Subject:
Re: Review needed of 'Encourage Women in Linux' HOWTO
From:
Tabatha Marshall ####@####.####
Date:
10 Dec 2003 03:20:29 -0000
Message-Id: <1071026399.3160.18.camel@mysticchild>
I'm going to provide my feedback, and then we can see what you'd like to
do from there. I have some reviewers who've spent years in the real
world editing for book publishers and corporations who are qualified to
perform such a review.
On that note, I've read the HOWTO in full, twice, and here are my
recommendations:
1. Rather than DOs and DON'Ts, which may sound too authoritative (and I
know there was an explanation for their use, but regardless...) you
might be better served writing SHOULDs and SHOULDN'Ts. This implies you
are not telling anyone what to do, particularly for those who feel they
don't do those things (and yes, I realize you addressed that too, but I
really think it would help the overall tone).
2. Gather some feedback from men and women. Perhaps another section -
an appendix. Maybe some examples from women of specific instances, and
then responses from "enlightened" men to deal with these issues more
effectively. This can give the men a feeling of positive contribution,
and using specific instances as examples can go a long way in teaching
"unenlightened" men the more politically-correct responses when
confronted with these situations.
(I think just the SHOULD/SHOULDN'T vs. the DO/DON'T may go a long way in
toning down the authoritative voice.)
3. I do agree with your references and generalizations on how
differently men and women perceive themselves and are perceived by
others. I know you've already put a great deal of research into this,
and I don't think that there's any "factual" errors. It would be nice
to see some more up-to-date examples, if you can find some.
Perhaps you could use the idea of a men/women problem/resolution
scenario in choosing reviewers. Maybe we should find a couple women and
a couple men to work on this? With the inclusion of such a section (#3)
this would be a feasible reason to have more review involvement, but
beyond that, I think just the tweaks I mentioned will make a positive
impact on the work, and not take away from the meaning.
I'll leave you with those thoughts while I continue to catch up on
mail.
Val, let me know what you think of these ideas. I'd appreciate your
thoughts, since it IS your work, and I want to make sure I'm not way off
base with my suggestions.
Thanks,
Tab
On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 17:47, Val Henson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 06:55:15PM -0500, Raymond wrote:
> >
> > To this end I have volunteered on the editors list (mailto:
> > ####@####.#### to review this document.
>
> Thank you, Raymond. I have read the "Linux Documentation Project
> Reviewer HOWTO" (good work, as usual, Joy) and found that the
> following three types of review exist:
>
> 1. Peer Review - http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LDP-Reviewer-HOWTO/peerreview.html
>
> This type of review occurs prior to publication. This HOWTO has
> already been published.
>
> 2. Technical Accuracy Review - http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LDP-Reviewer-HOWTO/techreview.html
>
> I quote:
>
> "Make sure the facts as stated in the document are correct,
> helpful, and on topic. To do a technical accuracy review, you
> really need to know your subject matter, probably as well or better
> than the original author."
>
> 3. Language Review - http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LDP-Reviewer-HOWTO/languagereview.html
>
> This type of review addresses "poor sentence structure, grammar,
> organization, clarity, and spelling."
>
> Please let us know which kind of review you are doing. If you are
> doing a Technical Accuracy Review, please inform us of your
> qualifications in the area of encouraging women in Linux. The
> authors of the HOWTO are listed here:
>
> http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/x28.html#AEN66
>
> Some of my personal qualifications to write about this subject can be
> found on my home page:
>
> http://www.nmt.edu/~val
>
> A quick summary of my qualifications:
> - Former full-time Linux developer
> - Active volunteer for LinuxChix
> - Member of Systers mailing list
> - Frequent attendee at women in computing conferences
> - Host of LinuxChix BoF at Ottawa Linux Symposium two years running
> - Well read in the area (as demonstrated by references in the HOWTO)
> - Member of the program committee of Sun's women in engineering group
>
> > I suggest a even number of male/female reviewers that can work
> > amongst themselves and submit the results as a group to the LDP.
>
> I believe the motivation behind this suggestion is to provide a
> "gender-balanced" review committee. However, mere numerical equality
> will not produce the desired results. Three sexist men and three
> sexist women will still produce a sexist review (as will six sexist
> women and six sexist men - whoa, cool tongue-twister!).
>
> I believe that the reviewers should be people who are qualified to
> review the HOWTO as described above, regardless of gender. I look
> forward to the review comments.
>
> -VAL
--
Tabatha Marshall
Web: www.merlinmonroe.com
Linux Documentation Project Review Coordinator (http://www.tldp.org)
Linux Counter Area Manager US:wa (http://counter.li.org)
