Listening to Shelley Powers about women in tech

Shelley Powers asks yet another conference organizer “where’s the women?” I’m looking at my plans for my own video show and realize I don’t have a diverse-enough set of subjects on my show yet.

I realize that I’ve gotten mostly male voices for my show so far. Partly cause that’s just who is running the tech industry. Head of Sun Microsystems? Male. Person who runs Google Calendar? Male. Person who runs Printing for Less? Male. Person who runs JotSpot? Male. Person who runs Flock? Male. Person who runs eBay’s new research arm? Male. There simply aren’t enough Mena Trotts to go around (speaking of which I’d be honored to have her on my show — her talk at TED was posted on her blog the other day). UPDATE: can you name a CEO of a recognizeable tech company that’s not male? It’s hard to do. Apple? Male. Cisco? Male. Intel. Male. HP? Male. Google? Male. Yahoo? Male. Oracle? Male. Microsoft? Male.

But this is my problem partly cause I just haven’t focused on making sure my show has diverse voices. Truth is that +I+ can do a better job here and haven’t, for whatever reason (UPDATE: we have a segment of the show called “Digital Divas”, by the way, but it still isn’t enough and there aren’t enough women who are hard-core geeks — most of the engineering departments I have walked through lately are mostly male).

Thanks to Shelley and others for reminding us all to think of that.

But, on the other hand, I don’t want to change my process, either, and I don’t want to devalue the accomplishments of women (I remember when men would get together and wonder if I hired Deborah Kurata simply cause she was a woman or because she deserved it — I kept having to pull out speaker ratings and demonstrating that she was always in the top tier of speakers, usually #1. I hated getting that question. I always put the best person on stage that I could and I tried not to care about their physical attributes).

I simply want the most interesting geeks out there to be on my show. For instance, are you an interesting geek like Heather Powazek Champ (who works on the Flickr team at Yahoo)? I wanna talk with you.

So, if you’re an interesting geek, or know of an interesting geek, who is doing something interesting, or running an interesting company (especially one that is using tech in an interesting way) please let me know. Male or female.

It’s helpful for the next few weeks if they are in the San Francisco area since I won’t be able to really start traveling for a few months yet.

Who would you like to see on a video show?

One thing I have feedback for Shelley on is that a few times I, and other people I know, got her invited to events and opportunities and she didn’t make it for some reason or another. When a door is opened that seemed to be closed before, it’d be nice for her to walk through it and take advantage of the opportunity. If only to set an example for others and to make sure the door stays open. But maybe that’s just me.

UPDATE: several days ago Maryam wrote “the women who inspire me.” She also let leak that she was working on a “Digital Divas” segment of our show.

Comments

  1. “There simply aren’t enough Mena Trotts to go around”… Maybe that’s the natural order right now…you sound like you’re going to try to deviate from that. And I’m not being gender biased or anti feminist.
    “But partly cause I just haven’t focused on making sure my show has diverse voices.”… Diverse voices is one thing and non-gender. Sounds like you’re getting confused and trying to make it a gender issue.

  2. “There simply aren’t enough Mena Trotts to go around”… Maybe that’s the natural order right now…you sound like you’re going to try to deviate from that. And I’m not being gender biased or anti feminist.
    “But partly cause I just haven’t focused on making sure my show has diverse voices.”… Diverse voices is one thing and non-gender. Sounds like you’re getting confused and trying to make it a gender issue.

  3. When you can get to San Antonio, let me know – I can introduce you to some really cool, and really smart tech woman – hey, Esther Dyson started here (Datapoint), and she’s done pretty well!

    Rob

  4. When you can get to San Antonio, let me know – I can introduce you to some really cool, and really smart tech woman – hey, Esther Dyson started here (Datapoint), and she’s done pretty well!

    Rob

  5. [...] Robert Scoble is looking for smart tech-savvy women to interview.  Are you one?  Do you know one?  I have several in mind already, but shre yours in the comments section (and no, Robert hasn’t made any plans to come interview anyone here – yet.  But if we get a good enough cast together maybe we can convince him to come on out for a spell!). [...]

  6. My visibility is not the point, Robert, and you’re making this into a personal issue is rather disengenious. I have been invited to a total of three events in six years, only one of which offered to cover my expenses (Blogher).

    I had no idea that there were so few women in technology in Silicon Valley and California, that you have to import people like me from St. Louis just to have some female representation.

    Hello Robert Scoble’s readers: is this true? Are there no women geeks in California?

    If you’re having trouble finding people, I would say you’re probably not trying hard enough. However, after implying that you have a choice between women and ‘interesting geeks’, I would say you might have some problems connecting with women technologists int he future.

  7. My visibility is not the point, Robert, and you’re making this into a personal issue is rather disengenious. I have been invited to a total of three events in six years, only one of which offered to cover my expenses (Blogher).

    I had no idea that there were so few women in technology in Silicon Valley and California, that you have to import people like me from St. Louis just to have some female representation.

    Hello Robert Scoble’s readers: is this true? Are there no women geeks in California?

    If you’re having trouble finding people, I would say you’re probably not trying hard enough. However, after implying that you have a choice between women and ‘interesting geeks’, I would say you might have some problems connecting with women technologists int he future.

  8. Shelley: I thought you were invited to MSN Search Champs too and they definitely pay your way.

    I notice you didn’t answer my question. Which geeks would you like to see on a video show? Male or female?

    And, I pointed out at least two women who DO meet my definition of “interesting geeks” (Deborah Kurata, who I hired, and Heather Champ (who I’m hoping to have on my show).

    So, YOU are the one who is reading too much into what I wrote and making this a devisive issue instead of helping me find great geeks to have on my show. But maybe that’s the role you want to play instead of helping improve the situation.

    Me? I’m just looking to have the most interesting tech geeks on my show. I’d love to have you on, because you wrote an interesting Java Script book, but I can’t get outside of California this month. Maybe next.

  9. Shelley: I thought you were invited to MSN Search Champs too and they definitely pay your way.

    I notice you didn’t answer my question. Which geeks would you like to see on a video show? Male or female?

    And, I pointed out at least two women who DO meet my definition of “interesting geeks” (Deborah Kurata, who I hired, and Heather Champ (who I’m hoping to have on my show).

    So, YOU are the one who is reading too much into what I wrote and making this a devisive issue instead of helping me find great geeks to have on my show. But maybe that’s the role you want to play instead of helping improve the situation.

    Me? I’m just looking to have the most interesting tech geeks on my show. I’d love to have you on, because you wrote an interesting Java Script book, but I can’t get outside of California this month. Maybe next.

  10. PXLated: >>Sounds like you’re getting confused and trying to make it a gender issue.

    diversity is about all sorts of things. Am I getting a complete range of voices on my show? Am I presenting the tech industry fairly and completely? Am I encouraging new voices? And, yes, do I have my own biases that I need to overcome and learn from?

    Why have diverse voices on a show? Cause we learn more if we don’t hear from just the same old set of people. I get bored hearing from the same set too.

  11. PXLated: >>Sounds like you’re getting confused and trying to make it a gender issue.

    diversity is about all sorts of things. Am I getting a complete range of voices on my show? Am I presenting the tech industry fairly and completely? Am I encouraging new voices? And, yes, do I have my own biases that I need to overcome and learn from?

    Why have diverse voices on a show? Cause we learn more if we don’t hear from just the same old set of people. I get bored hearing from the same set too.

  12. By the way, Maryam (my wife) – a few days ago, before this issue erupted again — posted “women who inspire me.” She also revealed that we’re working on a segment called “Digital Divas” which we planned BEFORE this all erupted. So, Shelley, you can see we’re thinking of this issue even before you reminded us again of its importance. Why don’t you help those of us out who are TRYING to make this issue better?

  13. By the way, Maryam (my wife) – a few days ago, before this issue erupted again — posted “women who inspire me.” She also revealed that we’re working on a segment called “Digital Divas” which we planned BEFORE this all erupted. So, Shelley, you can see we’re thinking of this issue even before you reminded us again of its importance. Why don’t you help those of us out who are TRYING to make this issue better?

  14. “So, if you’re an interesting geek, or know of an interesting geek, who is doing something interesting, or running an interesting company (especially one that is using tech in an interesting way) please let me know. Male or female”

    Why only Geeks ?? ain’t there female bloggers out there doin just interesting stuff ???

    Oh boy the “MSN Search Champs ” was not Tara C also invited and Liz was the only participant ?? so now we know the 3 females who were actually invited at the MSN search champs….hmmmmmmm ok if I remember correctly there were a total of 30 participants in that forum and only 3 females were invited.. and BTW Robert, your organized that event correct ??

  15. “So, if you’re an interesting geek, or know of an interesting geek, who is doing something interesting, or running an interesting company (especially one that is using tech in an interesting way) please let me know. Male or female”

    Why only Geeks ?? ain’t there female bloggers out there doin just interesting stuff ???

    Oh boy the “MSN Search Champs ” was not Tara C also invited and Liz was the only participant ?? so now we know the 3 females who were actually invited at the MSN search champs….hmmmmmmm ok if I remember correctly there were a total of 30 participants in that forum and only 3 females were invited.. and BTW Robert, your organized that event correct ??

  16. Yes, I understand that, you’re the one that focused on gender. Diversity isn’t a gender issue. If you focus on gender, you’re getting false or forced diversity.
    Diversity is good, just don’t force it.
    A good share of the Execs I’ve worked with over 30 years have been female. Each and every one could hold their own and rose to the cream level without any false “diversity” claims. They were just good and stood out.

  17. Yes, I understand that, you’re the one that focused on gender. Diversity isn’t a gender issue. If you focus on gender, you’re getting false or forced diversity.
    Diversity is good, just don’t force it.
    A good share of the Execs I’ve worked with over 30 years have been female. Each and every one could hold their own and rose to the cream level without any false “diversity” claims. They were just good and stood out.

  18. Search Champs started out very unbalanced in the early days. If I remember right the latest ones were about 30% female.

    As to my show? It’s a tech/geek show. NOT a blogger show. So, I want geeks and/or execs in the tech industry.

  19. Search Champs started out very unbalanced in the early days. If I remember right the latest ones were about 30% female.

    As to my show? It’s a tech/geek show. NOT a blogger show. So, I want geeks and/or execs in the tech industry.

  20. I like to see just the geeks on your show. If someone is on your show because of their gender, I prefer not to see it. I think that is what you are trying to say here.

  21. I like to see just the geeks on your show. If someone is on your show because of their gender, I prefer not to see it. I think that is what you are trying to say here.

  22. “So, I want geeks and/or execs in the tech industry”
    So take it as it comes…some will be women, some will be men. A lot don’t seek to be stars (like Mena) so you may have to dig for both men and women. Too many focus on the stars, the self promoters, the samo-samo. The ones I’ve been most impressed with in my career have not been the self-promoters, just doers.

  23. “So, I want geeks and/or execs in the tech industry”
    So take it as it comes…some will be women, some will be men. A lot don’t seek to be stars (like Mena) so you may have to dig for both men and women. Too many focus on the stars, the self promoters, the samo-samo. The ones I’ve been most impressed with in my career have not been the self-promoters, just doers.

  24. Shelley: there are women geeks in California. However, there are darn few *employed* women geeks. And because Robert’s qualifications appear to include an employer, people like me don’t make the cut.

    Robert: given that Heather describes herself as “not that technical,” I’d be interested to know how you define “geek”.

    Dori (Bay area female geek)

  25. >>>Why only Geeks ?? ain’t there female bloggers out there doin just interesting stuff ???

    Isn’t this a tech/geek blog. There are way too many blogs out there all other sorts of interesting stuff.

  26. Shelley: there are women geeks in California. However, there are darn few *employed* women geeks. And because Robert’s qualifications appear to include an employer, people like me don’t make the cut.

    Robert: given that Heather describes herself as “not that technical,” I’d be interested to know how you define “geek”.

    Dori (Bay area female geek)

  27. >>>Why only Geeks ?? ain’t there female bloggers out there doin just interesting stuff ???

    Isn’t this a tech/geek blog. There are way too many blogs out there all other sorts of interesting stuff.

  28. PXLated: yeah. That’s my goal. Geeks geeks geeks.

    I was walking around Flock the other day and noticed that a few of the engineers (almost all of whom were male) were just very quiet and reserved. They don’t get the spotlight, unfortunately. Hopefully I can help change that.

  29. PXLated: yeah. That’s my goal. Geeks geeks geeks.

    I was walking around Flock the other day and noticed that a few of the engineers (almost all of whom were male) were just very quiet and reserved. They don’t get the spotlight, unfortunately. Hopefully I can help change that.

  30. >>>A good share of the Execs I’ve worked with over 30 years have been female. Each and every one could hold their own and rose to the cream level without any false “diversity” claims. They were just good and stood out.

    I hope more people come to this conclusion. I had the same experience and never had to think they were females.

  31. >>>A good share of the Execs I’ve worked with over 30 years have been female. Each and every one could hold their own and rose to the cream level without any false “diversity” claims. They were just good and stood out.

    I hope more people come to this conclusion. I had the same experience and never had to think they were females.

  32. Dori, good point. I have a segment of my show called “Photowalking” where we talk with a talented photographer and follow him or her around.

    Heather might say she’s not very technical, but I heard her speak at BlogHer and she’s definitely a geek. She takes a geeky approach to her photos and she works for an interesting photosharing company. So, I’d love to have her on.

    I’m honored that you’ll be on cause you’re definitely a geek. Geeks don’t have to be employed. I’d love to have Shelley on cause she wrote an interesting JavaScript book and she’s also an awesome photographer and we go at each other enough to know that she’d be an interesting interview.

  33. Dori, good point. I have a segment of my show called “Photowalking” where we talk with a talented photographer and follow him or her around.

    Heather might say she’s not very technical, but I heard her speak at BlogHer and she’s definitely a geek. She takes a geeky approach to her photos and she works for an interesting photosharing company. So, I’d love to have her on.

    I’m honored that you’ll be on cause you’re definitely a geek. Geeks don’t have to be employed. I’d love to have Shelley on cause she wrote an interesting JavaScript book and she’s also an awesome photographer and we go at each other enough to know that she’d be an interesting interview.

  34. Robert – I love your description of diversity! Much of the world has way too narrow a vision of what this means…

    Shelley – From your link on your comment I visited your blog for the first time just now. I don’t see a bio, I don’t know what you do and there is no e-mail address. If I were a conference organizer, please tell me just how I’d get the idea that you would be interested in being a speaker and what type of topic you’d speak about???

    I’m currently interested in being a speaker, writing even more than I am and joining an A+ orgranization that is intensely customer focused. All of that information is clearly posted on my blog – I have Robert and Shel to thank for that, it has led to me meeting some amazing people so far and I’m making steps towards my goals every day.

    P.S. You take real nice pictures of baby elephants, this I can tell for sure, how did you manage to keep the baby elephant in focus without the closer one becoming blurry?

  35. Robert – I love your description of diversity! Much of the world has way too narrow a vision of what this means…

    Shelley – From your link on your comment I visited your blog for the first time just now. I don’t see a bio, I don’t know what you do and there is no e-mail address. If I were a conference organizer, please tell me just how I’d get the idea that you would be interested in being a speaker and what type of topic you’d speak about???

    I’m currently interested in being a speaker, writing even more than I am and joining an A+ orgranization that is intensely customer focused. All of that information is clearly posted on my blog – I have Robert and Shel to thank for that, it has led to me meeting some amazing people so far and I’m making steps towards my goals every day.

    P.S. You take real nice pictures of baby elephants, this I can tell for sure, how did you manage to keep the baby elephant in focus without the closer one becoming blurry?

  36. Shelley, do you know a woman who has developed an Office 2.0 site? If the answer is yes, then why don’t you suggest that that woman speak at the conference, as Ismael Ghamini suggested you do? If the answer is no, then why are you blaming a conference organizer for a much larger social problem that he has very little control over?

    Look at the keynote speaker list for Oracle Open World 2006. All men. Did you decry Larry Ellison on your blog? If not, why not? Don’t you feel some sense of entitlement to speak at Oracle Open World as well? Oracle Open World needs more women speakers, darn it, whether they know anything about Oracle or not.

    When my five-year-old daughter grows up and becomes an Oracle sysadmin (fingers crossed!), it’ll be because I started teaching her how to write stored procedures in the womb, not because some conference organizer was pressured into using his conference to “promote diversity”. Jeez.

  37. Shelley, do you know a woman who has developed an Office 2.0 site? If the answer is yes, then why don’t you suggest that that woman speak at the conference, as Ismael Ghamini suggested you do? If the answer is no, then why are you blaming a conference organizer for a much larger social problem that he has very little control over?

    Look at the keynote speaker list for Oracle Open World 2006. All men. Did you decry Larry Ellison on your blog? If not, why not? Don’t you feel some sense of entitlement to speak at Oracle Open World as well? Oracle Open World needs more women speakers, darn it, whether they know anything about Oracle or not.

    When my five-year-old daughter grows up and becomes an Oracle sysadmin (fingers crossed!), it’ll be because I started teaching her how to write stored procedures in the womb, not because some conference organizer was pressured into using his conference to “promote diversity”. Jeez.

  38. I don’t fall into the pure category of geek that Robert seeks but I just hate it when folks start talking women and men in a professional topic. I work hard to be an expert at what I do and expect respect for what I do, not my boobies. sheesh. This is not to say I haven’t had my share of battles to gain respect.

    Just continue on the path of diversity Robert. The diversity I find on this blog is what brings me back.

  39. I don’t fall into the pure category of geek that Robert seeks but I just hate it when folks start talking women and men in a professional topic. I work hard to be an expert at what I do and expect respect for what I do, not my boobies. sheesh. This is not to say I haven’t had my share of battles to gain respect.

    Just continue on the path of diversity Robert. The diversity I find on this blog is what brings me back.

  40. Jeffrey, I didn’t know that Arrington was a coder, and with an Office 2.0 application to boot. Well, color me surprised.

    Yes it would be a shame if conference organizers were forced to consider issues of diversity. I live in the south, a lot of towns here abouts thought the same of the blacks.

    David, thank you for the note on the baby elephant. A smaller aperture leads to a greater depth of field. I believed I used f/10, but I’d have to check the photo’s metadata to know for sure. And yes my site has no about page. They’re new sites and I’m re-organizing.

    However, just to clarify: I didn’t bring up this issue because I wanted to be speaker. I don’t bring these up because I want more visibility for myself. Having this turn into a discussion of my visibility is nothing more than sidetracking from the more serious issues.

    So yes, Robert, I forgot about Search champs. However, I don’t really consider that a conference. But yes, I was invited to four things in six years, two of which would have paid my way. I think, though, this really isn’t germaine to either this particular discussion or the issue generally. Is it?

  41. Jeffrey, I didn’t know that Arrington was a coder, and with an Office 2.0 application to boot. Well, color me surprised.

    Yes it would be a shame if conference organizers were forced to consider issues of diversity. I live in the south, a lot of towns here abouts thought the same of the blacks.

    David, thank you for the note on the baby elephant. A smaller aperture leads to a greater depth of field. I believed I used f/10, but I’d have to check the photo’s metadata to know for sure. And yes my site has no about page. They’re new sites and I’m re-organizing.

    However, just to clarify: I didn’t bring up this issue because I wanted to be speaker. I don’t bring these up because I want more visibility for myself. Having this turn into a discussion of my visibility is nothing more than sidetracking from the more serious issues.

    So yes, Robert, I forgot about Search champs. However, I don’t really consider that a conference. But yes, I was invited to four things in six years, two of which would have paid my way. I think, though, this really isn’t germaine to either this particular discussion or the issue generally. Is it?

  42. Jeffrey, I just went through several speakers: you sure you want to stick with your criteria?

    And when did diversity become a burden?

    You know what’s funny is the organizers naive pleasure in how the conference was set and speakers found even before a press release was published. See that actually works against diversity, because it reflects only that group of people initially involved in the earlier discussion of the conference. Now, should more women have been reading the Office 2.0 weblog? Perhaps. Perhaps the Office 2.0 weblogger should have been reading more women.

    Even with all of this, the most important point lost in the discussion is that whatever comes out of the conference is hopelessly flawed. Why? Half the target audience was not represented. Unless someone wants to convince me Office 2.0 is meant to be used my men only, nothing that comes out of this can be accepted with any credibility.

    Diversity isn’t a burden; diversity is an opportunity.

  43. Jeffrey, I just went through several speakers: you sure you want to stick with your criteria?

    And when did diversity become a burden?

    You know what’s funny is the organizers naive pleasure in how the conference was set and speakers found even before a press release was published. See that actually works against diversity, because it reflects only that group of people initially involved in the earlier discussion of the conference. Now, should more women have been reading the Office 2.0 weblog? Perhaps. Perhaps the Office 2.0 weblogger should have been reading more women.

    Even with all of this, the most important point lost in the discussion is that whatever comes out of the conference is hopelessly flawed. Why? Half the target audience was not represented. Unless someone wants to convince me Office 2.0 is meant to be used my men only, nothing that comes out of this can be accepted with any credibility.

    Diversity isn’t a burden; diversity is an opportunity.

  44. Maybe it’s just me, but the idea of “Digital Divas” makes me a little uncomfortable. Rather than integrating interesting techie women into the show alongside the men, it marginalizes them into their own segment: it suggests that they’re interesting not for what they *do* but for what they *are*.

    FWIW, I seem to remember reading Shelley saying she declined the BlogHer invite because she wanted to speak as Shelley Powers, technologist, rather than Burningbird, activist — that is to say, as a professional who happens to be a woman rather than a woman who happens to be a professional.

    Can’t find it now, though, so I may be remembering wrong.

  45. Maybe it’s just me, but the idea of “Digital Divas” makes me a little uncomfortable. Rather than integrating interesting techie women into the show alongside the men, it marginalizes them into their own segment: it suggests that they’re interesting not for what they *do* but for what they *are*.

    FWIW, I seem to remember reading Shelley saying she declined the BlogHer invite because she wanted to speak as Shelley Powers, technologist, rather than Burningbird, activist — that is to say, as a professional who happens to be a woman rather than a woman who happens to be a professional.

    Can’t find it now, though, so I may be remembering wrong.

  46. I’m glad you made this post and are hanging on for the rough ride it creates. Your post, and the comments to it, brought up a lot of good points I have no answers for, but think about quite a bit.

    Maybe one of your video shows can be you in drag at a tech interview or gathering as Roberta.

  47. I’m glad you made this post and are hanging on for the rough ride it creates. Your post, and the comments to it, brought up a lot of good points I have no answers for, but think about quite a bit.

    Maybe one of your video shows can be you in drag at a tech interview or gathering as Roberta.

  48. Shelley conveniently forgets the fact that speakers were mostly not invited, they could openly apply here.  I’ll take the liberty of finishing Tara’s title: Okay…rather than just complain... apply!

    I know for a fact Ismael would like to have more female speakers… 

    But … gee .. .how do I invite you now, Robert?  Will you dress up as woman for us?  :-)

    Joke apart, sending email in a minute… and hope to see you there.

     

     

  49. Shelley conveniently forgets the fact that speakers were mostly not invited, they could openly apply here.  I’ll take the liberty of finishing Tara’s title: Okay…rather than just complain... apply!

    I know for a fact Ismael would like to have more female speakers… 

    But … gee .. .how do I invite you now, Robert?  Will you dress up as woman for us?  :-)

    Joke apart, sending email in a minute… and hope to see you there.

     

     

  50. Zoli, how many of the speakers applied, and how many were specifically invited? How many of those 52 men went through the application process, and how many were recommended by other people, or approached directly?

    How publicized was this conference out to a more general populace?

    But no worries, few women at this conference. Should be just about right for you. Then you can have your manly echo chamber, and when you come out of the conference with all your bright ideas, we can all smile and nod knowingly when they all fail because you all didn’t bother to even try to attract participation from a significant segment of your target audience.

    James, I actually wanted to speak as Shelley the activist at the BlogHer. The conference organizers asked me to teach a tech tutorial.

    As for the Geek Divas thing: I don’t really care for segregation. Separate but equal has never worked in the past. I believe that Robert Scoble will find women that will meet his ‘geek’ criteria.

    geek geek geek, Robert.

    That’s it for me on this thread. I’m afraid we’ve moved away from the original topic. Anyone have anything to say to me directly, you know where to find me. Anyone wants to email me, it’s shelleyp@burningbird.net.

  51. Zoli, how many of the speakers applied, and how many were specifically invited? How many of those 52 men went through the application process, and how many were recommended by other people, or approached directly?

    How publicized was this conference out to a more general populace?

    But no worries, few women at this conference. Should be just about right for you. Then you can have your manly echo chamber, and when you come out of the conference with all your bright ideas, we can all smile and nod knowingly when they all fail because you all didn’t bother to even try to attract participation from a significant segment of your target audience.

    James, I actually wanted to speak as Shelley the activist at the BlogHer. The conference organizers asked me to teach a tech tutorial.

    As for the Geek Divas thing: I don’t really care for segregation. Separate but equal has never worked in the past. I believe that Robert Scoble will find women that will meet his ‘geek’ criteria.

    geek geek geek, Robert.

    That’s it for me on this thread. I’m afraid we’ve moved away from the original topic. Anyone have anything to say to me directly, you know where to find me. Anyone wants to email me, it’s shelleyp@burningbird.net.

  52. hey Scoble, why should we care if HP,Dell,Apple,etc aren’t runned by woman? I don’t see any real difference if its runned by a man or woman. this post makes me think. who mostly use msft products? A woman did run a major corporation once. It was called the HP and Compaq merger and look what that did. that was a waste of money and thats why she was fired. unless your argument is woman are more business savvy than man. no one is trying to stop woman from creating her own company and running it.?? thats how Dell,Gateway,HP,Google started.

    so to make it clear, what is the real reason that woman should run companies?. plz don’t use the “equal ” arguement.

  53. hey Scoble, why should we care if HP,Dell,Apple,etc aren’t runned by woman? I don’t see any real difference if its runned by a man or woman. this post makes me think. who mostly use msft products? A woman did run a major corporation once. It was called the HP and Compaq merger and look what that did. that was a waste of money and thats why she was fired. unless your argument is woman are more business savvy than man. no one is trying to stop woman from creating her own company and running it.?? thats how Dell,Gateway,HP,Google started.

    so to make it clear, what is the real reason that woman should run companies?. plz don’t use the “equal ” arguement.

  54. Yea, what Orbit said. In this day in age why does it matter what the race or gender of a person is that runs a company? Do people really believe that women are DELIBERATELY being kept out of the tech industry? I hardly believe that. That would be like saying heterosexuals are deliberately being kept out of the clothing business. Or that heterosexual women are deliberately being kept out of the WNBA. Or that men are deliberately being made a minority in the elementary education field. Or that whites are being prevented from driving cabs in New York City. Or that non-Koreans are being kept from owning convenience stores in urban areas. Have I generalized enough for you? Certain careers and industries simply attract more of one gender or race or lifestyle than another. It is what it is. Ask women why more of them don’t go into the field or don’t aspire to be CEO’s. I think you will find the answers eye-opening.

  55. Yea, what Orbit said. In this day in age why does it matter what the race or gender of a person is that runs a company? Do people really believe that women are DELIBERATELY being kept out of the tech industry? I hardly believe that. That would be like saying heterosexuals are deliberately being kept out of the clothing business. Or that heterosexual women are deliberately being kept out of the WNBA. Or that men are deliberately being made a minority in the elementary education field. Or that whites are being prevented from driving cabs in New York City. Or that non-Koreans are being kept from owning convenience stores in urban areas. Have I generalized enough for you? Certain careers and industries simply attract more of one gender or race or lifestyle than another. It is what it is. Ask women why more of them don’t go into the field or don’t aspire to be CEO’s. I think you will find the answers eye-opening.

  56. Robert asks: “…can you name a CEO of a recognizeable tech company that’s not male? It’s hard to do.”

    Dude, no it’s not, unless you just aren’t paying attention. Meg Whitman/eBay, Anne Mulcahy/Xerox, Carol Bartz/Autodesk, Pat Russo/Lucent, Kim Polese/SpikeSource. It’s true, there aren’t very many, but I know you’ve heard of these.

    How about company (co-)founders: Ann Winblad/HummerWinblad, Heidi Roizen/TMaker, Mary Hodder/Dabble, Caterina Fake/flickr, Jessica Hardwick/SwapThing…

    If you really want to talk with women who are world-class tech leaders, you can (and should) find them.

  57. Robert asks: “…can you name a CEO of a recognizeable tech company that’s not male? It’s hard to do.”

    Dude, no it’s not, unless you just aren’t paying attention. Meg Whitman/eBay, Anne Mulcahy/Xerox, Carol Bartz/Autodesk, Pat Russo/Lucent, Kim Polese/SpikeSource. It’s true, there aren’t very many, but I know you’ve heard of these.

    How about company (co-)founders: Ann Winblad/HummerWinblad, Heidi Roizen/TMaker, Mary Hodder/Dabble, Caterina Fake/flickr, Jessica Hardwick/SwapThing…

    If you really want to talk with women who are world-class tech leaders, you can (and should) find them.

  58. Love your Naked book…

    Am not a geek, but do have a blog for 13 million+ people in the business of network marketing – 80% of whom are women – to show them that they CAN use the Internet to do neat stuff.

    I get a kick out of helping them feel like they know almost as much as their children, especially their boys, about enjoying their life and business more because of what they can learn from folks like you on the Internet.

    The stories you wrote about your Mom were big hits and made many women feel like maybe, they could, too.

    And now they do. They’re online, reading good stuff to make their day and get their businesses off the ground.

    Kim Klaver

  59. Love your Naked book…

    Am not a geek, but do have a blog for 13 million+ people in the business of network marketing – 80% of whom are women – to show them that they CAN use the Internet to do neat stuff.

    I get a kick out of helping them feel like they know almost as much as their children, especially their boys, about enjoying their life and business more because of what they can learn from folks like you on the Internet.

    The stories you wrote about your Mom were big hits and made many women feel like maybe, they could, too.

    And now they do. They’re online, reading good stuff to make their day and get their businesses off the ground.

    Kim Klaver

  60. I wondered, if I applied to a Victoria Secret store would they hire me? I doubt it. They would think I’m just a pervert.

    thing is, why do woman buy this type of underwear?…. (I’ll wait for the brain to catch up)

  61. I wondered, if I applied to a Victoria Secret store would they hire me? I doubt it. They would think I’m just a pervert.

    thing is, why do woman buy this type of underwear?…. (I’ll wait for the brain to catch up)

  62. Zoli after reading that post, I was less surprised there was one woman presenting and more suprised that 52 men actually agreed. No accounting for standards.

  63. Zoli after reading that post, I was less surprised there was one woman presenting and more suprised that 52 men actually agreed. No accounting for standards.

  64. Shelley: regarding “speaker standards,” maybe you haven’t heard. Out of about 40 speakers who spoke at Google’s first Zeitgeist conference (including CEOs from Yahoo, AOL, Google, and other places and some women) I was the second highest ranked speaker (according to the audience) second only to Malcolm Gladwell.

    At LIFT in Europe, I was the second highest ranked speaker (if I remember right) second only to Cory Doctorow. Out of dozens of speakers, including a famous author and a famous model.

    And, there aren’t many people alive who’ve interviewed the Office Live team as well as the Google Calendar team as well as the guy who runs the company that makes Open Office.

    I also have a pretty deep resume of speaking engagements, including to executives from Boeing, Microsoft, Target, Nestle, Amazon, and other places. 

    Just to stick up for Zolli’s standards. If you have someone who is a better speaker, please feel free to recommend him or her. I’m sure Zolli would appreciate that.

    Also, I don’t need to be a speaker there. I could run a panel discussion or do something else like interview someone like Meg Whitman or Mena Trott.

    As to my Office 2.0 bonafides? I was one of the first people to email Bill Gates and Steven Sinofsky (execs in charge of Office at Microsoft) telling them that they should make a suite of apps, including a wiki, a blog tool, and a few other things. That was back before Flickr was purchased by Yahoo.

    Do you know of someone else who saw this industry back then and has an email to prove it?

  65. Shelley: regarding “speaker standards,” maybe you haven’t heard. Out of about 40 speakers who spoke at Google’s first Zeitgeist conference (including CEOs from Yahoo, AOL, Google, and other places and some women) I was the second highest ranked speaker (according to the audience) second only to Malcolm Gladwell.

    At LIFT in Europe, I was the second highest ranked speaker (if I remember right) second only to Cory Doctorow. Out of dozens of speakers, including a famous author and a famous model.

    And, there aren’t many people alive who’ve interviewed the Office Live team as well as the Google Calendar team as well as the guy who runs the company that makes Open Office.

    I also have a pretty deep resume of speaking engagements, including to executives from Boeing, Microsoft, Target, Nestle, Amazon, and other places. 

    Just to stick up for Zolli’s standards. If you have someone who is a better speaker, please feel free to recommend him or her. I’m sure Zolli would appreciate that.

    Also, I don’t need to be a speaker there. I could run a panel discussion or do something else like interview someone like Meg Whitman or Mena Trott.

    As to my Office 2.0 bonafides? I was one of the first people to email Bill Gates and Steven Sinofsky (execs in charge of Office at Microsoft) telling them that they should make a suite of apps, including a wiki, a blog tool, and a few other things. That was back before Flickr was purchased by Yahoo.

    Do you know of someone else who saw this industry back then and has an email to prove it?

  66. Robert,

    Where I don’t qualify as a hard-core geek, I do as a female CEO of a company using tech in interesting ways. After all, you were one of the first to try us out, and to be a featured guest! [thanks again for that - we really had fun with you and Shel]

    Attending a plethora of geek-centric events in San Francisco and Silicon Valley over the past months, I can attest that on a list of 400++ people I am often the only, if not one of very few, female CEOs.

    However, I concur with Gene. We are out there. It’s just a matter of digging a little deeper. I think even more interesting than “Digital Divas” would be to mix it up a little…a panel (or series of interviews) of smart, innovative and driven men and women brain jamming. Kind of like we do in the ‘hallway discussions’ at un/conferences and at tech/networking parties.

    Belated congrats on your successes, and the move. Hope you’re enjoying California.

  67. Robert,

    Where I don’t qualify as a hard-core geek, I do as a female CEO of a company using tech in interesting ways. After all, you were one of the first to try us out, and to be a featured guest! [thanks again for that - we really had fun with you and Shel]

    Attending a plethora of geek-centric events in San Francisco and Silicon Valley over the past months, I can attest that on a list of 400++ people I am often the only, if not one of very few, female CEOs.

    However, I concur with Gene. We are out there. It’s just a matter of digging a little deeper. I think even more interesting than “Digital Divas” would be to mix it up a little…a panel (or series of interviews) of smart, innovative and driven men and women brain jamming. Kind of like we do in the ‘hallway discussions’ at un/conferences and at tech/networking parties.

    Belated congrats on your successes, and the move. Hope you’re enjoying California.

  68. Robert, yeah, and I used to be one of the highest ranked speakers at Ken North’s old XML series — should we pull out our reviews and toss scores at each other at 20 paces.

    To clarify: I was responding to Zoli’s link to Ismael’s post. I thought Ismael’s post was clueless. I still do.

    I will say in his favor: between yesterday and today Ismael added three new women speakers. Three extremely impressive women speakers, in fact. A thumbs up for that action. Now, 10 or so more like the four ladies already speaking, and this conference might even be worth the bucks.

  69. Robert, yeah, and I used to be one of the highest ranked speakers at Ken North’s old XML series — should we pull out our reviews and toss scores at each other at 20 paces.

    To clarify: I was responding to Zoli’s link to Ismael’s post. I thought Ismael’s post was clueless. I still do.

    I will say in his favor: between yesterday and today Ismael added three new women speakers. Three extremely impressive women speakers, in fact. A thumbs up for that action. Now, 10 or so more like the four ladies already speaking, and this conference might even be worth the bucks.

  70. “Sadly to say Robert, when you engage the castration crowd, you ain’t never gonna win an argument. Not even come close.”

    What an abysmally stupid thing to say.

    I came looking for adults, and I find boys in the later stages of arrested development.

  71. “Sadly to say Robert, when you engage the castration crowd, you ain’t never gonna win an argument. Not even come close.”

    What an abysmally stupid thing to say.

    I came looking for adults, and I find boys in the later stages of arrested development.

  72. Shelley, considering the general tenor of your posts and comments, I’m almost surprised at comment 47.

    You like stirring shit up. You’re good at it. But please, don’t even start to act surprised when it spatters wrong. It’s silly. You get precisely the results you knew you’d both find and create, stop pretending to be surprised.

  73. Shelley, considering the general tenor of your posts and comments, I’m almost surprised at comment 47.

    You like stirring shit up. You’re good at it. But please, don’t even start to act surprised when it spatters wrong. It’s silly. You get precisely the results you knew you’d both find and create, stop pretending to be surprised.

  74. Whether male or female, I’ve always found that geeks (which to me means computer science nerds) will be geeks and shy away from roles that will focus a spotlight on them; they’d rather sit in their cubicle and write code, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

    What no one’s yet pointed out is that Robert’s looking at who’s running tech companies and leading their projects. In all of my experiences, I’ve always found these folks to be primarily business people — not hard-core computer scientists. So is that the main issue, that there aren’t enough women making it up the rungs of the technology corporate ladder?

    My take on that question would be yes. Being a geek that made the transition to management, I know that there aren’t enough women there, and it’s a damn difficult leap to make.

    So my suggestion, Robert, is to dig a little deeper. You’re not going to always find women running the show or leading the project — sometimes they’re behind the scenes actually making shit happen!

  75. Whether male or female, I’ve always found that geeks (which to me means computer science nerds) will be geeks and shy away from roles that will focus a spotlight on them; they’d rather sit in their cubicle and write code, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

    What no one’s yet pointed out is that Robert’s looking at who’s running tech companies and leading their projects. In all of my experiences, I’ve always found these folks to be primarily business people — not hard-core computer scientists. So is that the main issue, that there aren’t enough women making it up the rungs of the technology corporate ladder?

    My take on that question would be yes. Being a geek that made the transition to management, I know that there aren’t enough women there, and it’s a damn difficult leap to make.

    So my suggestion, Robert, is to dig a little deeper. You’re not going to always find women running the show or leading the project — sometimes they’re behind the scenes actually making shit happen!

  76. John Welch, yes I was surprised. I look at my post and these comments, and other than a flare of irritation at Zoli, I do not see where something like ‘castration crew’ came from.

    This particular ‘shit’ you’re discussing is about a professional conference that covers a topic of interest to both men and women, yet had one woman and 52 men as presenters. What surprises me more than ‘castration crew’ is the fact that there are so few of us questioning such. Yet here in this post, I’ve had to defend not our criticism of this conference, but diversity itself. How is it possible that we’ve become so caught up in marketing and making money that we now consider diversity a ‘roadblock’ in the path to prosperity. But diversity is core to what we say we value.

    I am surprised that diversity is sneered at, equated with loss of quality, and generally seen as more of an irritant than a goal. It doesn’t say much for any future with a 2.0 in it to see such, do you think?

    I am also suprised there aren’t more women questioning statements such as those about ‘not selecting based on gender’ and ‘wanting quality’ — with the implication being that women are not quality. I’m also surprised there aren’t members of other groups not represented at these events that aren’t also questioning much of this.

    Stirring up shit. What would you have rather seen, John? That this conference proceed as it was, 53+ men and one women, making decisions about software to be used by both sexes? Not very effective or efficient, would you say.

    Or would you rather I had admonished women for not having signed up? Most of the speakers were invited based on recommendations or being known by the conference originator. This conference has not been publicized, nor has there been any effort at outreach.

    I have heard from people that our criticism of Ismael was wrong, but few have come up with anything remotely reasonable or workable or effective as a solution.

    Fine.

    Will I continue stirring up shit? Maybe. Maybe not.

  77. John Welch, yes I was surprised. I look at my post and these comments, and other than a flare of irritation at Zoli, I do not see where something like ‘castration crew’ came from.

    This particular ‘shit’ you’re discussing is about a professional conference that covers a topic of interest to both men and women, yet had one woman and 52 men as presenters. What surprises me more than ‘castration crew’ is the fact that there are so few of us questioning such. Yet here in this post, I’ve had to defend not our criticism of this conference, but diversity itself. How is it possible that we’ve become so caught up in marketing and making money that we now consider diversity a ‘roadblock’ in the path to prosperity. But diversity is core to what we say we value.

    I am surprised that diversity is sneered at, equated with loss of quality, and generally seen as more of an irritant than a goal. It doesn’t say much for any future with a 2.0 in it to see such, do you think?

    I am also suprised there aren’t more women questioning statements such as those about ‘not selecting based on gender’ and ‘wanting quality’ — with the implication being that women are not quality. I’m also surprised there aren’t members of other groups not represented at these events that aren’t also questioning much of this.

    Stirring up shit. What would you have rather seen, John? That this conference proceed as it was, 53+ men and one women, making decisions about software to be used by both sexes? Not very effective or efficient, would you say.

    Or would you rather I had admonished women for not having signed up? Most of the speakers were invited based on recommendations or being known by the conference originator. This conference has not been publicized, nor has there been any effort at outreach.

    I have heard from people that our criticism of Ismael was wrong, but few have come up with anything remotely reasonable or workable or effective as a solution.

    Fine.

    Will I continue stirring up shit? Maybe. Maybe not.

  78. Hi Robert,

    Here are a few suggestions:

    Marissa Mayer, VP Search Products, User Experience, Google – see a video of a talk she recently did at Stanford.

    Tina Seelig, Executive Director, Stanford Technology Ventures Program – I have a link to a talk she recently gave here: http://www.elise.com/weblog/archives/001952tina_seelig_what_i_wish_i_knew_when_i_was_20.php Tina also recently helped host the Always On Tech conference with Tony Perkins, so if you go through the archives of that conference, you’ll see her. She’s a professor at Stanford, a serial entrepreneur, and has a PhD in neurology from Stanford Medical School.

    Sarah Allen, former engineering VP at Macromedia, now at Laszlo Systems – she’s an uber-geek, quite brilliant, and I would bet a great speaker as well.

    Janice Fraser, CEO of Adaptive Path

    There’s a start. If I think of others, I’ll let you know.

  79. Hi Robert,

    Here are a few suggestions:

    Marissa Mayer, VP Search Products, User Experience, Google – see a video of a talk she recently did at Stanford.

    Tina Seelig, Executive Director, Stanford Technology Ventures Program – I have a link to a talk she recently gave here: http://www.elise.com/weblog/archives/001952tina_seelig_what_i_wish_i_knew_when_i_was_20.php Tina also recently helped host the Always On Tech conference with Tony Perkins, so if you go through the archives of that conference, you’ll see her. She’s a professor at Stanford, a serial entrepreneur, and has a PhD in neurology from Stanford Medical School.

    Sarah Allen, former engineering VP at Macromedia, now at Laszlo Systems – she’s an uber-geek, quite brilliant, and I would bet a great speaker as well.

    Janice Fraser, CEO of Adaptive Path

    There’s a start. If I think of others, I’ll let you know.

  80. My response to @42…”Hey, how ’bout that!” Yawn. And this gets you a VP title at a no name startup? Woo hoo. I have hard time believing you were the first to inform Gates and Sinofsky of the need for useless wiki and blog tools. Neither of them strike me as being that out of touch that a level 59 needed to keep them up to date on the latest technology (it’s amazing what you can learn about MS from reading mini-microsoft). But if you need to believe that, and you need to keep reminding yourself and others that don’t really care, about your unimportant speaker scores from the ancient past to feel good about yourself, you go ahead. Talk about a delusions of grandeur! Sheesh!

  81. My response to @42…”Hey, how ’bout that!” Yawn. And this gets you a VP title at a no name startup? Woo hoo. I have hard time believing you were the first to inform Gates and Sinofsky of the need for useless wiki and blog tools. Neither of them strike me as being that out of touch that a level 59 needed to keep them up to date on the latest technology (it’s amazing what you can learn about MS from reading mini-microsoft). But if you need to believe that, and you need to keep reminding yourself and others that don’t really care, about your unimportant speaker scores from the ancient past to feel good about yourself, you go ahead. Talk about a delusions of grandeur! Sheesh!

  82. Shelley, are the Office 2.0 organinzers supposed to be clairvoyant. Please list women…hell, African Americans, or let’s get really diverse: African American Women.. or better still, African American women that are lesbian and handicapped..I mean if diversity is our goal, as opposed to information sharing, let’s go all the way with diversity…. that are making an impact in the Office 2.0 space? You can see how silly your point is. Doesn’t knowledge trump diversity? I’d rather hear from someone that knows what they are talking about (which baffles me why Scoble gets such supposedly high scores. And he should have said he’s not qualified to be a speaker at Office 2.0) than a gender for the sake of gender.

    The only one saying there is a problem appears to be you and anyone you can get to listen to you. Frankly I don’t think an audience really cares about the gender, race, color, or religion of a speaker. Only that they are getting quality information and insight. I don’t think women are being ignored, they just aren’t making themselves more visible.

    I’m sure Linda Stone would welcome an invite, for example. Or Jessica Lipnak. Or Johna Till Johnson. But again, I would listen to them not because they are women, but because of what they have to say!

  83. Shelley, are the Office 2.0 organinzers supposed to be clairvoyant. Please list women…hell, African Americans, or let’s get really diverse: African American Women.. or better still, African American women that are lesbian and handicapped..I mean if diversity is our goal, as opposed to information sharing, let’s go all the way with diversity…. that are making an impact in the Office 2.0 space? You can see how silly your point is. Doesn’t knowledge trump diversity? I’d rather hear from someone that knows what they are talking about (which baffles me why Scoble gets such supposedly high scores. And he should have said he’s not qualified to be a speaker at Office 2.0) than a gender for the sake of gender.

    The only one saying there is a problem appears to be you and anyone you can get to listen to you. Frankly I don’t think an audience really cares about the gender, race, color, or religion of a speaker. Only that they are getting quality information and insight. I don’t think women are being ignored, they just aren’t making themselves more visible.

    I’m sure Linda Stone would welcome an invite, for example. Or Jessica Lipnak. Or Johna Till Johnson. But again, I would listen to them not because they are women, but because of what they have to say!

  84. [...] – (editor’s note: a real blogger actually used this phrase…it’s too perfectly arrogant to change so I’ll quote his words in full)  “And, there aren’t many people alive who’ve interviewed the Office Live team as well as the Google Calendar team as well as the guy who runs the company that makes Open Office.”    (http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/2006/09/01/listening-to-shelley-powers-about-women-in-tech/  see comment #42) [...]

  85. LayZ: I only talk when I know what I’m talking about.

    I haven’t accepted the invitation to speak at Office 2.0 yet, have I?

    But, have you ever heard me speak? How do you know I don’t know what I’m talking about then?

    Linda Stone rocks, by the way! And her dinners are legendary.

  86. LayZ: I only talk when I know what I’m talking about.

    I haven’t accepted the invitation to speak at Office 2.0 yet, have I?

    But, have you ever heard me speak? How do you know I don’t know what I’m talking about then?

    Linda Stone rocks, by the way! And her dinners are legendary.

  87. LayZ? Ancient past? The Google talk was from less than a year ago. So was the LIFT talk. So where most of my other talks.

    As far as my letting Microsoft’s execs know, well, Bill Gates had me and two other people in his office to brief him on RSS (and later on Flock). Steven Sinofsky sent me a very long response to my email about the social software world that was happening without Microsoft’s involvement (since then they added RSS and Wikis and Blogs to Sharepoint, by the way).

    But, this is the disconnect. If I stand up for myself against attacks that I’m not a good speaker or I’m not good enough to speak about Office 2.0 then I’m an arrogant jerk. See #57. Whatever.

  88. LayZ? Ancient past? The Google talk was from less than a year ago. So was the LIFT talk. So where most of my other talks.

    As far as my letting Microsoft’s execs know, well, Bill Gates had me and two other people in his office to brief him on RSS (and later on Flock). Steven Sinofsky sent me a very long response to my email about the social software world that was happening without Microsoft’s involvement (since then they added RSS and Wikis and Blogs to Sharepoint, by the way).

    But, this is the disconnect. If I stand up for myself against attacks that I’m not a good speaker or I’m not good enough to speak about Office 2.0 then I’m an arrogant jerk. See #57. Whatever.

  89. Elise: I love Tina. She was over at PodTech just the other night. I had dinner a while back with Janice Frasier. She rocks too. I’ll definitely have both of them on the show. Thanks for reminding me about Sarah. As for Marissa, I got the feeling she didn’t like me last time I talked with her, but I’d be honored to have her on. Hope I misread her.

  90. Elise: I love Tina. She was over at PodTech just the other night. I had dinner a while back with Janice Frasier. She rocks too. I’ll definitely have both of them on the show. Thanks for reminding me about Sarah. As for Marissa, I got the feeling she didn’t like me last time I talked with her, but I’d be honored to have her on. Hope I misread her.

  91. Kimberly,

    >You’re not going to always find women running the show or leading the project — sometimes they’re behind the scenes actually making shit happen!

    I’d love to find more people who are behind the scenes. They always turn out to be the best interviews. Male or female.

  92. Kimberly,

    >You’re not going to always find women running the show or leading the project — sometimes they’re behind the scenes actually making shit happen!

    I’d love to find more people who are behind the scenes. They always turn out to be the best interviews. Male or female.

  93. Robert, reading within the tapesty of this conversation, the tone and general tenor — Oh Man, you have hecka of a challenge – on digging deep looking for ” geekettes” :)-

    Along with this challenge comes also an opportunity for you and your company. I think you have the vision and can make the difference. After all you perecive that they an;t a enough “mena trotts” – but is that a fact ?? A hrd factorid or just an assumption Because you cant digg deep enough ??

    If you ‘re-build they will come” :)-

  94. Robert, reading within the tapesty of this conversation, the tone and general tenor — Oh Man, you have hecka of a challenge – on digging deep looking for ” geekettes” :)-

    Along with this challenge comes also an opportunity for you and your company. I think you have the vision and can make the difference. After all you perecive that they an;t a enough “mena trotts” – but is that a fact ?? A hrd factorid or just an assumption Because you cant digg deep enough ??

    If you ‘re-build they will come” :)-

  95. Robert,
    A couple of bits that I think need a little light

    “that’s just who’s running the tech industry”
    If you just look for the head on a stick, you can make that argument, however, if you think about this for a moment, the number of people who ‘support’ those heads is much larger, and as a bunch of folks are pointing out, many of them are women.

    “I don’t want to devalue the accomplishments of women”
    well if you don’t look for them, it is hard to devalue them. This is one of those arguments that if you don’t acknowledge them, then you don’t have to value them at all.

    The last thing regarding your “Digital Divas”. Back in 1997 there were a group of women who has come together as the Digital Divas, who are still active.

    You were still selling stereos then.

    I bring this up as these women were able to mount and win a grass roots challenge to Microsoft, your former employer when MS tried marketing a ‘Digital Diva’ which culminated in MS abandoning that Idea.

    Here a couple of links to get you started
    http://news.com.com/2100-1017-246732.html
    http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/bas1/memberships_advocacy_1.htm#digitaldivas
    http://home.fullmoonwebs.com/minimouse/index.cfm/NewsItem?ID=23103&From=Home
    I would be very careful using Digital Divas without performing a little bit of due diligence.

  96. Robert,
    A couple of bits that I think need a little light

    “that’s just who’s running the tech industry”
    If you just look for the head on a stick, you can make that argument, however, if you think about this for a moment, the number of people who ‘support’ those heads is much larger, and as a bunch of folks are pointing out, many of them are women.

    “I don’t want to devalue the accomplishments of women”
    well if you don’t look for them, it is hard to devalue them. This is one of those arguments that if you don’t acknowledge them, then you don’t have to value them at all.

    The last thing regarding your “Digital Divas”. Back in 1997 there were a group of women who has come together as the Digital Divas, who are still active.

    You were still selling stereos then.

    I bring this up as these women were able to mount and win a grass roots challenge to Microsoft, your former employer when MS tried marketing a ‘Digital Diva’ which culminated in MS abandoning that Idea.

    Here a couple of links to get you started
    http://news.com.com/2100-1017-246732.html
    http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/bas1/memberships_advocacy_1.htm#digitaldivas
    http://home.fullmoonwebs.com/minimouse/index.cfm/NewsItem?ID=23103&From=Home
    I would be very careful using Digital Divas without performing a little bit of due diligence.

  97. @58 True I haven’t heard you speak. My opinion can only be based from what I read on your blog. Which I read for entertainment purposes only. ;-)

    As for your briefing with Gates, I still gotta believe tht neither he nor Sinofsky were exactly clueless on the the technology before you supposedly informed them. Neither of them got where they are by relying on low level employees not dirctly within their reporting structure to keep them abreast of technology already being used by some. Particulary someone like Sinofsky, who is legend is correct, made MS aware of potential of the internet well before it was being widely used by anyone outside of some higher education institutions. My guess is they were simply getting another viewpoint. Nothing wrong with that. I’m sure appreciated you confirming for them what they already knew.

    As for comment 57.. well it’s true. Your continuous need to remind the blogging world of your “accomplishments” tends to expose some apparent deep seated insecurity you seem to have about yourself. Your continued defensiveness when “attacked” belies that as well. When the majority of your readers only get exposed to you via your writing it’s difficult to not draw any other conclusions than that you yourself have issues with your own credibility. I know of very few people that have to periodically remind people of what the accomplished when no one asked. You often sound like that guy that used to write the BEST blog on the internet…”The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs” when he would say “I invented the iPod..perhaps you heard of it?”. Your version is: “I walked around and interviewed a lot of people actually doing working within MS (unlike me)..perhaps you’ve seen them?”. No one cares what you did in the past. People only care what you ARE doing or WILL be doing. But getting you to react is like shooting fish in a barrel. It’s way too easy.

  98. @58 True I haven’t heard you speak. My opinion can only be based from what I read on your blog. Which I read for entertainment purposes only. ;-)

    As for your briefing with Gates, I still gotta believe tht neither he nor Sinofsky were exactly clueless on the the technology before you supposedly informed them. Neither of them got where they are by relying on low level employees not dirctly within their reporting structure to keep them abreast of technology already being used by some. Particulary someone like Sinofsky, who is legend is correct, made MS aware of potential of the internet well before it was being widely used by anyone outside of some higher education institutions. My guess is they were simply getting another viewpoint. Nothing wrong with that. I’m sure appreciated you confirming for them what they already knew.

    As for comment 57.. well it’s true. Your continuous need to remind the blogging world of your “accomplishments” tends to expose some apparent deep seated insecurity you seem to have about yourself. Your continued defensiveness when “attacked” belies that as well. When the majority of your readers only get exposed to you via your writing it’s difficult to not draw any other conclusions than that you yourself have issues with your own credibility. I know of very few people that have to periodically remind people of what the accomplished when no one asked. You often sound like that guy that used to write the BEST blog on the internet…”The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs” when he would say “I invented the iPod..perhaps you heard of it?”. Your version is: “I walked around and interviewed a lot of people actually doing working within MS (unlike me)..perhaps you’ve seen them?”. No one cares what you did in the past. People only care what you ARE doing or WILL be doing. But getting you to react is like shooting fish in a barrel. It’s way too easy.

  99. As for your Women leaders in tech “challenge” How about

    Meg Whitman – eBay
    Clare Brabowski – Radio Shack
    Patricial Gallup – PC Connection
    Anne Mulcahy- Xerox
    Patricia Russo – Lucent
    Gail Deegan – Board of Directors EMC
    Safra Catz – President, CFO – Oracle
    Judith Sim – SVP Marketing – Oracle
    (of course these are probably women Ellison is dating)
    Nancy Cooper – CFO – CA

    I’m sure I could go on…

    and let’s look in your former back yard
    Lisa Brummel – VP HR – Microsoft
    Debra Chrapaty – Corp VP MSN Ops
    Suzan Delbene – Corp VP Moble Embedded Devices
    Gerri Elliot- Corp VP – Public Sector
    Kathleen Hogan – Corp VP – WW Support
    Julie Larson-Green – Corp VP Windows Experience
    Mitch Matthews – Sr VP Central Marketing
    Lori Moore – Corp VP Service and Support
    Mindy Mount – Corp VP CFO Entertainment
    Tami Reller – Corp VP Business Solutions
    Mary Snapp – Corp VP Deputy General Counsel
    Allison Watson – Corp VP – Partner Group

    Look at all those women in Tech you could have interviewed!!! now, careful not to be sexist in your repsonse.

  100. As for your Women leaders in tech “challenge” How about

    Meg Whitman – eBay
    Clare Brabowski – Radio Shack
    Patricial Gallup – PC Connection
    Anne Mulcahy- Xerox
    Patricia Russo – Lucent
    Gail Deegan – Board of Directors EMC
    Safra Catz – President, CFO – Oracle
    Judith Sim – SVP Marketing – Oracle
    (of course these are probably women Ellison is dating)
    Nancy Cooper – CFO – CA

    I’m sure I could go on…

    and let’s look in your former back yard
    Lisa Brummel – VP HR – Microsoft
    Debra Chrapaty – Corp VP MSN Ops
    Suzan Delbene – Corp VP Moble Embedded Devices
    Gerri Elliot- Corp VP – Public Sector
    Kathleen Hogan – Corp VP – WW Support
    Julie Larson-Green – Corp VP Windows Experience
    Mitch Matthews – Sr VP Central Marketing
    Lori Moore – Corp VP Service and Support
    Mindy Mount – Corp VP CFO Entertainment
    Tami Reller – Corp VP Business Solutions
    Mary Snapp – Corp VP Deputy General Counsel
    Allison Watson – Corp VP – Partner Group

    Look at all those women in Tech you could have interviewed!!! now, careful not to be sexist in your repsonse.

  101. John Welch, yes I was surprised. I look at my post and these comments, and other than a flare of irritation at Zoli, I do not see where something like ‘castration crew’ came from.

    Shelley, that’s ridiculous. Your style is to bludgeon people with your opinion and your wisdom, such as it is, and then you act all surprised when people don’t react with kittens and rainbows. I’m not complaining about the style, it’s similar to my own, but come on. You hit people with a brick, don’t act all shocked when they fling it back at you.

    This particular ’shit’ you’re discussing is about a professional conference that covers a topic of interest to both men and women, yet had one woman and 52 men as presenters. What surprises me more than ‘castration crew’ is the fact that there are so few of us questioning such. Yet here in this post, I’ve had to defend not our criticism of this conference, but diversity itself. How is it possible that we’ve become so caught up in marketing and making money that we now consider diversity a ‘roadblock’ in the path to prosperity.

    Did it ever occur to you that maybe a lot of women with technical backgrounds just don’t care? I mean, have you SEEN the explosion in small conferences about blogging, “Web 2.0″ and now this crap? Maybe it’s that they’re picking their conferences carefully? WTF *is* Office 2.0? I read the site description, and it sounds like yet another “IN THE FUTURE, EVERYTHING WILL BE PERFECT, WE’LL LIVE IN GIANT ZEPPELINS, AND OUR FOOD WILL ALL BE PILLS”

    Pfah, who’s got time for that crap. Maybe you do, but most of us don’t. I’ve a friend who only speaks at Macworld/Photoshop world – related stuff, and she’s busy as hell with just that.

    No, no, it must be that the organizers don’t want women. Oy.

    But diversity is core to what we say we value.

    Diversity in encouraging really smart people to participate, regardless of genetic makeup, or diversity so that you feel happier about the male/female ratios? There’s a difference you know.

    I am surprised that diversity is sneered at, equated with loss of quality, and generally seen as more of an irritant than a goal. It doesn’t say much for any future with a 2.0 in it to see such, do you think?

    When it comes across as “You must have n women speaking if you have x men speaking” then yes, it is sneered at, and properly so. Sticking women on stage just so you can have more estrogen than thou is not diversity, it’s bullshit, and should be properly called out as such.

    I am also suprised there aren’t more women questioning statements such as those about ‘not selecting based on gender’ and ‘wanting quality’ — with the implication being that women are not quality. I’m also surprised there aren’t members of other groups not represented at these events that aren’t also questioning much of this.

    Oh please. Go sing this song to someone who’ll take it at face value. Me? No, I’m not going to insist on a certain number of female, black, gay, asian, etc. faces, just so we can all feel good about out commitment to diversity. Are the speakers qualified to speak on their topic? Do they want to be there? Yes? then it’s all good. That’s all that matters. If you don’t like that, then why aren’t you signing up to speak at every damned conference on the planet. Macworld Expo 2007′s call for papers just ended, and I know that there are more than a few people who would love to hear from a javascript expert such as yourself. I know Dori’s there, and she’s damned sharp too, but everyone has their own way of approaching the same topic. So of course, you submitted a session, right? I mean, it’s one of the bigger conferences out there, how could you not?

    Stirring up shit. What would you have rather seen, John? That this conference proceed as it was, 53+ men and one women, making decisions about software to be used by both sexes? Not very effective or efficient, would you say.

    Effective at what? Should they be required to get n women for every man just to fill in a checkbox? Is that somehow a good idea? Try again. Unless you’re saying that it’s simply impossible for a man to talk about software to women. Of course, that creates an interesting situation with the opposite. If only women can talk to women about things techincal, then why should any man go to a session with a woman speaker. OBVIOUSLY, she’ll be COMPLETELY unable to say anything in a way he’ll understand. Because, as we all know, women and men are completely different species, with different languages and are really incapable of communicating to each other.

    Or would you rather I had admonished women for not having signed up? Most of the speakers were invited based on recommendations or being known by the conference originator. This conference has not been publicized, nor has there been any effort at outreach.

    I have, in my speaking career only ever been specifically invited to speak at one conference. The last Comdex Chicago. It was, shall we say, a waste of time. Every other time, I’ve submitted sessions in accordance to the rules of the conference. What, is that a male only thing? Is there a separate set of rules for women? As far as the publicity for the conference, or lack thereof, that’s a TOTAL strawman to the issue of “Why aren’t there more women speaking”. So they have crappy PR, what’s that have to do with anything? What, Crappy PR = TEH SEXISM in your world?

    I have heard from people that our criticism of Ismael was wrong, but few have come up with anything remotely reasonable or workable or effective as a solution.

    You do understand that no, every criticism of you does not in fact, have to come up with a different solution to be valid. You can in fact say “I do believe you’re full of crap”, and have that be a valid opinion and criticism on its own. You may not like this, but your opinion doesn’t change much here.

    Fine.
    Will I continue stirring up shit? Maybe. Maybe not.

    I don’t really care. Writing on the web is something I do for fun, and occaisionally money. But if you’re going to stir up shit, then stop whining about the reaction you get. Shit-stirring does not, as a rule, create a calm, reflective, affirming reaction. If that is the reaction you want, then stop working so damned hard to get the opposite one.

  102. John Welch, yes I was surprised. I look at my post and these comments, and other than a flare of irritation at Zoli, I do not see where something like ‘castration crew’ came from.

    Shelley, that’s ridiculous. Your style is to bludgeon people with your opinion and your wisdom, such as it is, and then you act all surprised when people don’t react with kittens and rainbows. I’m not complaining about the style, it’s similar to my own, but come on. You hit people with a brick, don’t act all shocked when they fling it back at you.

    This particular ’shit’ you’re discussing is about a professional conference that covers a topic of interest to both men and women, yet had one woman and 52 men as presenters. What surprises me more than ‘castration crew’ is the fact that there are so few of us questioning such. Yet here in this post, I’ve had to defend not our criticism of this conference, but diversity itself. How is it possible that we’ve become so caught up in marketing and making money that we now consider diversity a ‘roadblock’ in the path to prosperity.

    Did it ever occur to you that maybe a lot of women with technical backgrounds just don’t care? I mean, have you SEEN the explosion in small conferences about blogging, “Web 2.0″ and now this crap? Maybe it’s that they’re picking their conferences carefully? WTF *is* Office 2.0? I read the site description, and it sounds like yet another “IN THE FUTURE, EVERYTHING WILL BE PERFECT, WE’LL LIVE IN GIANT ZEPPELINS, AND OUR FOOD WILL ALL BE PILLS”

    Pfah, who’s got time for that crap. Maybe you do, but most of us don’t. I’ve a friend who only speaks at Macworld/Photoshop world – related stuff, and she’s busy as hell with just that.

    No, no, it must be that the organizers don’t want women. Oy.

    But diversity is core to what we say we value.

    Diversity in encouraging really smart people to participate, regardless of genetic makeup, or diversity so that you feel happier about the male/female ratios? There’s a difference you know.

    I am surprised that diversity is sneered at, equated with loss of quality, and generally seen as more of an irritant than a goal. It doesn’t say much for any future with a 2.0 in it to see such, do you think?

    When it comes across as “You must have n women speaking if you have x men speaking” then yes, it is sneered at, and properly so. Sticking women on stage just so you can have more estrogen than thou is not diversity, it’s bullshit, and should be properly called out as such.

    I am also suprised there aren’t more women questioning statements such as those about ‘not selecting based on gender’ and ‘wanting quality’ — with the implication being that women are not quality. I’m also surprised there aren’t members of other groups not represented at these events that aren’t also questioning much of this.

    Oh please. Go sing this song to someone who’ll take it at face value. Me? No, I’m not going to insist on a certain number of female, black, gay, asian, etc. faces, just so we can all feel good about out commitment to diversity. Are the speakers qualified to speak on their topic? Do they want to be there? Yes? then it’s all good. That’s all that matters. If you don’t like that, then why aren’t you signing up to speak at every damned conference on the planet. Macworld Expo 2007′s call for papers just ended, and I know that there are more than a few people who would love to hear from a javascript expert such as yourself. I know Dori’s there, and she’s damned sharp too, but everyone has their own way of approaching the same topic. So of course, you submitted a session, right? I mean, it’s one of the bigger conferences out there, how could you not?

    Stirring up shit. What would you have rather seen, John? That this conference proceed as it was, 53+ men and one women, making decisions about software to be used by both sexes? Not very effective or efficient, would you say.

    Effective at what? Should they be required to get n women for every man just to fill in a checkbox? Is that somehow a good idea? Try again. Unless you’re saying that it’s simply impossible for a man to talk about software to women. Of course, that creates an interesting situation with the opposite. If only women can talk to women about things techincal, then why should any man go to a session with a woman speaker. OBVIOUSLY, she’ll be COMPLETELY unable to say anything in a way he’ll understand. Because, as we all know, women and men are completely different species, with different languages and are really incapable of communicating to each other.

    Or would you rather I had admonished women for not having signed up? Most of the speakers were invited based on recommendations or being known by the conference originator. This conference has not been publicized, nor has there been any effort at outreach.

    I have, in my speaking career only ever been specifically invited to speak at one conference. The last Comdex Chicago. It was, shall we say, a waste of time. Every other time, I’ve submitted sessions in accordance to the rules of the conference. What, is that a male only thing? Is there a separate set of rules for women? As far as the publicity for the conference, or lack thereof, that’s a TOTAL strawman to the issue of “Why aren’t there more women speaking”. So they have crappy PR, what’s that have to do with anything? What, Crappy PR = TEH SEXISM in your world?

    I have heard from people that our criticism of Ismael was wrong, but few have come up with anything remotely reasonable or workable or effective as a solution.

    You do understand that no, every criticism of you does not in fact, have to come up with a different solution to be valid. You can in fact say “I do believe you’re full of crap”, and have that be a valid opinion and criticism on its own. You may not like this, but your opinion doesn’t change much here.

    Fine.
    Will I continue stirring up shit? Maybe. Maybe not.

    I don’t really care. Writing on the web is something I do for fun, and occaisionally money. But if you’re going to stir up shit, then stop whining about the reaction you get. Shit-stirring does not, as a rule, create a calm, reflective, affirming reaction. If that is the reaction you want, then stop working so damned hard to get the opposite one.

  103. [...] Update: Just going through my RSS feeds – of course  Robert Scoble couldn’t stay out of the debate…. but here’s the thing – he virtually offers an invitation to women to put their hand up to be on his new show – lots of heated debate later, there are only two women who have done anything like say ‘pick me’.  I’m sure a lot more men than women read Scoble… but surely lots of the women who do would fit the geek profile he’s after? or not. Give it a digg or share with del.icio.usThese icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]

  104. John, we who are not white, male, straight (and Californian) thank you for equating diversity with loss of quality. DO you want us to shine your shoes and bake that cake for you now.

    I happen to believe that a more diverse conference is a better conference; that organizers who don’t see this as a goal are lazy, shallow, money makers who care less about quality and more about sponging off the desperate last days of a bubble even more nebulous than the last.

    Real reason I am commenting one last time:

    Dennis, oh we’re sorry, when you were talking about “castration crowd” did you mean Christopher Coulter?

    Putz.

  105. John, we who are not white, male, straight (and Californian) thank you for equating diversity with loss of quality. DO you want us to shine your shoes and bake that cake for you now.

    I happen to believe that a more diverse conference is a better conference; that organizers who don’t see this as a goal are lazy, shallow, money makers who care less about quality and more about sponging off the desperate last days of a bubble even more nebulous than the last.

    Real reason I am commenting one last time:

    Dennis, oh we’re sorry, when you were talking about “castration crowd” did you mean Christopher Coulter?

    Putz.

  106. I actually am only writing at this point because I spend the last few days at Barcamp London. Needless to say, one of the few women.

    And I find this discussion interesting, because I am going to Office 2.0 – mainly because I disagree with a lot which is on the table there and am looking forward to interesting discussions which I intend to add my usual European touch.

    So how do i like the idea of getting women up there to have more diverse voices? Not at all if that means the permier reason being them there is “have a skirt on the stage”.

    We had this conversation over and over again. There is a side which is the organizers job. Which seems not have been done this time and he should have learned out of it. And there is a side for the women to be done also.

    It is not enough to sit on your backs and wait for the organizers to come to you and begging you to do something for them.

    Why don’t I go to him and do what i ask here? Because frankly I cant think of something worth presenting up there to the crowd for this topic. But I am sure that a pre conference podcast will have something valuable added to the conference and it is something I not only like to do but is also received well by the audience.

    Very often, when those accusations are made, it is all blamed on the guys. In part very correctly. But in part also very snobbish.

    If women cannot come to such a conference because they don’t have the babysitter at home, complain about it. And make it clear that this is the reason why you are not coming.

    If you are not coming because you find the ratio of guys coming to be intimidating, mail this and mark that you find the marketing of such an event to be lacking.

    And so many more reasons. This is a game of two parties, not just one. And if you want to score in the game, then you need to actually play it.

    You will not be given points for free just for being a women.

  107. I actually am only writing at this point because I spend the last few days at Barcamp London. Needless to say, one of the few women.

    And I find this discussion interesting, because I am going to Office 2.0 – mainly because I disagree with a lot which is on the table there and am looking forward to interesting discussions which I intend to add my usual European touch.

    So how do i like the idea of getting women up there to have more diverse voices? Not at all if that means the permier reason being them there is “have a skirt on the stage”.

    We had this conversation over and over again. There is a side which is the organizers job. Which seems not have been done this time and he should have learned out of it. And there is a side for the women to be done also.

    It is not enough to sit on your backs and wait for the organizers to come to you and begging you to do something for them.

    Why don’t I go to him and do what i ask here? Because frankly I cant think of something worth presenting up there to the crowd for this topic. But I am sure that a pre conference podcast will have something valuable added to the conference and it is something I not only like to do but is also received well by the audience.

    Very often, when those accusations are made, it is all blamed on the guys. In part very correctly. But in part also very snobbish.

    If women cannot come to such a conference because they don’t have the babysitter at home, complain about it. And make it clear that this is the reason why you are not coming.

    If you are not coming because you find the ratio of guys coming to be intimidating, mail this and mark that you find the marketing of such an event to be lacking.

    And so many more reasons. This is a game of two parties, not just one. And if you want to score in the game, then you need to actually play it.

    You will not be given points for free just for being a women.

  108. What about Diane Greene, founder and CEO of VMware. Now that it’s been bought by EMC she has another title but still runs this recognizable tech company.

  109. What about Diane Greene, founder and CEO of VMware. Now that it’s been bought by EMC she has another title but still runs this recognizable tech company.

  110. John, we who are not white, male, straight (and Californian) thank you for equating diversity with loss of quality. DO you want us to shine your shoes and bake that cake for you now.

    Of course, when someone disagrees with your agenda, they’re instantly a chauvanist. Even worse, you accuse me of being from Cali, when that’s literally as far from the truth as possible, (try Miami). By raising that strawman, it VERY conveniently allows you to ignore my point, which was that adding women just to jack the estrogen levels is *precisely* as stupid as ignoring them to jack the testosterone levels. But no, that would require you to stop crusading and start listening. How silly of me to think that making sure you had qualified speakers first, and then within that, doing what you can to jack the female/other minority count is the way to go.

    Nope, quality of speaker, knowledge of topic, none of that matters. All that counts is making sure that there’s females in the proper proportion. Get lucid Shelley, i’m not in the “FEAR SHELLEY” club, so if you think you’re going to confuse me with strident declarations and strawmen, think again.

    I happen to believe that a more diverse conference is a better conference; that organizers who don’t see this as a goal are lazy, shallow, money makers who care less about quality and more about sponging off the desperate last days of a bubble even more nebulous than the last.

    However, when your SOLE definition of “good” is “number of women” then you don’t really give a rat’s ass about the quality of the conference, just your agenda. Of course, reconciling this with your heresay – based criticism of Blogher is amusing, since, by your sole criteria, it was the perfect conference.

    Make up your mind Shelley, but until you do, stop bitching about everyone and everything, because after a while it starts to sound like “not enough kissing Shelley’s ass” is the real problem.

  111. John, we who are not white, male, straight (and Californian) thank you for equating diversity with loss of quality. DO you want us to shine your shoes and bake that cake for you now.

    Of course, when someone disagrees with your agenda, they’re instantly a chauvanist. Even worse, you accuse me of being from Cali, when that’s literally as far from the truth as possible, (try Miami). By raising that strawman, it VERY conveniently allows you to ignore my point, which was that adding women just to jack the estrogen levels is *precisely* as stupid as ignoring them to jack the testosterone levels. But no, that would require you to stop crusading and start listening. How silly of me to think that making sure you had qualified speakers first, and then within that, doing what you can to jack the female/other minority count is the way to go.

    Nope, quality of speaker, knowledge of topic, none of that matters. All that counts is making sure that there’s females in the proper proportion. Get lucid Shelley, i’m not in the “FEAR SHELLEY” club, so if you think you’re going to confuse me with strident declarations and strawmen, think again.

    I happen to believe that a more diverse conference is a better conference; that organizers who don’t see this as a goal are lazy, shallow, money makers who care less about quality and more about sponging off the desperate last days of a bubble even more nebulous than the last.

    However, when your SOLE definition of “good” is “number of women” then you don’t really give a rat’s ass about the quality of the conference, just your agenda. Of course, reconciling this with your heresay – based criticism of Blogher is amusing, since, by your sole criteria, it was the perfect conference.

    Make up your mind Shelley, but until you do, stop bitching about everyone and everything, because after a while it starts to sound like “not enough kissing Shelley’s ass” is the real problem.

  112. Oops… The macro issue of great women being accepted as equals and their equal involvement and participation in the tech community, including conferences and events… Robert, I suggest you step back for a moment in order to re-think and quickly get on the right side of this issue (right side = pro women). Women stuggling for equality and respect (and they have had to struggle) in society has a long history. For example, when did women achieve the right to vote in the USA, UK and Canada?

    I’m an old guy so the phrase “Digital Divas” seems to me somewhat more than a little demeaning to women. It also possibly indicates a lack of understanding regarding the issues and problems.

    A number of people commenting made good suggestions with respect to women in technology for your interview initiatives (e.g., Elisa Bauer, Sept. 2nd @ 8:12 pm and LayZ, Sept 3, 9:18).

    The larger issue seems to be basic human dignity including equal opportunities for involvement, participation and contribution. The positions either against or for. Clearly the technological community has some work to do.

  113. Oops… The macro issue of great women being accepted as equals and their equal involvement and participation in the tech community, including conferences and events… Robert, I suggest you step back for a moment in order to re-think and quickly get on the right side of this issue (right side = pro women). Women stuggling for equality and respect (and they have had to struggle) in society has a long history. For example, when did women achieve the right to vote in the USA, UK and Canada?

    I’m an old guy so the phrase “Digital Divas” seems to me somewhat more than a little demeaning to women. It also possibly indicates a lack of understanding regarding the issues and problems.

    A number of people commenting made good suggestions with respect to women in technology for your interview initiatives (e.g., Elisa Bauer, Sept. 2nd @ 8:12 pm and LayZ, Sept 3, 9:18).

    The larger issue seems to be basic human dignity including equal opportunities for involvement, participation and contribution. The positions either against or for. Clearly the technological community has some work to do.

  114. On your article: Thanks for searching out “undiscovered” women tech geeks. I would love to hear from more of them.

    On the comments following your article: Why engage in such seemingly unprofessional dialogue? For me, it totally distracts from your position as a thought leader in the tech world. I’m all for speaking your mind and sharing ideas, but why the useless banter? My continuing bone with blogging is that it takes to much effort to sort through all the banter to find the golden nuggets.

  115. On your article: Thanks for searching out “undiscovered” women tech geeks. I would love to hear from more of them.

    On the comments following your article: Why engage in such seemingly unprofessional dialogue? For me, it totally distracts from your position as a thought leader in the tech world. I’m all for speaking your mind and sharing ideas, but why the useless banter? My continuing bone with blogging is that it takes to much effort to sort through all the banter to find the golden nuggets.