[NCSG-Discuss] On Diversity and Discrimination

[Marc Perkel]

I agree on interest diversity. Third world view needs representation. 
I'm from West Virginia, kind of third world if you've ever been there. 
NGOs, education, Libertarians, genius geeks, and hookers. Hookers are 
always being discriminated against.

But - I agree with the premise about a broad range of ideas. But I'm not 
sure that the source of broad range means gender/sexual preferences/ or 
the frequencies of light reflected off the surface of the skin. 
Especially since we communicate by email, I have no idea what color 
anyone is, nor do I care. If we go back 75,000 years we all come from 
Africa and humans are less genetically diverse than my 3 cats.

One person volunteered he was a white straight guy. This is a tech and 
policy forum. Color doesn't matter. There a plenty of women here and 
this list seems if anything slightly female dominate, so gender isn't a 
problem. As to sexual orientation, I don't see the world in terms of 
just straight and LGBT as if those were the only two sexual preferences. 
I like hippy women, geeks, prostitutes, and women from Craigslist. I 
have no idea if the BDSM community is represented. What about polygamy? 
Or celebacy?

I think we need a balance of 49ers vs. Ravens fans.

What about diversity of drug use? Or politics? Is America ready for a 
white president in 2016? Do we have enough Republicans in this group? I 
tried to find some anarchists but they didn't want to join. What about 
stupid people? Should policy only be made by people who are smart? Did 
you know that half of all people are below average?

This group already seems pretty diverse to me.  Are we missing any 
perspective?

Sorry - sometimes I get on a rant.

On 1/31/2013 6:28 PM, Dan Krimm wrote:
> Not sure how it works on Kolob, but "discrimination" has virtually nothing
> to do with this.  I think that's a spurious point.
>
> The point is really about capturing the broad range of ideas that may
> apply to policy making.  Regardless of individual talent, there may be a
> narrow characteristic to the experience of any individual, and including
> other individuals with other experience may allow the group as a whole to
> "think" of some ideas or implications that it may not imagine without a
> diverse group.  Some of those ideas may be the best ones, in the context
> of a particular policy deliberation, or may lead to ideas that no single
> participant would have thought of without the collective discourse.
>
> I think this diversity is especially important geographically, but other
> demographic variation is important too.
>
> It's not about what is valuable to any individual in the opportunity to
> participate.  It's about what is valuable to the group in having diverse
> participation.  It's about a better group outcome.
>
> If a sports team doesn't have a good diverse balance of athletic roles
> (say, a basketball team with all centers and no guards, or vice versa), it
> won't compete very well.  Policy teams have similar dynamics.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> On Thu, January 31, 2013 6:12 pm, Marc Perkel wrote:
>> I'm leaning against the idea of diversity/discrimination in decision
>> making bodies unless there is a reason to do so. One can not assume that
>> discrimination exists by default. I don't know if you are talking about
>> this email group or not but I have no idea what color/gender/or sexual
>> orientation anyone on this list is. Nor do I care. I see it as a
>> distinction without a difference.
>>
>> I myself am a cybernetic artificial life form from the future. I come
>> from the planet Kolob. We are an androgynous species. We reproduce by
>> mitosis, which is splitting in half creating 2 individuals. We are
>> either invisible or appear to be whatever shape we choose to make you
>> puny humans feel comfortable. We are a telepathic race and share a
>> singular consciousness. I communicate with you using a subspace
>> inter-dimentional modem.
>>