Event DEI Location Policy

This page describes the Event DEI Location policy, aiming to keep our diversity commitment in mind when organizing a event.

Goals

This policy goal is to make sure that a event location do not prevent people from coming due to discriminatory laws that would realistically impact attendance by marginalized members of the community. It was written with the LGBTQIA+ community in mind, but should not be restricted to it. To give a example, a law that prevent so-called "LGBT propaganda" would create legal risk if the DEI team decide to have a meeting, and so we should refrain from choosing such a location for a international event. As another example, a law preventing abortion under any circumstance would make pregnant people be wary of coming due to the risk of not being able to get proper care in case of unforeseen pregnancy related complications. This policy is written to be supplemented with several criteria submitted by the community following the process to add criteria outlined in this document.

Non goals

This policy does not attempt to take in account travels and/or passports/visa issues on purpose. While this greatly impact who can travel and would fall under the goal of increasing community diversity, this requires a different approach due to the complexity involved and the fact that it almost always requires a arbitrary decision that depend on the location of community members, the previous locations and current geopolitical climate as well as budget.

This policy also explicitly do not cover the event venue itself and the facilities used during the event, as this should be part of a separate document.

This policy do not cover smaller events organized by a local team (like a release party), as there is no expectation of international travel and the audience wouldn’t see its situation change wrt inclusivity. However, the event are still bound by Fedora CoC. Organizers are free to take that policy in account if their planned event aim for a audience spanning multiple countries and need to decide where to organise the event.

Location evaluation process

Each covered event should be assessed by the Fedora DEI team and/or the council in a timely fashion (ideally in a month time frame). Each proposal must be formally assessed using the criteria listed here: * placeholder criteria (to be added later)

Feedback can be provided in advance before the formal review process is started, and community members are encouraged to become familiar with the requirements before submitting a proposal, and get in touch with DEI team if they have any questions.

Events covered

Only a event requiring international travel for a sizable portion of the attendees shall be covered by that policy. Smaller events aiming at a regional or national audience can be exempted of this policy.

For Fedora, this mean mostly Flock to Fedora, or a event that replace it, as it aim to get the wider community from all around the world. Hackfests tend to bring people from various countries and should be covered too.

Criteria evaluation

Laws priority order

Criteria must be evaluated using the material applicability of laws, with a focus on their locality. For example, if a country lack a specific law used in a criteria, but a applicable law exists at a lower administrative level such as a town and cover the proposed location, then the closer applicable law will be taken in account. To give a example, at the time of writing of this document (April 2024), same sex unions are not recognized country-wide in Japan. However, since the Ibaraki prefecture has a partnership system since 2019, a event in Mito (capital of the prefecture) would be covered, and so a criteria based on same sex unions recognition could be fulfilled.

Timing of laws application

The criteria would be evaluated at the time of the proposal and/or decision. If a law is proposed but not yet voted, then it shouldn’t be taken in account. In a lot of country, there is plenty of laws proposed with most not being discussed nor being signed. If a law is not enforced in practice, but still exists, it should however be taken in account as if it was enforced. In the event of a imminent vote (1 or 2 weeks) along a rather high certainty of the result, a case-by-case exception can be discussed for that. Proposed laws can be brought during discussion outside of the process, and it is up to the Council to take that in account, especially if there is a need for a arbitrage between multiple locations.

Survey and perceptions

The criteria must be primarily based on laws, not survey or perceptions. The main reason is that surveys and perceptions can be hard to get in a consistent way across the world, and would requires to make a judgement call based on changing numbers, which is less clear cut than the presence or absence of laws. However, surveys and perceptions can be taken in account during discussion, on a case by case basis, especially if there is a need for arbitrage by the Council.

Importance

Each criteria will result either "met" or "not met" result. If a criteria is not met, it can be either a hard requirement (the proposal is rejected on that criteria alone), or a soft requirement (the proposal is not rejected just with that). Fedora Council can ignore a criteria (hard or soft), but it must provides a public explanation and a detailed reasoning for that. If all proposals for a event have at least one criteria that is not met, Fedora Council will need to start a arbitrage and should favor the one with the least amount of "not met" criteria and the least amount of "hard" and "not met" criteria. It should also provides a public and detailed reasoning around the arbitrage.

Criteria Addition Process

Anyone in the project can submit a new criteria in the policy by opening a ticket to the DEI tracker.

To be considered, a proposal must provides the following information:

  • A name for the proposal. A pun in the acronym is not required, but always appreciated.

  • The name/FAS ID of 2 persons responsible for pushing the proposal, answering to questions and submitting the changes and merge requests.

  • A rational explaining how it is related to Fedora DEI team objectives.

  • A criteria, in a short form of 1 or 2 sentences.

  • A short paragraph explaining the impact on the community and on the conference attendance, ideally along examples of past issues, controversies in others communities or academics papers

  • Whether the criteria is a hard requirement, or a soft requirement. A hard requirement would be harder to override than a soft requirement.

  • A set of resources in English from authoritative sources such as specialized NGOs report that permit to assess the criteria at the time of decision. It should be up to date and cover all countries if possible, and can be complemented with more precise smaller regional sources. Exceptions can be accepted on a case by case basis.

  • A set of 3/4 examples locations and how the criteria would be applied in practice. It must provides at least one accepted and one refused location, along the reasoning and justifications for the verdict. Locations should be provided as examples and do not need to be related to previous or future locations, but must use existing and contemporary laws at the time of the proposal.

New criteria approval

A proposal need to be reviewed and approved by the Fedora DEI team for adequacy with the team goals, then by the Fedora Council along the input of the Events team and any 3rd party that the Council may decide to consult.

The Fedora DEI team must use a full consensus approval as defined in its decision process. The Fedora Council need to follow its own Policy Change process.

If the proposal fail to obtain a consensus by any of the approving parties, their decision must be motivated. If the proposers wish to amend their proposal and submit it again, the new proposal must be treated as a new proposal from the point of view of the process and obtain approval from Fedora DEI team and Council again.

People listed as responsible for the proposal can participate to the discussions but must refrain from casting any vote on their own proposal. A proposal can be withdrawn or set aside at any time by the proposers. Any substantive change to a proposal during the approval procedure reset the process to 0.

Fictional example of a criteria proposal

Name: Proposal for mandatory and adequate feeding of cats

Proposer: Ruby N. (rudebythecat@) and Saphire N. (simp4ever@)

Rationale: Cats are very important and cute and important, and should be able to come without suffering from hunger or the psychological trauma of having water that is not fresh in their bowl.

Criteria: Flock should be in a place where cats are in charge and/or well fed and/or treated as divinities.

Impact on the community: Without having cats in charge, they might get underfed, and that’s very very very bad. It would deter cats from traveling to Flock, and so reduce the cuteness of the community by reducing the feliness of the community, which is the 6th F of the 4 foundations. Cats are also good for people according to this academic paper.

Type of requirement: Hard

Resources:

Examples:

References

Want to help? Learn how to contribute to Fedora Docs ›