Malcolm Hutty wrote: [...]
May I ask why the TF's goal should not be an actual increase in diversity and instead should just be the removal of (some) barriers? How can we know whether the TF's work addresses the right barriers if the goal is defined by the work being done and not the outcome of the work?
I agree.
The goal should not be to have a RIPE community that could in theory be diverse, but rather to have a RIPE community that *is* diverse.
There may be factors in society at large that mean fewer women want to come to a RIPE meeting. We can address some of those, by being a more welcoming place, and by actively showing that we are. But we can't fix everything: it's not given to us in this TF to persuade more women to become network engineers in the first place, or to study STEM topics.
The lack of research into why diversity is so low is indeed disappointing. It could be that gender diversity is so low because the companies and universities hiring the people RIPE needs to attract also have problem hiring women. But gender is just one diversity dimension. If participation in RIPE is lower than we'd expect based on wider society, supply is unlikely to be the problem. Or at least not the only problem. A structured research programme would be very helpful in understanding the issues and so allow the TF and wider community to develop suitable approaches.
I think "fixing RIPE" is ambitious enough. Fixing society, well that's a rabbit hole beyond the scope of this TF.
This is the other part of where research would help. It would help identify the appropriate scope for goal setting. Kind regards, Leo