[Diversity] On-going handling of such issues (was: Concerns about Singapore

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi Stephen, Dave,
At 12:49 10-04-2016, Dave Crocker wrote:
>Actually, we're not.  There is a tendency to believe that diversity 
>issues are solved by better awareness, or better documentation, or 
>more diligent attention, or by enforcing 
>well-intentioned-but-artificial membership quotas on 
>committees.  None of those suffice for complex and emotional social 
>concerns, of the sort we are currently seeing.
>
>So discussion about the best ways to ensure on-going handling of 
>such issues is entirely relevant.

[snip]

>Stephen, that's an example of magical thinking about transparency. 
>Sounds good but isn't practical for most administrative work or most 
>administrative environments.  In ignores costs and inefficiencies 
>and imposes unrealistic burdens on the folk doing the work.  (By the 
>way, it also imposes unrealistic burdens on the community, who have 
>to pay very close attention, all the time, to all this new detail 
>being made available...)
>
>Further, you are calling for massive operational changes, with only 
>modest direct relationship to the problem at hand.  By contrast, the 
>suggestion I'm advocating is simple, cheap, safe, and effective for 
>exactly the kind of issue at hand.

There is indeed a high cost for handling complex social 
concerns.  Does transparency help?  I believe so as everyone can 
judge for himself/herself whether the decision taken favored a group 
of persons or whether the concerns of a minority group were ignored 
during the decision-making.  Another way is to have representivity 
where there are quotas for each group.  Either way, it is a substantive change.

Regards,
-sm