| 7 Nov 2021 |
 joepie91 🏳️🌈 | In reply to @jkarlson:kapsi.fi
tech is slightly different, as you are not supposed to normally touch subjects sensitive to racial or other identities or roles? still on weekend break, but I would like to make a quick note here that "_______ should not be made political" is a common refrain in many communities, technical or otherwise, including in some communities like city planning that have infrastructural responsibilities similar to tech (and therefore the statement is similarly problematic). all of this is to say that tech isn't really as 'different' here as it might seem | 10:14:41 |
 tomberek | Perhaps I missed something; what was meant with "legitimate concerns" in the RFC thread? What were the language issues that were being acknowledged there? | 10:17:52 |
 @jkarlson:kapsi.fi | I do also find it likely that women (and many other) have more socially constructed obstacles in many things and would definitely not refuse to discuss the topic. | 10:26:25 |
| @jkarlson:kapsi.fi | * I do also find it likely that women (and many other groups) have more socially constructed obstacles in many things and would definitely not refuse to discuss the topic. | 10:27:27 |
 problems | i also want to reference a thing that happened recently, with delphi the descriptive ethics ai that was trained on r/aita. things like this need to explicitly pay attention to how they intersect with social issues, or they will reinforce the biases of the status quo | 10:27:39 |
| problems | delphi has some racist judgements, and that's because its input has racist judgments. the authors didn't pay attention to that stuff and it reinforced the status quo | 10:32:32 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | and while that is still a fairly explicit failure mode that's fairly easy to see and point at, there are many more subtle problems that fan out from social-issue-ignoring technical design choices, that aren't obvious to someone who isn't already very familiar with the problem domain | 10:35:55 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | and no one person is going to spot every single issue themselves, because nobody has a full view of the world, and that is IMO why it's important to embed these sort of social considerations into the culture behind a project and actively ensure a diversity of 'vantage points' | 10:37:18 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | * and no one person is going to spot every single issue themselves, because nobody has a full view of the world, and that is IMO why it's important to embed these sort of social considerations into the culture behind a project and actively ensure a diversity of 'vantage points' or backgrounds | 10:37:35 |
| problems | irenes and i certainly don't have every viewpoint or insight, which is why we're so glad to see constructive feedback | 10:42:02 |
| tomberek | That is my question, what feedback has been considered as constructive? | 10:45:08 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | In reply to @tomberek:matrix.org
Perhaps I missed something; what was meant with "legitimate concerns" in the RFC thread? What were the language issues that were being acknowledged there? just realized that this question may have been aimed at me? I think I was the only one who used that particular phrase | 10:45:47 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (asking so that I don't talk over others :p) | 10:48:21 |
 @piegames:matrix.org | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
irenes and i certainly don't have every viewpoint or insight, which is why we're so glad to see constructive feedback joepie91 🏳️🌈: ⬆️ | 10:50:45 |
| problems | i can't answer right now as an rfc author because i'm frankly too tired and need to sleep, but i think the original question was aimed at joepie91 🏳️🌈 | 10:53:21 |
| @piegames:matrix.org | Timezones are fun | 10:53:47 |
| problems | feel free to take the floor with that. i'm off to bed | 10:53:51 |
| * @piegames:matrix.org was wondering the other day how you kept talking till 4am. Well, most probably didn't … | 10:54:08 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | goodnight! | 10:54:19 |
| problems | In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
was wondering the other day how you kept talking till 4am. Well, most probably didn't … actually it was 7 | 10:56:23 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | tomberek: okay, so I'll try to answer the 'legitimate concerns' question from my perspective at least: an example would be the concerns brought up by jonringer here two(?) days ago, which after narrowing down seemed to work out mainly to 'overzealous application of norms without consideration for people needing to adjust' | 10:56:54 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I've talked to them a bit further in DM afterwards, and I am convinced that those concerns were 'real' concerns, and not a constructed pretext for bigotry or something like that (which does usually happen with a handful of people on topics like these) | 10:57:56 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | that's the distinction that I intended to draw in my comment; those who have real concerns that they might be unable to express 'politely'(?), vs. those who are constructing fake concerns to steer the community away from moderating abusive behaviour (ie. concern trolling) | 10:58:57 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | my words are not the best today but I hope that makes sense :p | 10:59:12 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (and yes, I recognize that it can be very difficult to distinguish between those two sometimes, that's part of the reason for my open invite for people to DM me unfiltered - it would make no sense for a concern troll to take me up on that, but it could make sense for someone who legitimately feels unheard and/or uncomfortable with expressing themselves publicly) | 11:00:10 |
| tomberek | That's it? That it was overzealous and that people must adjust to the norms eventually, they have no choice in the matter? | 11:09:35 |
| @jkarlson:kapsi.fi | that is true by definition? | 11:10:08 |
