28 Mar
2014
28 Mar
'14
11:18 a.m.
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:39 AM, eddan.com <eddan(a)sudoroom.tv> wrote:
While I agree with concerns about top-down ownership,
I think it is important to recognize their success in regards to diversity. Both in terms
of who works there during the day and the kind of events they hold, I have been impressed
by how connected the place is to the community - at any point in time you'll see a
majority of people of color and more often more women than men
That was not my experience, but I've only been to one of their handful
of events (Oakland Data Day). I heard mixed reviews of their other
events and can't comment on them. I could never afford the price of
being there during the day, so I wouldn't know.
I am refreshingly surprised that you care about this, Eddan. I think
all Sudoers need to look critically at our work from an intersectional
feminist, anti-racist and anti-colonial frame. That especially
includes being accountable to our privileges and learning to replace
oppressive silencing behavior with ally behavior. How's that Sudo
men's group going, btw?
both areas in which Sudo Room has struggled with since
its inception.
To be clear, it is women, people of color, queers and other oppressed
groups who have struggled to be supported and represented at Sudoroom.
I feel like saying the organization has struggled is a rhetorical
erasure that adds to this problem. There are actually a lot of us, but
we face a structural bias.
Additionally, I think there may be some
misunderstanding about what having an open knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements.
The logic of open knowledge systems is to celebrate the spread of these norms as they
become more widely adopted - concern about 'copying and pasting' seem to
perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking.
Pretty sure Hol was being tongue-in-cheek. As I said in reply at the
meeting, "it's more of a ctrl-x"