You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Some folks seemed unclear as to under what contexts they could or couldn't call their event a "ClojureBridge workshop." So far, the only thing we could point to was the line
A commitment by the organizers, teachers, and students to increasing diversity in tech.
That's true, but not very clear. However, it's hard to be more specific right now, so I've temporarily replaced that bullet point with the following:
A commitment by the organizers, teachers, and students to increasing diversity in tech. You can see what that looks like by reading our "Resources on Diversity" page, or by reading how we typically describe ClojureBridge workshops to attendees:
This workshop is for women interested in learning programming with Clojure, an expressive, general-purpose programming language. Men, you are welcome if you know a woman who would like to attend and come to learn Clojure together. ClojureBridge is emphatically queer and trans* friendly.
(The description was lifted from this Eventbrite page for a past San Francisco workshop.)
This probably isn't a long-term solution, though, and I'd want to make sure that people agree with this change to the wording, so I've opened an issue to draw people's attention to it.
Cheers!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Some folks seemed unclear as to under what contexts they could or couldn't call their event a "ClojureBridge workshop." So far, the only thing we could point to was the line
on the "Minimum Viable Workshop" page.
That's true, but not very clear. However, it's hard to be more specific right now, so I've temporarily replaced that bullet point with the following:
(The description was lifted from this Eventbrite page for a past San Francisco workshop.)
This probably isn't a long-term solution, though, and I'd want to make sure that people agree with this change to the wording, so I've opened an issue to draw people's attention to it.
Cheers!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: