On August 3, 2018 10:35:57 Stefan van der Walt <stefanv@berkeley.edu> wrote:

On August 3, 2018 09:50:38 Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 11:01 PM Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
<looks back> Nope, concision is definitely not my strength. But I hope I made the argument clear, at least.

No, wait. I got it:

Bad actors use "diversity of political beliefs" in bad faith as cover for undermining the goals of the diversity statement. Marginalized groups want more assurance that our community (1) isn't one of those bad actors and (2) is willing and capable of resisting those bad actors when they come.

That's a very useful summary; thank you. 

I think we can fairly easily add a sentence that encourages participation from a wide diversity of people, while making it clear that including someone in the conversation does not give them free reigns in contradiction with the rest of the guidelines. 

Ralf, if you agree, shall we do this for SciPy, and use the new version for NumPy too?

Although, perhaps, a better question to answer is how many people feel that the current document is deficient, and does not go far enough in stating explicitly what we want from our community interactions. 

It is always hard to tell the opinion of the sometimes silent majority? 

Best regards, 
Stéfan