The document discusses gender representation within the OpenStreetMap (OSM) community and highlights the stark underrepresentation of women in various roles and contributions. It presents data from mailing lists and surveys, illustrating the gender disparity in participation and the potential barriers to female involvement in the geospatial and open-source fields. The document concludes by suggesting actionable strategies to improve gender diversity and inclusivity within OSM and similar communities.

1. OpenThreadsthe community of open street map mailing lists
@alyssapwright

2. Teaser.
graphs! data! sex! oh my!*
* in this context sex equates with gender

3. fwd
new
reply
600030000
Messages By Type Messages By Gender
female
male
unknown
800040000
OSM DEV
Messages By Day
2010 2011 2012 2013
20
40
60
0
Dates: Jan 2010 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 992* | Messages: 13446 | Threads: 2496

4. fwd
new
reply
1600080000
Messages By Type Messages By Gender
female
male
unknown
20000100000
OSM TALK
Messages By Day
2010 2011 2012 2013
40
80
120
0
Dates: Jan 2010 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 1094 | Messages: 20554 | Threads: 3065

5. female
male
unknown
14007000
Messages By Gender
fwd
new
reply
200010000
Messages By Type
Talk US
Messages By Day
2008 2010 2011 2013
20
50
60
0
Dates: December 2007 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 397 | Messages: 10753 | Threads: 1997
20122009

6. female (11%)
male (61%)
unknown (28%)
14007000
Messages By Gender
fwd
new
reply
200010000
Messages By Type
HOT OSM
Messages By Day
2010 2011 2012 2013
10
20
30
0
Dates: March 2010 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 331 | Messages: 3180 | Threads: 942

7. Don’t you have a hobby?
why do this.

8. apw217
member since May 2007

9. ART

10. Every Metro Station
Madrid, Spain

12. Then I left.
I didn’t know about community.

13. apwright
member since March 2013

14. US

15. Hello World.
The “Community” is OSM

16. See the US Bylaws, Local Charter Agreement,
OSM US website, MapBox Knight News
Challenge, every media quote, OSM Press Kit,
and too many academic papers to count.
Proof

17. Who is our community?

18. Who is our community?
Seeking well-educated (white) male with a
penchant for high paying tech jobs.
Academics also accepted.

19. What was that?
Where are the women, you ask?

20. -----interactive session!-----

21. female representation in geospatial industry?

22. 40%
Census 2000 and 2009 American Community Survey
female representation in geospatial industry?

23. female graduates from geospatial programs?

24. 34%
National GIS Academic Program Survey 2012
female graduates from geospatial programs?

25. female computer science graduates ?

26. 25%
female computer science graduates ?

27. % of women who have heard of OSM?

28. 23%
% of women who have heard of OSM?
Stephens 2013

29. % of women speakers at this conference?

30. % of women speakers at this conference?
12%

31. % of women contributors in OpenStreetMap?

32. 3%
Budhathoki et al 2010 | Stark 2011 | Lechner 2011
% of women contributors in OpenStreetMap?

33. % of women participants in open source?

34. 1%
% of women participants in open source?
Ghosh et al. 2002

36. How did this happen?

37. There are many possible reasons...

38. Maybe the few restrictions on how people
treat each other creates permission for
discrimination.
Reagle, 2013

39. Maybe there is inertia. I mean, this was a
community started by men with a particular
ideology...why fight men stuck in their
ways?
Judd Atkin, 2012

40. Maybe there’s an incentive and motivation
gap. (e.g., Women and men relate to award
structures differently.)
Judd Atkin, 2012

41. Maybe women and men have different
communication styles and the current
conversations just ain’t cutting it for
both.
Judd Atkin, 2012

42. Maybe there’s active hostility towards
women.
Wikipedia, 2012

43. Why does this matter?

44. “Maybe girls just don’t like

45. computers,

46. or maps,

47. or open stuff.”
(paraphrased mansplaining)

48. “Maybe OSM

49. is a man’s field,

50. like construction work

51. or firefighting.”
(paraphrased from OSGeo)

53. (was that uncomfortable?)

54. This is a serious problem.

55. 01

56. Maps are biased by
the norms, traditions,
assumptions, and political
biases of the map maker.
J.B Harley 1989
01

57. tag=amenity=baby_hatch
A baby hatch is a place where mothers can
bring their babies, usually newborn, and
leave them anonymously in a safe place to be
found and cared for. A baby hatch is also
known as "safe haven".
Monica Stephens 2013

58. tag=amenity=kindergarten
A kindergarten, also known as a nursery or
playgroup. A place for looking after
preschool children and (typically) giving
early education.
Monica Stephens 2013

59. proposed feature=childcare
Monica Stephens 2013
A place for children to do homework, play
and spend time otherwise after school or
kindergarten.

60. Monica Stephens 2013

61. J.B Harley 1989

62. J.B Harley 1989

63. 02

64. Open source communities
serve as a model for
civic engagement.
02

66. 03

67. The collective intelligence
of diversity
Lam et al 2011 | Callahan & Herring 2011

68. not only expands the reach of our maps
Lam et al 2011 | Callahan & Herring 2011
The collective intelligence
of diversity

69. but the sustainability of our tools.
Lam et al 2011 | Callahan & Herring 2011

70. In case you were sleeping:

71. The future of our work
depends on “converting” more
white males

72. and more other under-
represented groups.

73. So, what can we do?

74. Stop being assholes?

75. The mailing list
temper tantrum.

76. The joust for
technical supremacy.

77. Hi Newbie: Read the
fucking manual?

78. Stop engaging?

79. The hesitation...
to ask for help,
to participate,
to question.

80. Doesn’t matter.
Mailing lists suck
anyway.

81. It’s not the tool
It’s the interaction.

82. Start Looking
Start gathering data
about what’s really going on.

83. Measured Progress
Start gender focused initiatives
with measurable goals.

84. And do it together.
WE ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE.

85. OpenThreads

86. Looks at the rhetoric of online
communications acknowledging them as
complicated spaces. Rife with the messiness
of human relationships.

87. Mailing lists have been important platforms
for online interaction. We can learn from
them as we create future social spaces.

88. Methodology

89. 00
Assemble the Team
Seamus Tuohy
Tech Lead | Rhetorical Analysis (Open Technology Institute)
Georgia Bullen
Creative Lead | Data Visualization (Open Technology Institute)
Alyssa Wright
Product Manager | Professional Nagging (OpenGeo)

90. 01
Frame the Problem
Open Government
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies

92. 02
Ask the Questions

94. 03
Structure the Data
Participant
author of an email
Message
body of an email
Thread
series of messages posted as replies to each other

95. 03
participant
participantID
totalPosts
averageReplies
starter : threads started / total #
engagement : Average number of replies a user has per thread
response : replies/ total
control : # of replies / # threads started by participant
timeSpent : total time spent
name
list
gender
entryTime
lastPost
messages
threads
type: participant

96. 03
message
msgID
list
minutes : time spent metric - words per email (given a words per
minute count)
msgType : message type, categorical (forward, question, reply, ...)
date : sent timedate
gender : gender of the sender
threadID
participantID
type: message

97. 03
thread
threadID
writingTime : minutes spent
list
start timedate
end timedate
calendarTime: total calendar time of the thread
genderBalance : count of gender
participants
messages
type: thread

98. 04
Parse the Mailing Lists
Types
discussion | user | developer
Format
pipermail | mailman
Technology
couchDB | python | d3

99. 04
https://github.com/elationfoundation/
openThreads
github

100. 04
http://bit.ly/17Ai1L4
sketches

101. 05
Visualize to Analyze
An initial observation

102. Messages By Gender
female (5%)
male (94%)
unknown (2%)
20000100000
female (5%)
male (87%)
unknown (8%)
10005000
Gender of Participants
OSM Talk
Dates: Jan 2010 - May 2013
User Profiles: 1094 | Messages: 20554 | Threads: 3065
Gender of Participants
female (3%)
male (88%)
unknown (9%)
7503750
Messages By Gender
female (3%)
male (96%)
unknown (1%)
800040000
OSM DEV
Dates: Jan 2010 - May 2013
User Profiles: 992 | Messages: 13446 | Threads: 2496

103. female (4%)
male (95%)
unknown (1%)
14007000
Messages By Gender
Gender of Participants
female (11%)
male (58%)
unknown (31%)
2501250
Talk US
Dates: December 2007 - May 2013
User Profiles: 397 | Messages: 10753 | Threads: 1997
Messages By Gender
female (5%)
male (94%)
unknown (2%)
20000100000
female (5%)
male (87%)
unknown (8%)
10005000
Gender of Participants
OSM Talk
Dates: Jan 2010 - May 2013
User Profiles: 1094 | Messages: 20554 | Threads: 3065

104. female (21%)
male (46%)
unknown (33%)
14007000
Messages By Gender
female (11%)
male (61%)
unknown (28%)
2501250
Gender of Participants
HOT OSM
Dates: March 2010 - May 2013
User Profiles: 331 | Messages: 3180 | Threads: 942
Gender of Participants
female (11%)
male (58%)
unknown (31%)
2501250
female (4%)
male (95%)
unknown (1%)
14007000
Messages By Gender
Talk US
Dates: December 2007 - May 2013
User Profiles: 397 | Messages: 10753 | Threads: 1997

105. OSM DEV
TALK OSM
TALK US
HOT OSM
Gender of Participants
100%50%0
Messages by Gender
100%50%0
Female
Male
Unknown

106. fwd
new
reply
600030000
Messages By Type Messages By Gender
female (3%)
male (96%)
unknown (1%)
800040000
OSM DEV
Messages By Day
2010 2011 2012 2013
20
40
60
0
Dates: Jan 2010 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 992* | Messages: 13446 | Threads: 2496

107. fwd
new
reply
1600080000
Messages By Type Messages By Gender
female (5%)
male (94%)
unknown (2%)
800040000
OSM TALK
Messages By Day
2010 2011 2012 2013
40
80
120
0
Dates: Jan 2010 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 1094 | Messages: 20554 | Threads: 3065

108. female (4%)
male (95%)
unknown (1%)
14007000
Messages By Gender
fwd
new
reply
200010000
Messages By Type
Talk US
Messages By Day
2008 2010 2011 2013
20
50
60
0
Dates: December 2007 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 397 | Messages: 10753 | Threads: 1997
20122009

109. female (21%)
male (46%)
unknown (33%)
14007000
Messages By Gender
fwd
new
reply
200010000
Messages By Type
HOT OSM
Messages By Day
2010 2011 2012 2013
10
20
30
0
Dates: March 2010 - May 2013 | User Profiles: 331 | Messages: 3180 | Threads: 942

110. Technical Challenges
People use multiple e-mails/names
identifying the identity behind a voice can be difficult
Gender is difficult to parse
requires community review
Headers: Standardized
Bodies: Not Standardized
Email dates
varies in format
05

111. 06
What’s Next?

112. 06
Activity Score
Quantity of initiated messages
Quantity of responses
Time taken to respond

113. 06
Influence Score
Initiated conversations
Ratio of initial poster vs others in the thread
Dialogue with new people

114. 06
Relation Score
Male > Male | Female > Female
Male > Female | Female > Male

119. 06
Keep Going.
more lists +
more questions +
more visualizations +
more analysis +
more awareness +
more self-reflection +
more focused initiatives =
more diversity + better OSM

120. OpenThreadshttps://github.com/elationfoundation/openThreads
@alyssapwright

121. Appendix

122. GNOME

123. Internship for GNOME project
10 OSS project involved
Success

124. Address women directly.
Accept non-students and non-coders.
Connect women with mentors.
Require a contribution
No pressure for really ambitious projects.
Approach

125. Etsy

126. GNOME
attracted 500% more female engineers
Success

127. GNOME
Invest
trained junior women for hiring
Partner
alliances with other organizations
Make a Public Stand
success breeds success
Approach

128. Recommendation
Address Gender
Make gender an explicit part of any
intervention. Increasing gender increases
representation of other groups as well.

129. Personal Recommendation
Consciously come from a place of trust.
Do not attack.
Make a public commitment.
Talk openly about what’s not working.
Use research to focus on action.