@josh#BSDCan has maintained their strong policy, which is great. There have been other #BSD conferences with a strong #HealthPolicy, but has been patchy & organising teams have dropped the ball in subsequent years, like EuroBSDConf. Some leadership was needed, instead of leaving it to local organisers.
Likewise, #LinuxAustralia could have stepped in & set the tone for their events, but failed to.
#Python is the only large community I've noticed taking a consistently correct approach to this.
My reflection from yesterday's @linuxaustralia#AGM - you can't make things a priority for an organisation unless prioritisation involves dedicating resources to that priority.
If there are no additional resources, and other things are not de-prioritised, then you cannot logically make something else a priority.
There is a "red line" on organisational capacity - if things get added to the list of priorities / tasks, then either something else drops below the line, or more resources are required to deliver those priorities.
@KathyReid@linuxaustralia Your comment about my "making a big deal" about not being able to increase text size in Zoom is an excellent exemplar of how Linux Australia is doing at accommodating disability. I needed to increase the text size because I had great difficulty reading the chat despite employing accessibility options on my own computer. I should have expected nothing better after my advocating for better support of disabled people to help them participate at Everything Open was met with "we don't have the resources for that".
As I said before, I was going to offer to investigate exactly what needed to be done to get Linux Australia to be using 100% open source, but the motion was voted down without anyone even asking me if I would do anything. At the very least this is a procedural failure. The chairman put the motion to a vote without the discussion being complete. A point which another attendee made at the time.
I can understand how people in an organisation set up to promote open source might feel attacked when a member of the organisation asks them why they aren't in fact using open source software for the activities of that organisation. However I did not say "You're a bunch of hypocrites" which your toot portrays as a direct quote but is in fact a misrepresentation. I did say it was hypocritical of the organisation to advocate for open source but to not use open source itself.
The fact remains that they voted down a motion asking them to make it a priority to do the core thing the organisation purports to support. If they are angry about that then that is way more about them than about my approach. I was offering to help the organisation live up to its principles and, not only was my help not accepted, but now you are patronising me in public. This is a strange approach for an organisation that says it will support people to do things if they step up.
The fact that Linux Australia even considered using Zoom, a known data security risk and a complete trash fire of a company, for their AGM is a massive prioritization of convenience over principle, and a really bad look. And I do not apologize for calling them out on that.
I 100% don't care about political capital. I care about doing things for the community. That is why I gave my time and organised OSDC. That is why I presented at LCA. That is why I have gone on the session selection committee whenever I was asked. That is why I was offering to edit an open journal at the AGM, an offer which was also not taken up. If multiple people are offside because I offered to help the organisation not be hypocritical and to be more accessible to disabled people then this is clearly not an organisation I want to be a part of.