Re: Request for consensus to add text in the BLM statement

+1 to Marisa’s rewording too.

—tobie

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 12:39 Daniel Appelquist <dan@torgo.com> wrote:

> I was Ok with the original proposal, and definite +1 to the Marisa's
> proposed rewording.
>
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Thursday, 20 August 2020 23:36, vagner <vagner@nic.br> wrote:
>
> Much better this addition.
>
> Vagner.
>
>
>
> Enviado do meu Samsung Mobile da Claro
>
>
> -------- Mensagem original --------
> De : Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>
> Data: 20/08/2020 18:56 (GMT-03:00)
> Para: Inclusion and Diversity Community Group <public-idcg@w3.org>
> Assunto: Re: Request for consensus to add text in the BLM statement
>
> -1
>
> I am afraid of our statement having a subtext that equates endorsing BLM
> with endorsing violence. Because otherwise why would we feel the need to
> add that line? This was never supposed to be a statement about all the
> things we support and don’t support. It’s specifically a statement of
> support for BLM.
>
> I would however be happy with adding this:
> "We unequivocally stand against racism, injustice, and violence against
> marginalized communities.”
>
> Marisa
>
> > On Aug 20, 2020, at 10:47, Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> > IDCG Participants,
> >
> > As you know, the W3C Process allows for formal objections to a group
> decision.  A formal objection is a request to the W3C Director to consider
> when evaluating the related decision.
> >
> > During the W3C Member review of the proposed W3C Statement on Black
> Lives Matter a formal objection was raised.  I have been delegated to try
> to find a consensus resolution to this formal objection on behalf
> > of the W3C Director.
> >
> > I share with you part of the objector's statement and following that a
> change (addition) to the text of the BLM statement. The objector has
> confirmed that this would resolve the objection to their satisfaction.
> >
> > Quoting from the objector's statement:
> >
> > "I believe it is important to clearly state what we _do_ and _do not_
> > support as W3C organization. We support true equality, we support any
> > lawful action that aims to fight injustice, but we do not condone
> > violence or destruction of property. In numerous cases, the peaceful
> > protests for right social cause were hijacked by radical extremists,
> > and their violent actions [that clearly deviate from the established
> > social norms and the rule of law] only diminish the importance of
> > "Black Lives Matter" message. I do not believe that being vocal about
> > the rightful cause while being silent about radical violations of
> > social norms sends the right message - we all know too well that
> > silence is approval. We do not tolerate any behaviors that violate
> > our own social norms, we openly speak against any violations of the
> > W3C Code of Conduct - I do not see why our stance on the larger
> > social issue should be any different.
> >
> > "Our stated position should clearly communicate the fact that while
> > we do support all marginalized and underrepresented communities, and
> > we support their fight for true equality, we do not condone any
> > violence or unlawful actions!"
> >
> > The objector states they will withdraw their Formal Objection to the
> proposed statement if the following sentence is incorporated into paragraph
> 6:
> >
> >  "As an organization, W3C believes that Black Lives Matter.
> >  /+We unequivocally stand against racism, injustice, and violence.+/
> >  We also stand in support of our Indigenous colleagues, colleagues
> >  of color, LGBTQI+ colleagues, and colleagues with disabilities.
> >
> > I solicit your view on this change, preferably no later than 27 August.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ralph Swick, W3C
> >
>
>
>
>