@Graham Snyder could of clarifying questions if you're happy to entertain them

1. Are you aware of how PoC + working class people are already being "integrated directly into XR strategy and decision-making processes"? (not suggesting it's being done enough! but wanted to be clearer what understanding you have currently)
   
   

2. What exactly do you mean in this instance "integrated directly into XR strategy and decision-
   making processes"? what would you like that integration to look like exactly?

These are great questions. I don't think I could claim to have a good understanding of the current situation and the impressions I gave are formed from what exposure I have had (on a personal level and e.g. public speakers) to people who seem to hold some sway in XR.
As it happens I agree with the critique of the proposal wording that it is not clear exactly what it would entail, but I decided to take the wording directly from the article because I don't feel I have a good enough grasp of what it would entail to make those proposals directly, and on that basis I was looking to gauge support of Ahmed's suggestion, not my own questionable reframing of it.
With those caveats then, my perspective is that I would like to know that the teams guiding internal + external and messaging, strategy, and actions design include or at least actively consult with PoC + working class people who are currently critical of XR's approach. I'm quite wary of the potential for citing the fact that there are already some PoC/working class voices in those teams (and no doubt there are) as evidence that no change is needed.

On the proposal posted here, taken from the article:

"People of colour and working people need to be integrated directly into XR strategy and decision-making processes"

Asking whether people agree with this or not seems meaningless in the absence of any clarity around what being 'integrated directly' is supposed to mean. Does it mean quotas, or what? I'm concerned about a slide into virtue-signalling lip service as opposed to meaningful engagement with this issue...

I agree – the current positive reactions to this proposal on all of our internal platforms not only fills me with hope that the topic (finally) gets the attention it deserves, but also (due to their almost automatic character) with a fear we still only talk the talk (easy) but don't walk the walk (hard). I would highly welcome a discussion about possible operationalisations of the proposal.

I get a bit fed up of lots of white, middle class people complaining that XR is full of white, middle class people, and worrying about it. There are some people in XR who are neither white, nor middle class. Ask them how important it is, and what we should be doing to improve matters. You might be surprised by the answers.

As a white, middle class person, I am unqualified to comment, but if we didn't constantly block the buses these people we want to attract need to get to their jobs, so they can afford to feed their children, while happily allowing their bosses to continue to earn millions exploiting them, it might help.

Thank you to everyone so far!

...for sharing such considered views, in a respectful way. I think there is a lot of value here.

Now I'm wondering if we can dare to try and converge some of this divergent conversation into tangible takeaways. Perhaps this dialogue has changed some peoples' minds.

It would be great if someone is up for proposing a take away from this article (if any) so we can actually see how much we align now, as we move forward together.

Use the PROPOSAL button to propose a take away. Make it specific!

Graham's temperature check above was certainly agreeable but also not very specific. Bear in mind how much easier (but less practically useful) it is to propose "let's do better, more inclusive actions" for example, compared to a daringly specfic learning/take away or proposal for how we go forward differently (or continue exactly the same!) I could propose (and I will soon) but being the kinda facilitator of this new dialogue space, I'd love to invite diversity of contribution (I've already created a bunch of threads :)

I'm confused. Shouldn't a proposal on Canning Town be in the Canning Town thread, rather than this one? Or do I totally misunderstand Loomio threads?

oh god sorry thanks, yes. I hold them so closely in my heart and am a bit knackered! Loomio lets you edit comments after sending so I've corrected it - thank you!

Aha, this is where we can customize the vote options to

• STRONGLY agree

• agree

• abstain

• disagree

how do we feel about doing this for future proposals?
Reason being because I don't know about others here, but I'm finding there's sometimes proposals / temperature checks which I partly / largely agree with, but there's definitely significant room to improve it (I suspect) and want to be able to express that, so rather than having 2 levels of disagree ("disagree" and "block") we would have 2 levels of agree :)
(I thiiiink if we customize it, it'll remember the setting for future proposals.)

Thoughts?

Why did the editor present me with the text from my previous comment by default?
I think it is important to retain block. Can we have 5 options?

Hmm. Might've been temporary data stored in your cache..probably just prioritising not losing your work.

I don't think 5 options is possible, I can actually see it's not fully customisable it seems (I'll attach screenshot of creating new proposal)

I think the trouble with Block is it suggests that we each have the power to block a proposal, which isn't really true, unless we somehow change XR UK's decision making method! Of course a working group or affinity group can choose it's own decision making method..

I think you should just run with a poll made to look like a proposal

Is there an option for "other" (add comment)? Because sometimes the question itself should be phrased differently, or an opinion doesn't simply fit into the agree-disagree range. To give a random example, in the question "We should concentrate our disruption on the elite, rather than the working class." - if my opinion is "well, maybe we should specifically focus our disruption on the police force" (I don't think so, just an example) then whatever I choose from the range of agree-disagree will not reflect my attitude.

There is an option to give an explanatory comment along with any poll or proposal response – but if your opinion doesn't fit with any of the available responses, then perhaps you are trying to answer a different question, or the original question is poorly constructed. In either case rather than trying to shoehorn your opinion into your response to that original question, you can create a new, separate poll/proposal while responding to the original on its own terms.