rutgers.edu or rutgers!unirot!liz. liz
lee@unmvax.UNM.EDU (Lee Ward) (04/20/87)
Oooo, goodie, women's lib hits UN*X. Will the discussion be centered
about changing the name of "man" to "woman"?
I must admit, being male, I can fathom not alot of reason for such
a BOF. I know I am missing something though and you'll tell me, right?
--
--Lee (Ward)
{ucbvax,convex,gatech,pur-ee}!unmvax!leedonn@utah-gr.UUCP (04/22/87)
From: lee@unmvax.UNM.EDU (Lee Ward) Oooo, goodie, women's lib hits UN*X. Will the discussion be centered about changing the name of "man" to "woman"? I must admit, being male, I can fathom not alot of reason for such a BOF. I know I am missing something though and you'll tell me, right? I love self-referential postings... This is a posting questioning the rationale for a BOF for women in Unix which itself constitutes an excellent recommendation for holding such a BOF. I'm not sure why Mr. Ward would be interested in Unix anyway -- as any long-time Usenix groupie could tell him... Unix is NOT a 'real man's' operating system, Donn Seeley University of Utah CS Dept donn@cs.utah.edu 40 46' 6"N 111 50' 34"W (801) 581-5668 utah-cs!donn
bsteve@gorgo.UUCP (04/24/87)
lee@unmvax.UNM.EDU (Lee Ward) writes: >Oooo, goodie, women's lib hits UN*X. Will the discussion be >centered about changing the name of "man" to "woman"? WOOF ARF WOOF! But I must say that I am curious. Is a women's BOF somehwat out of place in a technical conference? This sort of thing always brings back images of Thurber's "The War Between Men and Women" :-) Steve Blasingame ihnp4!gorgo!bsteve
trb@ima.UUCP (Andrew Tannenbaum) (04/24/87)
> I must admit, being male, I can fathom not alot of reason for > such a BOF. I know I am missing something though and you'll > tell me, right? > I love self-referential postings... This is a posting questioning the > rationale for a BOF for women in Unix which itself constitutes an > excellent recommendation for holding such a BOF. Using Donn's logic above, I question the rationale for a USENIX BOF for <your favorite under-represented minority here> in UNIX which itself constitutes an excellent recommendation for holding such a BOF. I think not, therefore I am recommending a BOF. I disagree with Donn, and I personally am not compelled to work to organize a BOF for women in UNIX. This is my personal opinion, and therefore, of little value to the question of rationale. Popular interest in the BOF is the rationale (or reason, as lee put it). lee@unmvax's personal opinion is not sufficient reason for or against, nor is the opinion of any other individual. The issue of women in the workplace is popular, which means that people want to talk about it. If USENIX agrees that they (we) are willing to support a BOF on that topic, then birds of that feather will be welcome to participate. To some extent, I share the opinion voiced in lee's comment, and I don't think that it means that I'm an enemy of women or of gentle people in general. As it stands, lee stated that he couldn't think of one reason for a women in UNIX BOF, and the only response I've seen (donn's) stated in a veiled way, that people like lee are why we need this BOF. I don't accept that as a good reason, and I don't think that lee posted so that people would mock him or brush him off. His request was certainly worded respectfully enough and even if it wasn't, by forming a BOF, you are volunteering to deal with the issues, right? I hope that one of the protagonists of the women in UNIX BOF posts an agenda of issues in response to lee's question, or else I'll have little respect for their actual interest in their cause. It's a problem with many activists that they'd rather not deal with the people whom they perceive as their opponents. You can't influence them by remote control, like changing channels on a TV, you have to communicate with the people you disagree with. No, I don't think that comp.org.usenix is the proper forum for the actual discussion of the issues apart from a posting of the agenda. Let that poster move the discussion elsewhere if it's warranted. Andrew Tannenbaum Interactive Boston, MA +1 617 247 1155
roger@esquire.UUCP (Roger Reid) (04/25/87)
In article <466@unmvax.UNM.EDU> lee@unmvax.UUCP (Lee Ward) writes: >Oooo, goodie, women's lib hits UN*X. Will the discussion be centered >about changing the name of "man" to "woman"? > >I must admit, being male, I can fathom not alot of reason for such >a BOF. I know I am missing something though and you'll tell me, right? > > >-- > --Lee (Ward) > {ucbvax,convex,gatech,pur-ee}!unmvax!lee Ever notice that men outnumber women at Usenix by about 100 to 1? And the ones I know find themselves being constantly hit on and harrassed by the men. So who knows? Let the women have a bof so they can talk about whatever it may be that they find a need to talk about. Since you're a bird of a different feather, I can't see how it could possibly affect you.
bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) (04/25/87)
Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.41.4 of Mon Mar 23 1987 on bu-cs (berkeley-unix) Being as I was in the original kitchen where the BOF was proposed (as was Andy who seems to now have forgotten everything that was said, too much dip I assume) I will try and repeat for everyone's edification why the BOF seemed to have been proposed: Someone (Liz I think) remarked that the attendance of USENIX by women has been miniscule. No one knew why except for all the pat answers which were probably true, but it wasn't the right forum for such a discussion, everyone was too busy with the dip. Now whether or not this bears discussion I suppose is a fine topic for discussion at the BOF. So the answer is: the proper place to discuss whether or not to have a Woman's BOF at USENIX would be at a Woman's BOF at USENIX. Andy, you can fix the dip. -Barry Shein, Boston University
rcj@moss.ATT.COM (04/26/87)
In article <6954@bu-cs.BU.EDU> bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes: > >Being as I was in the original kitchen where the BOF was proposed (as >was Andy who seems to now have forgotten everything that was said, too >much dip I assume) I will try and repeat for everyone's edification >why the BOF seemed to have been proposed: > >Someone (Liz I think) remarked that the attendance of USENIX by women >has been miniscule. No one knew why except for all the pat answers >which were probably true, but it wasn't the right forum for such a >discussion, everyone was too busy with the dip. And her suggestion was passed on to Peter (USENIX top person), who agreed that non-attendance by women (and minorities) was a definite problem and in turn tasked Lizzie to come up with some ideas to foster attendance. She came up with several good ones (don't ask for a list; it'll come out in time after it is polished) and came up with the idea for the BOF to get MORE ideas on how to get more women to USENIX. Don't worry, it ain't AA -- just an attempt to find out better ways to even out the gender numbers at USENIX. The MAD Programmer -- 201-386-4295 (Cornet 232) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd allegra ]!moss!rcj ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua watmath ]!clyde!rcj
paw3c@krebs.acc.virginia.edu (Pat Wilson) (04/26/87)
Don't blame Liz - *I* brought the topic up here. It seemed the appropriate place to ask if _anyone knew anything about it_. Not "should there be one", but "is one scheduled". I hoped someone in the know (perhaps Liz herself - I didn't have her net address) would fill me in. One way or another, there will be one scheduled. It may be very short - there may be no "burning issues". Then again... Basically, if you're not interested, don't attend. I doubt seriously that this BOF will steal resources from anything else, so I guess I don't see what all the fuss is about. *I* don't feel left out or offended because there's an EMACS BOF...:-) -- Pat Wilson, UVa Medical School UUCP: seismo!virginia!paw3c CSNET: paw3c@acc.virginia.edu BITNET: paw3c@virginia.BITNET
ken@rochester.ARPA (Ken Yap) (04/26/87)
|But I must say that I am curious. Is a women's BOF somehwat out of place |in a technical conference? This sort of thing always brings back images |of Thurber's "The War Between Men and Women" :-) :-) :-) Not at all. Women are always complaining how men talk shop when they get together. Well, this is a smart plan to get women involved in Unix so that the sexes can have more to talk about. Just imagine: "Would you believe, I did an egrep on the recipes in comp.cooks and 70% of them require tomatoes?" "Say, have you heard about the new product that lets you have a uucp connection in your car?" "I was so tired after hacking the SCSI driver for 30 hours straight that I had to go for a sauna... (-: (-: Never mind... Ken
avolio@decuac.dec.com (Frederick M. Avolio) (04/26/87)
>|But I must say that I am curious. Is a women's BOF somehwat out of place >|in a technical conference? This sort of thing always brings back images >|of Thurber's "The War Between Men and Women" :-) This is getting to be too much. Anyway, some of us are thinking of organizing a Men's BOF whre we'll sit around, drink brandy and smoke cigars long into the night. Oh, of course :-). By All Means. Gimme a break, as They Say. :-).gi #! rn #
jsq@im4u.UUCP (John Quarterman) (04/27/87)
The speculations about why there will be a BOF on this subject (or most any other) are somewhat beside the point: BOFs don't really need a reason, other than that somebody wants to schedule one. They don't have to have an agenda, either. The only thing that is unusual about the scheduling of this particular BOF is that it is being done in time to appear in the preprinted schedule of the conference. This has been done before, in the case of, for example, the USENET BOF. The scheduling in this case was approved by both the Program Chair and the USENIX Board of Directors. >And her suggestion was passed on to Peter (USENIX top person), who >agreed that non-attendance by women (and minorities) was a definite >problem and in turn tasked Lizzie to come up with some ideas to >foster attendance. She came up with several good ones (don't ask for >a list; it'll come out in time after it is polished) and came up with >the idea for the BOF to get MORE ideas on how to get more women to >USENIX. This speculation is in outline correct, but in details inaccurate, since many other people were involved. The board, in particular, has been considering a number of ideas to improve the conferences, the Association, and the community. Two that are scheduled for Phoenix are the BOF already mentioned and the research sessions. These two, and others, were proposed by Liz Sommers. Though the latter idea has been bouncing around in some form for years, I credit her with providing sufficient agitation to actually get it done. Don't expect a complete list of ideas: I don't even know what "complete" would be; however, some of the ideas that have been discussed will be mentioned in the minutes of the New Orleans board meeting when they appear in ;login:. Do expect to see other new things tried from time to time, and feel free to suggest your own ideas, e.g., at the open board meeting in Phoenix. Note that this article is my interpretation of what's been going on. It is not a statement of position on behalf of the board. -- John Quarterman, jsq@sally.utexas.edu, jsq@longway.tic.com {gatech,harvard,ihnp4,pyramid,rutgers!im4u,seismo,sequent}!ut-sally!jsq
jbuck@epimass.UUCP (Joe Buck) (04/27/87)
Why is it in any way controversial for there to be a women's BOF
(birds of a feather) gathering at Usenix? What the hell is wrong
with you people? Aren't you aware that any group of attendees that
wants to can have such a meeting? Why do you find it so threatening?
If Liz and gang can figure out ways of increasing women's
participation in Usenix and Unix in general, I for one will be
delighted. I'm ashamed to belong to the same gender as some of you
guys.
--
- Joe Buck {hplabs,ihnp4,sun,ames}!oliveb!epimass!jbuck
seismo!epiwrl!epimass!jbuckdennisg@pwcs.UUCP (04/27/87)
Anything that could possibly improve the attendance of other-than-white-males at USENIX or any other computer type conference would be greatly appreciated by me. It is embarrasing to be in a field that appears to do such an impressive job of discrimination. -- Dennis Grittner City of Saint Paul, Minnesota (612) 298-4402 Room 700, 25 W. 4th St. 55102
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (04/27/87)
I was in the kitchen, too, and even had something to do with promoting
what seemed to be a dying discussion. I don't remember a BOF as a
final resolution, though. The problems seemed to be that the portion
of women being sent to Usenix was smaller than that of those in the
profession (presumably for consciously or unconsciously sexist
reasons), and that so-called "women's issues" were not being addressed
at all.
What I object to is the original phrasing as a "BOF for Women in UNIX."
That may just be inadvertant phrasing; but it seems to imply a uni-sex
BOF (to me, anyway; but some of you know how language-sensitive I am)
[;-(/;-)]. This is, of course, sexist. A BOF about Women in Unix
should be open to all of us who work with, under the supervision of,
supervising, or in the general vicinity of women. [;-)/10] This also
includes personnel and head-hunter types, should any be at Usenix.
All regardless of sex, of course! It should even, or perhaps more
especially, include those who don't think there's a reason for having
a BOF about Women in Unix.
{don't shoot} Now, when will we get a BOF about Men in Unix? {;-}}
Joe Yao jsdy@hadron.COM (not yet domainised)
hadron!jsdy@{seismo.CSS.GOV,dtix.ARPA,decuac.DEC.COM}
{arinc,att,avatar,cos,decuac,dtix,ecogong,kcwc}!hadron!jsdy
{netex,netxcom,rlgvax,seismo,smsdpg,sundc}!hadron!jsdybrunner@sri-spam.istc.sri.com (Thomas Eric Brunner) (04/27/87)
The discussion of women's participation took place as John and Barry recount, Liz appeared to take it as an action item - which we now know has been acted on via Peter. Lots of ideas were put on the table, I seem to recollect (though the haze of anti-freeze of that frigid night) recomending that Grace (Adm. COBOL, etc.) be invited, and other women in related, but not necessarily "UNIX" systems, be considered, with one exception which I hope Liz keeps in mind for my own sake :-). There were lots of ideas, it was brainstorming and the final list I expect will become available at just the right time - as it always does for any other BOF. Andy, did you have more antifreeze than I?
eugene@aurora.UUCP (Eugene miya) (04/27/87)
In article <1105@epimass.UUCP> Joe Buck writes: >I'm ashamed to belong to the same gender as some of you guys. >-- >- Joe Buck About seven years ago, when it was still the Unix Users Group, we held a meeting in San Francisco and two of the `talks' were given by a handicapped (speech) person. I was really impressed that computers were helping to bridge these problems. It was in keeping with Unix style really. With lots of other groups, I don't get that feeling anymore, and this little incident, confirms what I am feeling. Time to move on. From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center eugene@ames-aurora.ARPA "You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?" "Send mail, avoid follow-ups. If enough, I'll summarize." {hplabs,hao,ihnp4,decwrl,allegra,tektronix,menlo70}!ames!aurora!eugene
jsq@im4u.UUCP (04/28/87)
Please don't blame Peter for the BOF, the research sessions, etc. His
involvement in the BOF planning was because I delegated some things to
him (being the USENIX Executive Director means you have to put up with
twits like me just because they happen to be on the board). On the
other hand, if there's credit to be allocated, do let him have a heap
of it. And those of you, such as Joe (and Laura, and Mike, and Mike),
who were in the original kitchen, as well.
The original idea was for a session in the regular technical conference
schedule on the problems of women and minorities in computing. Why that
did not and is not likely to happen is a topic appropriate for the BOF.
The working title for the BOF in the board meeting was "Women and Minorities
in USENIX." No ``for'' or ``about'' in it. The final title is up to Liz.
(Do get it to Judy soon, Liz.) As at any BOF, all may attend, but the chair
may decide who has appropriate things to say.
I suggest further discussion at the BOF or at the open board meeting.
--
John Quarterman, jsq@sally.utexas.edu, jsq@longway.tic.com
{gatech,harvard,ihnp4,pyramid,rutgers!im4u,seismo,sequent}!ut-sally!jsqgeoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) (04/28/87)
In article <69@esquire.UUCP> roger@esquire.UUCP (Roger Reid) writes: > Ever notice that men outnumber women at Usenix by about 100 to 1? And > the ones I know find themselves being constantly hit on and harrassed by > the men. I resent this characterization. As a male who has, on occasion (recently) carried out an intensive search for a "S.O.", I've noticed that VERY few women (none) take the trouble to ask me out. This leaves me with the choice of approaching them or being lonely. If they don't display some sort of symbol (e.g., the infamous left-hand ring) to indicate that they aren't interested, they can expect me to continue to "hit on" and "harass" them. I try to be polite about it. But until you've (not you, Roger, but you, the women) asked at least ten men out and been rudely shut down, please don't use terms like "hit on" and "harass" to describe my legitimate (if occasionally clumsy) attempts at a decent social introduction. Since almost 100% of the women at Usenix share interests with me, is it very surprising that I find them interesting? P.S. Since this doesn't seem very Usenix-related, I directed followups to soc.women. I don't have time to read soc.*, so if you want to discuss this with me personally, feel free to respond directly by mail. -- Geoff Kuenning geoff@ITcorp.com {hplabs,ihnp4}!trwrb!desint!geoff
gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) (04/28/87)
In article <866@pwcs.StPaul.GOV> dennisg@pwcs.StPaul.GOV (Dennis Grittner) writes: >It is embarrasing to be in a field that appears to do such an >impressive job of discrimination. Oh, come on. Just because there isn't the same ethnic distribution within a profession as within a community at large does not prove that anyone has been discriminated against. I don't know why more women haven't become UNIX professionals, but perhaps it's because they're smarter than the rest of us. Sheesh.
lee@unmvax.UUCP (04/30/87)
Ignore references line please. This posting comes after reading everyones
views. I was quite surprised to see the number of responses. I expected
to be called "childish", "sexist" and a host of other names. I didn't
expect rational discussion. For the most part, I must say I am happy
to be dissapointed.
I have seen the point made that "men outnumber women 100 to 1" at
the conferences. I don't think the blame lies on USENIX nor it's associated
staff and members. More likely the finger should be pointed at the
women themselves (how many TRY to go? how many are even in the field?).
If there IS discrimination it sure isn't USENIX doing it. Try the
womens' bosses who think a man can do a better job than they.
I don't object to a women's BOF. I object to official sanction being
given (and asked from) by USENIX. I don't think political and moral
arguments unrelated to the purpose of the conference should be sanctioned.
This means, homosexuality, gun control and equal rights.
While the problems exist, USENIX is not the place.
However, it seems from one point I am wrong. I read that ANY topic
is valid for a BOF. I thought we were all there to discuss, learn
and share ideas about a particular operating system. Am I wrong?
I could see ACM supporting and sanctioning such a topic. Their purpose is
to help the field in general; To promote understanding of it and what it is
trying to do. Even take up causes such as this where related.
I pay dues to that organization along with most of you. I would
happily see my money spent for such a cause by ACM. I would give my time
to help.
Finally; My friends and I who get together at USENIX do talk about totally
unrelated subjects. I wouldn't dream of asking the organization to put a notice
of these topics in any official publication though. So, for the comment
of "do unto others..." I say, I am!
--
--Lee (Ward)
{ucbvax,convex,gatech,pur-ee}!unmvax!leedyer@spdcc.UUCP (05/01/87)
I think this guy Ward is trying to be deliberately inflammatory, so
let's keep trying to "disappoint him" and keep to the facts. The facts
are that BOFs are held without official sanction of the USENIX organization;
they don't appear in the proceedings, and they're held in otherwise empty
conference rooms and ballrooms at the conference hotel, and are run by
the participants, all of whom have paid money to attend the conference
and use the facilities.
It is a courtesy of the USENIX Association that they announced its
scheduling so that interested parties could consider it an inducement
(or not) to come to the BOF. I'd have no problem with ANY BOFs being
announced well beforehand. Most aren't as well organized, however, and
are lucky to be announced by a scrawl in crayon on the notice board.
My God, I can't believe this is such a big deal for this guy. Sheesh!
It seems I've been saying "Sheesh!" a lot lately...
--
Steve Dyer
dyer@harvard.harvard.edu
dyer@spdcc.COM aka {ihnp4,harvard,linus,ima,bbn,halleys}!spdcc!dyergrob@cmcl2.NYU.EDU (Lori S. Grob) (05/01/87)
> > I have seen the point made that "men outnumber women 100 to 1" at >the conferences. I don't think the blame lies on USENIX nor it's associated >staff and members. More likely the finger should be pointed at the >women themselves (how many TRY to go? how many are even in the field?). >If there IS discrimination it sure isn't USENIX doing it. Try the >womens' bosses who think a man can do a better job than they. > I was determined not get involved in this, but this one is more then I can let go by. Blaming the women themselves for not going is like saying there is no discrimination at Ivy League schools ***** (ethnic group of your choice) people just don't apply. The point is WHY don't they go? If as you assume the women in our field aren't interested in Usenix, the question is why not and what can we as an organization do to remedy that and make our membership more representative of the field in general? The point is not to be smug and self-satisfied and say, yes there are women, black people, other groups in the field (not enough of them!) and if they don't choose to come to Usenix it is not our problem. As for how many are even in the field, I can't believe that you don't know about the kind of steering process that goes on in high schools and colleges where women who are interested in sciences are steered toward "soft" sciences. It is very similar to black families getting steered to black neighborhoods and buildings by real estate agents. Blaming the victims of discrimination for the discrimination itself is really unforgiveable. I am sorry for adding to an overcrowded band-width, I am NOT sorry if I have offended anyone. All this is NOT to say that I personally have felt discriminated against by anyone at Usenix. I HAVE FOUND THE MEN TO BE ENLIGHTENED AND ON THE WHOLE NON-SEXIST or at least trying to be. (and fun!) But it is obvious that the conferences don't draw a group representative of the field as a whole and that the field as a whole (and all the sciences) don't have enough women and minorities. Flame away. Lori S. Grob (NYU Ultracomputer Project) grob@nyu.arpa {mcvax!seismo,floyd,harpo,ihnp4,...}!cmcl2!grob [That's c-m-c-ELL-2] Courant Institute (NYU), 251 Mercer St., NYC 10012, 212-460-7326
lloyd@aplcen.UUCP (Lloyd W. Taylor) (05/02/87)
It's interesting to note that at the recent Usenix Large Installation
System Administrators Workshop, approximately 25% of the 70+ attendees
were female.
I leave each of you to draw your own conclusions.
--
Lloyd W. Taylor | seismo!mimsy!aplcen!{lloyd, root}
Johns Hopkins Univ./APL Center | lwt1@aplvax.ARPA
Laurel, Maryland | lwt1@APLVM (Bitnet)
"Man does not live by bread alone" | (301) 953-6175 (voice)snoopy@doghouse.gwd.tek.com (Snoopy) (05/04/87)
When I first read about the women's BOF I thought it didn't make a lot
of sense. ("Don't they have feminist conventions?") Then I thought
about some other BOFs at the two usenixes (usenixen?) I've attended.
The singles party. The Go tournament. The "Let's go to my favourite
restaurant in DC" dinner. The "Let's watch a funny movie that
happens to have a couple of scenes filmed in this hotel" video festival.
What do these have to do with Unix? Nothing. They have to do with
a group of friends being in the same town at the same time and taking
advantage of the chance to get together.
Assuming that these non-Unix BOFs don't interfer with the main
purpose of the convention, what do they hurt? If anything, they
help, by getting people out of their hotel rooms and meeting other
people.
Snoopy
tektronix!doghouse.gwd!snoopy
snoopy@doghouse.gwd.tek.com
Anyone for a puppy-dog BOF? (Beagles-of-a-fur)bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) (05/15/87)
Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.41.4 of Mon Mar 23 1987 on bu-cs (berkeley-unix) Although I agree Lee Ward seems to be trying to be a bit inflammatory he does ask some questions that aren't altogether undeserving of answer, so here's my 2c: 1. It is the women's fault they don't attend. Why do you assume this? The point of the BOF is they don't assume anything, the idea is to gather some information and see if there is indeed any problem which could be addressed. Remember that many if not most attendees have their expenses paid by their employers. To some extent this indicates their status in the pecking order of things. One question counter to your statement is whether or not women tend to be denied this opportunity, I don't know, but it might be worth a BOF to see if anything is revealed. Further, it might reflect the relative status of women in the field, is there any pattern to the job level of people who attend? (eg. system programmers? keypunch operators?) Is this generally under-represented by women? Are Unix jobs under-represented by women? I don't know, I guess it's all possible. There may be other factors, such as traditional social roles. Do women in general attend conferences away from home as much as men? Does this cause friction between spouses more then when it's the man away from home? If this is a problem, is there anything that could be done about that? Do women feel welcome? Has USENIX for any reason gotten some sort of reputation of a bunch of men sitting around drinking beer and being obnoxious or some such, you know, the Shriner's convention kind of rep (it would be completely untrue, but gossip has its ways.) 2. Usenix is not the appropriate place to address these issues. Inasmuch as they seem to affect Usenix attendance (which seems to always have been the point/name/mission of this proposed BOF) where else would it be discussed? Why isn't it relevant to speak about the mix of attendees at Usenix except through the Usenix organization? Say all of a sudden there was a complete drop-off in systems types and only people who sold Unix were attending, wouldn't that be something to discuss if people felt this was a problem that needed a solution? There is one possible fallacy however. All the women who don't attend obviously won't be at the BOF so how does one gather information as to why others couldn't attend? Well, this could be addressed there, I would hope that if there were any reasons that are holding anyone back they would post them to the net, obviously my hypothesizing is of very limited value. Maybe it's because they do the summer conferences in Atlanta and Pheonix? Perhaps only women are sane :-) -Barry Shein, Boston University
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (05/17/87)
> Say all of a sudden there was a complete drop-off in systems types and > only people who sold Unix were attending, wouldn't that be something > to discuss... I'm half-tempted to set up an Old-Timers' BOF, admission restricted to those who have booted a Version 5 or earlier. (NOT System V, *Version* 5 -- if you don't know the difference, you definitely don't qualify!) Hmm, I'd probably have to make that Version 6 or the non-Bell attendance would be pretty small... On the other hand, maybe a small BOF is better... -- "The average nutritional value Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology of promises is roughly zero." {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry
lee@unmvax.UNM.EDU (Lee Ward) (05/18/87)
Thank you Mr. Shein. You have changed my mind, at least. Seems you are
right on all counts in your article.
--
--Lee (Ward)
{ucbvax,convex,gatech,pur-ee}!unmvax!leebrunner@sri-spam.istc.sri.com (Thomas Eric Brunner) (05/18/87)
In article <8035@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: > >I'm half-tempted to set up an Old-Timers' BOF, admission restricted to >those who have booted a Version 5 or earlier. (NOT System V, *Version* 5 -- >if you don't know the difference, you definitely don't qualify!) > >Hmm, I'd probably have to make that Version 6 or the non-Bell attendance >would be pretty small... On the other hand, maybe a small BOF is better... Henry, as someone who would most certainly not pass the v.5 or v.6 muster, I do urge you to do what you'd like. I've no problems with BOFs for people different from myself, in interest or experience. Please give a thought to editing the subject line though - some of this discussion is not about a possible "Old-Timer's" BOF, but about a scheduled BOF with a fairly clear idea that something in the profession can be changed. We went though this several years ago, with middling results, in the Berkeley Mathematics Dept. Unix systems programming professionals face a similar situation, and also similar opportunities. Cheers!
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (05/18/87)
> ... Please give a thought to > editing the subject line though - some of this discussion is not about a > possible "Old-Timer's" BOF, but about a scheduled BOF with a fairly clear > idea that something in the profession can be changed... Hm, I suppose I should clarify one aspect of my posting: it wasn't intended to poke fun at the idea of a Women's BOF. It was a somewhat bemused reaction to all the *fuss* that's been made about the Women's BOF. Tolerance and a sense of humor seem to be foreign to both the ignorant scoffers and the deadly-serious social reformers. -- "The average nutritional value Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology of promises is roughly zero." {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry
phil@osiris.UUCP (Philip Kos) (05/18/87)
I think that as long as the women at the women's BOF think a women's BOF is a good idea, then a women's BOF is a good idea. I almost attended the women's BOF at the DC Usenix, but decided instead to begin The Valiant Trek Home to Baltimore (it was the evening of the day all the pretty snow came down). It wasn't that Liz Sommers said I could stay only if I took all my clothes off, honestly it wasn't... (next time in DC, mamaliz... no can do Phoenix but if anybody there sees my little sister Kate tell her I said "hi"...) ...!decvax!decuac!\ Phil Kos ...!seismo!mimsy!aplcen!osiris!phil The Johns Hopkins Hospital ...!allegra!/ Baltimore, MD
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (05/20/87)
> I almost attended the women's BOF at the DC Usenix, but decided instead > to begin The Valiant Trek Home... It wasn't that Liz Sommers said I > could stay only if I took all my clothes off, honestly it wasn't... Interesting; that requirement must have been relaxed later. I was the token male at the DC BOF (i.e. I was talking to Liz in the hall while she waited in hopes that a significant number of people would show up; nope), and I didn't even have to take off my shoes. -- "The average nutritional value Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology of promises is roughly zero." {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry
phil@osiris.UUCP (Philip Kos) (05/20/87)
They lifted that requirement for Henry Spencer??!? I smell discrimination in the air! Liz, what's the deal? Am I *that* much cuter than Henry, or what? ...!decvax!decuac!\ Phil Kos ...!seismo!mimsy!aplcen!osiris!phil The Johns Hopkins Hospital ...!allegra!/ Baltimore, MD