You can clone with
HTTPS or Subversion.
So sure, this test was my idea, but frankly, as a 30-something white male I'm probably NOT the right person to be writing any test of disadvantagement for any group, since I'm not very disadvantaged in the tech industry (I am a redhead and that oddly does cause problems but that can wait.. hehe).
I really need help and feedback from women in technology to improve the quality and effectiveness of this test. Please discuss in the comments here how it can be improved. Please fork the project, edit the test and submit a pull request.
That's the only way this will get better.
I'll have to think about it more. The thing I like about the Joel Test is it's a positive test. The more you score, the better you do.
Consider inverting the "Disadvantagement Test" in this way. The name of the test is hard to say and doesn't roll off the tongue.
So what's the opposite of a discriminatory work place?
Maybe it's the "fairness test"? Or something like that.
Good point. That was my intention for this test but on re-reading I realize only some of the questions are correctly written for that outcome. The others will need to be re-phrased.
The original name I gave for the test was the Fair Advantage test but I thought that was a bit hard to understand. Then it became the Non-Disadvantagement test, which is a double negative and doesn't really roll off the tongue. I like "Workplace Fairness"... but this applies outside of the workplace as well for open-source communities, etc..
Some antonyms to discriminatory: tolerant, inclusive, fair, etc.
I don't like "tolerant" because of it's negative connotation. I do like "inclusive".
What about "The Inclusive Team Test"?
Also, what I'd like to do with this project is create a generalized test that can apply to any group as a kind of "base class" for various more specific tests which are implementations that focus on certain groups. This project can collect tests for a variety of different concerns based around the same template, but modified to be appropriate for the specific case.
I updated the description and the test questions considering this topic. If we like the name "Inclusive Team Test", I'll change the name of the repo (which will break the links I sent out earlier, but I can send an updated email).
I feel weird taking part in this at all. That said, I was turned off almost immediately b the term "disadvantagement". I only read it because I know you. That said, I love the "Ada Test", and that seems to perfectly speak to the issue.
@coderoshi : The idea behind using the term "disadvantagement" was to make it applicable to any disadvantaged group. I think Phil was right though, and using something less formal and more positive is the way to go. I like "inclusive".
What do you think?
As for feeling weird -- I agree, which is why I opened this issue. But I also made a point to ask an equal amount of men and women to comment on this. I think we need a balanced perspective from both sides to make the test both accurate in terms of covering the problems that women face and also easily understood by a male perspective.
Coming late to the party here. I read this prior to the conversion from disadvantagement to inclusiveness and I like the new terminology much better.
As far as this being written by a red-headed but otherwise demographically stereotypical member of the tech sector: I'm actually ok with it. :)
I should be submitting a pull request shortly with minor changes.
Haha.. Oddly, I've noticed a disproportionate amount of redheads in tech vs other sections. Wonder what about the tech industry draws red heads in? Maybe it's the idea that being disruptive is valuable in tech. :)