Value of a Voice
Collectives and Identity
The free and open-source movements are a massive experiment in decentralizing the creation of software among a diverse collective of unique perspectives. This offers a potential glimpse for communities to form radical new ideas that upend the status quo.
There is a conversation in the room that only this people at this moment can have. Find it.
On paper, this may appear as the utopian egalitarian ideal capable of giving both equal voice and access throughout the development process. We bring our entire selves to these creation-oriented ecosystems and that can bring as much synergy as friction.
Indeed, many people get involved with free and open-source software seeking to contribute back to the community. However, prejudice – already an existential problem within computing – have only further distilled within these communities.
We must actively work towards equitable and accessible systems that value our perspectives yet hold us accountable to biases. This may require radical new ideas and implementations, but we can still learn the value of our voice within the crowd.
Who Contributes?
There are limitless reasons why people contribute to free and open communities, spreading the gamut from altruistic to narcissistic – and just looking to get a paycheck. The people who become integrated into these spaces are just as varied as the software projects themselves.
Organizations which design systems (in the broad sense used here) are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations.
The ways in which a free and open-source project is organized can greatly impact their software. The inverse may also hold true – the software itself can play a role in the community that forms around it. These tensions are a dynamic process and every project responds to them differently.
Debian – the most popular community-supported Linux distributions – maintains a social contract that defines the expectations for affiliated volunteer developers. Each applicant must undergo a vetting process to better understand their technical skills, as well as their motivation and identity. With each influx of interest, the process has become more stringent. There are many reasons behind their contributions.
|
Diversity_3 |
Community Involvement Many volunteers are looking to give back to the community and find fulfillment through simply being involved with others. They may use the software everyday and want to support it.
This can take many forms: participating in hackathons; undertaking code reviews; updating documentation; or simply sharing the word.
|
|
School |
Continuing Education Some volunteers are seeking to learn a new skill or further develop one they already have. Established open-source projects often excel at onboarding new community members, providing valuable structure and mentorship.
|
| Paid |
Paid Work Not all people who contribute to open-source projects are by necessity unpaid volunteers. The largest contributions to projects like the Linux kernel are by paid employees working for the companies like IBM and Intel.
Similarly, corporate Linux distributions like Red Hat provide paid hours to developing the Kernel for their own software. It is not uncommon for contracted work to be incorporated into open source software.
|
| Interests |
Side Projects Some developers create their own software to solve a problem and end up sharing their solution freely, while others may seek fulfillment by creating something people like to use.
Solving puzzles with a community or fixing an irritating bug can scratch an itch. At the end of the day, it's about personal enrichment. |
| Cognition |
Personal Motivations Developers may be motivated by personal reasons stemming from emotional, political, social, interpersonal, economic or professional reasons.
Contributing to open-source projects can fulfill political agendas, build up a developer's portfolio, or create a reputation within the community. |
People are multifaceted and each volunteer may approach the project with overlapping motivations. Volunteers are free to resign at any time, for any reason – even without prior warning – through a simple public statement.,
Diverse Perspectives
Debian has made efforts to diversify and have members represented from the community. Debian Women in 2004 was established with the aim of having more women involved in development. Debian also partnered with Outreachy, which offers internships to individuals with underrepresented identities in technology.[214][215]
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/about/diversity-inclusivity
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_in_open-source_software
https://opensourcesurvey.org/2017/
- Documentation is highly valued, frequently overlooked, and a means for establishing inclusive and accessible communities.
- Negative interactions are infrequent but highly visible, with consequences for project activity.
- Open source is used by the whole world, but its contributors don't yet reflect its broad audience.
- Using and contributing to open source often happens on the job.
- Open source is the default when choosing software.
https://opensourcediversity.org/
The "very seductive" moral and ethical rhetoric of Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation fails (Raymond), he said, "not because his principles are wrong, but because that kind of language ... simply does not persuade anybody".[24]
https://opensource.com/article/17/9/diversity-and-inclusion-innovation
Researchers and journalists have found a higher gender disparity and lower racial and ethnic diversity in the open-source-software movement than in the field of computing overall, though a higher proportion of sexual minorities and transgender people than in the general United States population. Despite growing an increasingly diverse user base since its emergence in the 1990s, the field of open-source software development has remained homogeneous, with young men constituting the vast majority of developers.
Since its inception in the 1990s, as open-source software has continued to grow and offer new solutions to everyday problems, an increasingly diverse user base began to emerge. In contrast, the community of developers has remained homogeneous, dominated by young men.[3]
In 2017, GitHub conducted a survey named the Open Source Survey, collecting responses from 5,500 GitHub users. Among the respondents, 18% personally experienced a negative interaction while working on open-source projects, but 50% of them have witnessed such interactions between other people. Dismissive responses, conflict, and unwelcoming language were respectively the third, fourth, and sixth most cited problems encountered in open-source.[4]
Another study from 2017 examined 3 million pull requests from 334,578 GitHub users, identifying 312,909 of them as men and 21,510 as women from the mandatory gender field in the public Google+ profiles tied to the same email addresses as these users were using on GitHub. The authors of the study found code written by women to be accepted more often (78.6%) than code written by men (74.6%). However, among developers who were not insiders of the project, women's code acceptance rates were found to drop by 12.0% if gender was immediately identifiable by GitHub username or profile picture, with only a smaller 3.8% drop observed for men under the same conditions. Comparing their results to a meta-analysis of employment sex discrimination conducted in 2000, the authors observed that they have uncovered only a quarter of the effect found in typical studies of gender bias. The study concludes that gender bias, survivorship and self-selection bias, and women being held to higher performance standards are among plausible explanations of the results.[5]
The gender ratio in open source is even greater than the field-wide gender disparity in computing. This was found by a number of surveys:
- A 2002 survey of 2,784 open-source-software developers found that 1.1% of them were women.[7]
- A 2013 survey of 2,183 open-source contributors found that 81.4% were men and 10.4% were women.[8] The survey included both software contributors and non-software contributors and found that women were much more likely to be non-software contributors.[9]
- In the GitHub's 2017 Open Source Survey 95% respondents identified as men and only 3% as women,[4] while in the same year about 22.6% of professional computer programmers in the United States were female according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.[10][11]
In an 2013 article for the NPR, journalist Gene Demby considered Black people and Latinos to be underrepresented in the open source software development.[12]
- In the GitHub's 2017 Open Source Survey the representation of immigrants, from and to anywhere in the world, was 26%.[4]
- In the same survey, 16% of respondents identified as members of ethnic or national minorities in the country where they currently live,[4] while according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, Black, Asian, and Latino people accounted for a total of about 34% of programmers in the United States in 2017.[10][11]
Among the respondents of GitHub's 2017 Open Source Survey 1% identified as transgender, 1% as non-binary, and 7% as lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual, or another minority sexual orientation,[4] while according to a Gallup poll in conducted in the same year 4.1% of the United States population identify as LGBT.[13][11] A 2018 survey of software developers conducted by Stack Overflow found that out of their sample of 100,000, 6.7% in total identified as one of "Bisexual or Queer" (4.3%), "Gay or Lesbian" (2.4%), and "Asexual" (1.9%), while 0.9% identified as "non-binary, genderqueer, or gender non-conforming".[14]
Large personalities in open source and complicated views
Eric s Raymond
Linus torvalds
Barriers to Entry
https://www.ashedryden.com/blog/the-ethics-of-unpaid-labor-and-the-oss-community
It's difficult to go much further without mentioning the undercurrent belief in meritocracy that is particularly pervasive in open source communities, especially around participation in GitHub.
Meritocracy is the belief that those with merit float to the top - that they should be given more opportunities and be paid higher.
We prize the idea of meritocracy and weigh merit on contribution to OSS. Those who contribute the most, goes the general belief, have the most merit and are deemed the most deserving. Those who contribute less or who don't at all contribute to OSS are judged to be without merit, regardless of the fact that they have less access to opportunity, time, and money to allow them to freely contribute.
As the people who exist within this supposed meritocracy don't exist within a vacuum, we also have to realize how our actions affect others. Meritocracy creates a hierarchy amongst the people within it. Some of those at the top or striving to at least be above other people have been guilty of using their power for bullying, harassment, and sexist/racist/*ist language that they use against others directly and indirectly. This creates an atmosphere where people who would otherwise be deemed meritorious within this system choose not to participate because of a hostile, unrewarding environment.
The idea of a meritocracy presumes that everyone starts off and continues through with the same level of access to opportunity, time, and money, which is unfortunately not the case. It's a romanticized ideal - a belief in which at best ignores and at worst outright dismisses the experiences of everyone outside the group with the most access to these things. A certain demographic of people have three or four steps above other people, so the playing field is not even.
know many women that either don't contribute to OSS because they've been dismissed for being women - being too pretty, not pretty enough, being forced to prove their competence more than their male counterparts because they're women. I've talked to women who use gender-ambiguous GitHub names and don't post a picture of themselves as their avatar because of how quickly this happens. In addition, the sexual harassment, slurs, and other derogatory language that are used directly or indirectly at these groups of people causes many to not want to participate at all.
Additionally, there are very public instances of assuming someone is male.
"No one is forcing anyone to contribute to open source."
While that on the surface is true, the imposition is there. Many jobs require open source contributions to even consider a candidate.
The Value of Your Perspective
Why are there fewer people represented who aren't white men
There are a few possibilities to consider when thinking about an answer to this question:
1. Maybe there isn’t a strong correlation between programming talent and GitHub activity.
Both agreed that while being active on GitHub is typically a good indicator of engineering expertise, the reverse isn’t true, mentioning that they know plenty of great engineers who aren’t involved in open source at all. The tech industry agrees too, with many companies assessing GitHub profiles during hiring processes (although this practice seems to be quite biased, which isn’t really a surprise given the results of my study).
Anna-Chiara commented that it takes a great deal of confidence to contribute to open source, something that she thought may be more difficult for female developers to overcome, given the tech industry’s poor history with welcoming women.
There are certainly several biases that could potentially be at play with this GitHub data (including the fact that almost 25% of the names couldn’t be classified as male/female with confidence).
3. Female programmers are leaving the tech industry.
If activity on GitHub correlates with seniority and expertise, then the extremely low number of active female contributors (low even compared to female contributors overall) could be explained by the alarmingly high departure rate of female engineers from the tech industry.
If the tech industry can’t retain as many women past their mid-career mark, then it’s likely that they won’t be contributing to many open source projects either.
https://www.toptal.com/open-source/is-open-source-open-to-women
https://biancatrink.github.io/files/papers/TOSEM2021.pdf
https://thenewstack.io/why-women-are-underrepresented-in-open-source/
The current inclusion of the historically disadvantaged might help wash some consciences without changing anything from the root. However, what is needed is a mental and structural paradigm shift. From there, it will be possible to build a more horizontal structure where decisions are made more inclusively and democratically.
https://www.computer.org/csdl/magazine/co/2022/12/09963732/1Iz0RZM9Wbm
Different aspects of diversity
Open source projects benefit from various types of diversity:
| Aspect | Description |
|---|---|
| Cultural | People from different backgrounds bring new ideas |
| Racial and ethnic | Helps make software that works for everyone |
| Gender | Mix of men and women improves understanding of user needs |
| Age | Different age groups add varied experience levels |
| Disability | Includes people with disabilities to make software accessible |
| Socioeconomic | Ensures software is useful for people from all backgrounds |
How Can I Contribute?
How to contribute to open source software projects
Financial Support
Donations
Sponsorship
Non profit funds
Open Collective is a crowdfunding platform focused on grassroots groups. It enables organizations, communities, and projects to get a legal status and raise funding through subscription or one time payment. It's particularly favoured by open source projects.[1] It currently hosts funding for thousands of open-source communities.[2]
https://www.spi-inc.org/donations/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_in_the_Public_Interest
Software in the Public Interest, Inc. (SPI) is a US 501(c)(3) non-profit organization domiciled in New York State formed to help other organizations create and distribute free open-source software and open-source hardware. Anyone is eligible to apply for membership, and contributing membership is available to those who participate in the free software community.
https://www.pledge.to/women-in-linux-4579
Community Support
Documentation
Feedback
Finding forums, chat apps, websites
Forums and mailing lists
Polls and feedback
Emergent strategy
Irc chatroom
I offer, from this defensive and sacred place, a protocol for those who are most comfortable approaching movements from a place of critique, AKA, haters.
1. Ask if this (movement, formation, message) is meant for you, if this serves you.
2. If yes, get involved! Get into an experiment or two, feel how messy it is to unlearn supremacy and repurpose your life for liberation. Critique as a participant who is shaping the work. Be willing to do whatever task is required of you, whatever you are capable of, feed people, spread the word, write pieces, make art, listen, take action, etc. Be able to say: ‘“T invest my energy in what I want to see grow. I belong to efforts I deeply believe in and help shape those.”
3. Ifno, divest your energy and attention. Pointing out the flaws of something still requires pointing at it, drawing attention to it, and ultimately growing it. Over the years I have found that when a group isn’t serving the people, it doesn’t actually last that long, and it rarely needs a big takedown—things just sunset, disappear, fade away, absorb into formations that are more effective. If it helps you feel better, look in the mirror and declare: “There are so many formations I am not a part of—my non-participation is all I need to say. When I do offer critique, itis froma space of relationship, partnership, and advancing a solution.”
4. And finally, 1f you don’t want to invest growth energy in anything, just be quiet. If you are not going to help birth or raise the child, then shhhhh. You aren’t required to have or even work towards the solution, but if you know a change is needed and your first instinct when you see people trying to figure out how to change and transform is to poop on them, perhaps it is time you just hush your mouth.
Development Support
Feature requests
Pull requests
Contributions