Subject: Re: [boost] GNOME outreachy
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-23 23:09:24
On 8/23/2018 2:53 PM, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
>> I was hoping why don't we also apply for GNOME outreachy also it is also
>> similar to GSoC and can also help our community to grow. and by appearing
>> in end of year internship in GNOME outreachy we can keep a flow of new
>> contributors and motivate people to contribute to opensource throughout the
> Boost has always functioned as a strictly equal meritocracy. You get
> judged here completely independent of who or what you are. We, quite
> frankly, don't care so long as you can write excellent C++ and defend
> that C++ in front of everyone else here. Some long standing members here
> have pseudonyms for various personal reasons, and nobody cares.
> Outreachy requires orgs to practice discrimination of a form which is
> illegal in some parts of the world. I certainly could not abide by it,
> it contravenes EU human rights legislation, and I also find it morally
Do you have more information to back up your assertions ? I know nothing
about "outreachy" but I see nothing whatever in the description of the
organization which suggests discriminatory practices. Or do you really
believe that an organization for, let us say, people who have 6 fingers
on their right hand, is discriminatory because people who do not have 6
fingers on their right hand are being discriminated against ?
My response has nothing to do with whether Boost should support
"outreachy" but with your claims above about "discrimination", "EU human
rights legislation" and morality. I find your claims outlandish without
any given proof.
Your other remark that Boost is interested in people who show expertise
in C++ I agree with. But I do not see why Boost should only be
interested in people who show expertise in C++ depending on what
organization(s) they belong to.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk