# Idea: Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Acessibility BAT

**URL:** <https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152>\
**Category:** Brigade Action Teams\
**Created:** [June 5, 2018, 7:44pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152 "2018-06-05T19:44:48Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 19\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ninakin](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/ninakin/32/33_2.png) [@ninakin](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/ninakin)\
**Post date:** [June 5, 2018, 7:44pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/1 "2018-06-05T19:44:49Z")

</div>

# Brigade Action Team (BAT) Report

**CODE FOR AMERICA BRIGADE NETWORK**

Drafted on: May 31, 2018.  
Drafted by: Ramy Kim (OpenOakland), Carl V. Lewis (Open Savannah)

| Table of Contents | |
| --- | --- |
| INTRODUCTION | 1 |
| Defining the terms | 2 |
| Background | 3 |
| Framing this work | 4 |

## 1 Introduction

## 2 The IDEA Framework: An Explication

_The four building blocks –– and what each building block signifies in a world increasingly mediated by technology, design, and usability_

The IDEA Framework is geared to civic-tech communities of practice and place – called ‘Brigades’ in Code for America parlance – includes four overarching patterns that civic technology, media, and design organizational leaders should follow as a core part of their day-to-day mission for improving society, not as an afterthought. The four components of the IDEA Framework include: inclusion, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Although these four terms have overlap in meaning, each represents a distinctive idea and vision for compensating for systemic inequity from broader civil society.

In a manner not entirely dissimilar to [other](http://www.innovativegrowthsolutions.com/services/diversity-equity-inclusion/) [frameworks](http://www.d5coalition.org/tools/dei/) already widely-adopted in the social sector, this guide focuses on the distinct yet nonetheless overlapping democratic aspirations for inclusion, diversity, and equity (DEI) for all. But few, if any, existing frameworks for address these concepts in relation to human-to-computer or human-to-screen interactions. In a period of human history when our lives increasingly take place behind a digital screen –– from financial transactions, to ride hailing, to grocery shopping, even to building grassroots movements – strategies for inclusivity in volunteer organizations dedicated to social good, for the most part, fail to address the unique and emerging influences of the digital sphere.

largely do not touch on many of the unique and largely untackled issues for inclusivity in the private sector and beyond have not historically tended to focus as much on user experience as a civic technology community should –– instead using the acronym DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and leaving out the growing importance of accessibility as an entry point or barrier to information. The authors of this guide felt the need –– given that much of its audience is composed of software and web app developers – to include an additional focus area: accessibility.

Unlike previous mass media, electronic networks allow people to directly interact with the information with which they are presented. Consequently, citizens can have ‘real-time’ conversations with each others, regardless of geographical constraints. In addition, people with similar interests or goals can go to ‘virtual’ spaces to meet like-minded individuals and discuss issues of interest. In some cases, citizens can even converse with their political representatives about legislation on which they have an opinion.

This type of interaction adheres to the "ritual view of communication, directed not toward the extension of messages in space but toward the maintenance of society in time; not the act of imparting information but the representation of shared beliefs.” Ritual communication brings people together in a manner reminiscent of Athenian democracy or the old New England town meetings, where each citizen was provided with an equal right to speak.

The ritualistic capability for expression increases the participatory nature of democracy in cyberspace while undermining old hierarchies. Individuals play a more direct role in their own governance, through “the power of citizen-to-citizen (lateral) communications” which benefit both themselves and their community:

> “Community building power comes from the living database that the participants create and use together informally as they help each other solve problems, one to one and many to many. The web of human relationships that can grow along with the database is where the potential for cultural and political change can be found.” ([Rheingold 249](http://faculty.georgetown.edu/bassr/gaynor/bib.htm))

Rheingold’s explanation of how communication between citizens can result in the production of an empowered community and the possibility for political action, echoes Habermas notion of the [public sphere](http://faculty.georgetown.edu/bassr/gaynor/publics.htm), in which individuals respect and take interest in each other’s opinions while also looking out for the good of the community as whole.

But electronic networks such as the [Big Sky Telegraph](http://macsky.bigsky.dillon.mt.us/) and the [Blacksburg Electronic Village](http://crusher.bev.net/) allow for democratic participation across geographical boundaries as well as within local areas. Virtual communities created online can serve as alternatives to or reinforcements of actual physical communities in their functions as public spheres. By utilizing the transcendence and speed of electronic technology these communities can also spur political action by citizens, especially on the [grassroots level](http://faculty.georgetown.edu/bassr/gaynor/grassr.htm).

ACCESSIBILITY, diversity, equity, and accessibility.  
Even though the words ‘INCLUSION’, ‘DIVERSITY tend have slightly different social connotations.

### INCLUSION

refers to the way our membership acknowledges inequalities within our organization and outside while intentionally promoting equity among diverse populations by actively working to minimize behaviors that continue subtle biases and exclusive behavior. Inclusion is by default diverse, but diversity within a group does not presuppose inclusion ([www.d5coalition.org](http://www.d5coalition.org))

1. Highlight exclusion – For individuals comfortably living in the majority in technology and design communities, it’s easy to be exclusion-blind.

### DIVERSITY

is the act of bringing to the table community members from a range of demographic and cultural characteristics, e.g., gender, viewpoints, backgrounds, skillsets, social status, economic status, etc. Diversity should strive to include members of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented, margninalized, or underresourced by systemic processes

### EQUITY

Equity is the fair and just distribution of resources in a manner that promotes equal access to participation. Resources can encompass fiscal, physical or social capital and may have structural ties to inequity. Ongoing commitment to equity through strategy, implementation, reflection and improvement is required. It can be viewed as an end goal, rather than a process.

Civic technology and design communities shouldn’t expect to act as a panacea for deeply systemic and seemingly intractable issues

### ACCESSIBILITY

addresses the physical and nonphysical barriers that may hinder full participation in brigade work and events. Physical barriers may be diminished by compliance with ADA, however, nonphysical barriers may be addressed by universal design principles to be usable and inclusive of persons within a spectrum of abilities, including those with age-related impairments. Further, accessbility and inclusive design should consider persons with low literacy or non-fluency in English; low bandwidth connections or older technologies; new and infrequent users;[mobile users (w3.org)](https://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/overlap)

## 3 Background

## 4 Framing this work

_The Problem with Civic Inclusion Efforts_

Since its nascent days nearly a decade ago, ‘civic technology’ has grappled with the never-simple question of: ‘Civic for whom?’ The civic technologists devising the solutions and planning the interventions –– are they the ones whose lives stand to benefit most immediately from public sector innovation? Or is it the individuals living at the margin of society who actually need robust public social safety nets the most? Alternatively, is it politicians?

Any strong believer in democratic principles would rightly note that it benefits everyone when we have more civic and informed communities, Empowered communities are more robust, more innovative, and produce more collective prosperity than disempowered ones seen in the data from almost all major United Nations Economic Development Indicators than those with disempowered communities. So the topic of correcting systemic inbalances for the long haul gets

# Proposal

**The Purpose**

The Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility (IDEA) BAT will be a multi-brigade effort to exchange knowledge and resources to develop a shared framework for DEI efforts across the brigade network. This collective effort should result in the creation of a DEI Toolkit that is open-sourced, reproducible, and shared with all brigade members, and adaptable by the constituents they serve, and other organizations.

**The scope of the BAT with start and end time; which should be no more than 12 months. Successful and ongoing BATs can renew their teams after one year. \***

The scope of the BAT is to align efforts and resources and create an action plan that identifies IDEA BAT projects that all participating brigades can work on and a framework that can be deployed successfully for any brigade project process. This action plan will also create timelines and milestones so that all success criteria (metrics) are completed. Our proposed timeline for this scope is eight months.

**The success criteria (metrics) \***

1. **Creation of IDEA Toolkit hosted in Gitbook**

2. **IDEA Content Strategy for Brigades website**

3. **Community Outreach Strategy**

4. **Network Visualization/Map of IDEA ecosystem**

**List of Brigades working together to start the brigade action team. \***  
OpenOakland, Open Savannah, Hack for LA

**Proposed kickoff date**  
May 30, 2018

**Back-up proposed kickoff date \***  
June 15, 2018

**Back-up proposed kickoff time \***  
12:00pm

**Proposed end date \***  
January 31, 2019

Designate the following leadership roles with names and email addresses:

**Co-Chair names \***  
Ramy Kim, Richard Ng (OpenOakland)  
Carl V. Lewis (Open Savannah)

**Chair GitHub username \***

**Chair email address \***  
[richard@designgoodbusiness.com](mailto:richard@designgoodbusiness.com)  
[ramy@openoakland.org](mailto:ramy@openoakland.org)  
[Carl@opensavannah.org](mailto:Carl@opensavannah.org)

**Secretary name \***  
We have no secretary, as the co-chairs will be equally responsible for project management and administration

**Secretary GitHub username \***  
N/A

**Secretary email address \***  
N/A

**NAC sponsorship member \***  
Nina Kin (Hack for LA, NAC Member-At-Large)

**Name of BAT to be used for all infrastructure (Google Drive, GitHub, Google Group, Slack channel, etc.) \***  
IDEA BAT

**Additional Interbrigade Collaborators & Contributors:**

Deirdre Hirschtritt (OpenOakland)  
Bethany Patrick (Civic Data Alliance)  
Margeaux (Civic Data Alliance)  
Nina Kin (Hack for LA)  
Tamura (Hack for LA)  
Victor Ogundipe Jr (Open Toledo)

# NOTES & RESOURCES:

Open Austin’s Civic Tech Canvass  
Code for Charlotte: bat-matchmaking  
OpenOakland DEI Survey (Google Forms)  
OpenOakland DEI Survey Narrative  
Open Savannah Diversity Treatise  
Hard and fast policies  
Context-specific policies

UBM

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ninakin](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/ninakin/32/33_2.png) [@ninakin](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/ninakin)\
**Post date:** [June 5, 2018, 8:24pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/2 "2018-06-05T20:24:59Z")

</div>

There was some formatting weirdness in the original doc (copy/pasting issues?) so I tweaked it a little here. @ramymik @carlvlewis feel free to edit at will, it’s been turned into a wiki post.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![chris](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/chris/32/10_2.png) [@chris](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/chris)\
**Post date:** [June 5, 2018, 8:31pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/3 "2018-06-05T20:31:07Z")

</div>

After a couple rounds of tweaking the markdown for this post we could turn it into a template

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![miklb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/miklb/32/73_2.png) [@miklb](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/miklb)\
**Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 4:40am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/4 "2018-06-06T04:40:12Z")

</div>

> The four components of the IDEA Framework include: inclusion, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Although these four terms…

Is `inclusion` used twice here for effect or is that a typo?

Is this in a gist or repo where we could fix/suggest edits? I feel pedantic pointing out editing issues in a forum thread.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ninakin](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/ninakin/32/33_2.png) [@ninakin](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/ninakin)\
**Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 5:28am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/5 "2018-06-06T05:28:19Z")

</div>

Excellent points, definitely a typo. Figuring out how this will work is totally part of this piloting phase. You should be able to edit it directly. Maybe post in the thread about the changes you make?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![miklb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/miklb/32/73_2.png) [@miklb](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/miklb)\
**Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 5:17am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/6 "2018-06-07T05:17:32Z")

</div>

# Brigade Action Team (BAT) Report

**CODE FOR AMERICA BRIGADE NETWORK**

Drafted on: May 31, 2018.  
Drafted by: Ramy Kim (OpenOakland), Carl V. Lewis (Open Savannah)

| Table of Contents | |
| --- | --- |
| INTRODUCTION | 1 |
| Defining the terms | 2 |
| Background | 3 |
| Framing this work | 4 |

## 1 Introduction

## 2 The IDEA Framework: An Explication

_The four building blocks –– and what each building block signifies in a world increasingly mediated by technology, design, and usability_

The IDEA Framework is geared to civic-tech communities of practice and place – called ‘Brigades’ in Code for America parlance – includes four overarching patterns that civic technology, media, and design organizational leaders should follow as a core part of their day-to-day mission for improving society, not as an afterthought. The four components of the IDEA Framework include: inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility. Although these four terms have overlap in meaning, each represents a distinctive idea and vision for compensating for systemic inequity from broader civil society.

In a manner not entirely dissimilar to [other](http://www.innovativegrowthsolutions.com/services/diversity-equity-inclusion/) [frameworks](http://www.d5coalition.org/tools/dei/) already widely-adopted in the social sector, this guide focuses on the distinct yet nonetheless overlapping democratic aspirations for inclusion, diversity, and equity (DEI) for all. But few, if any, existing frameworks for addressing these concepts in relation to human-to-computer or human-to-screen interactions. In a period of human history when our lives increasingly take place behind a digital screen –– from financial transactions, to ride hailing, to grocery shopping, even to building grassroots movements – strategies for inclusivity in volunteer organizations dedicated to social good, for the most part, fail to address the unique and emerging influences of the digital sphere.

They do not touch on the unique and untackled issues for inclusivity in the private sector. Beyond that they have not historically tended to focus as much on user experience as a civic technology community should –– instead using the acronym DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and leaving out the growing importance of accessibility as an entry point or barrier to information. The authors of this guide felt the need –– given that much of its audience is composed of software and web app developers – to include an additional focus area: accessibility.

Unlike previous mass media, electronic networks allow people to directly interact with the information with which they are presented. Consequently, citizens can have ‘real-time’ conversations with each other, regardless of geographical constraints. In addition, people with similar interests or goals can go to ‘virtual’ spaces to meet like-minded individuals and discuss issues of interest. In some cases, citizens can even converse with their political representatives about legislation on which they have an opinion.

This interaction adheres to the "ritual view of communication, directed not toward the extension of messages in space but toward the maintenance of society in time; not the act of imparting information but the representation of shared beliefs.” Ritual communication brings people together in a manner reminiscent of Athenian democracy or the old New England town meetings, where each citizen was provided with an equal right to speak.

The ritualistic capability for expression increases the participatory nature of democracy in cyberspace while undermining old hierarchies. Individuals play a more direct role in their own governance, through “the power of citizen-to-citizen (lateral) communications” which benefit both themselves and their community:

> “Community building power comes from the living database that the participants create and use together informally as they help each other solve problems, one to one and many to many. The web of human relationships that can grow along with the database is where the potential for cultural and political change can be found.” ([Rheingold 249](http://faculty.georgetown.edu/bassr/gaynor/bib.htm))

Rheingold’s explanation of how communication between citizens can result in the production of an empowered community and the possibility for political action, echoes Habermas notion of the [public sphere](http://faculty.georgetown.edu/bassr/gaynor/publics.htm), in which individuals respect and take interest in each other’s opinions while also looking out for the good of the community as whole.

But electronic networks such as the [Big Sky Telegraph](http://macsky.bigsky.dillon.mt.us/) and the [Blacksburg Electronic Village](http://crusher.bev.net/) allow for democratic participation across geographical boundaries as well as within local areas. Virtual communities created online can serve as alternatives to or reinforcements of actual physical communities in their functions as public spheres. By utilizing the transcendence and speed of electronic technology these communities can also spur political action by citizens at the [grassroots level](http://faculty.georgetown.edu/bassr/gaynor/grassr.htm).

Inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility.  
Even though the words ‘INCLUSION’ and ‘DIVERSITY’ tend have slightly different social connotations.

### INCLUSION

refers to the way our membership acknowledges inequalities within our organization and outside while intentionally promoting equity among diverse populations by actively working to reduce behaviors that continue subtle biases and exclusive behavior. Inclusion is by default diverse, but diversity within a group does not presuppose inclusion ([www.d5coalition.org](http://www.d5coalition.org))

1. Highlight exclusion – For individuals comfortably living in the majority in technology and design communities, it’s easy to be exclusion-blind.

### DIVERSITY

is the act of bringing to the table community members from a range of demographic and cultural characteristics, e.g., gender, viewpoints, backgrounds, skillsets, social status, economic status, etc. Diversity should strive to include members of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented, margninalized, or underresourced by systemic processes

### EQUITY

Equity is the fair and just distribution of resources in a manner that promotes equal access to participation. Resources can encompass fiscal, physical or social capital and may have structural ties to inequity. Ongoing commitment to equity through strategy, implementation, reflection and improvement is required. It can be viewed as an end goal, rather than a process.

Civic technology and design communities shouldn’t expect to act as a panacea for deeply systemic and seemingly intractable issues.

### ACCESSIBILITY

addresses the physical and nonphysical barriers that may hinder full participation in brigade work and events. Physical barriers may be diminished by compliance with ADA, however, nonphysical barriers may be addressed by universal design principles to be usable and inclusive of persons within a spectrum of abilities, including those with age-related impairments. Further, accessbility and inclusive design should consider persons with low literacy or non-fluency in English; low bandwidth connections or older technologies; new and infrequent users;[mobile users (w3.org)](https://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/overlap)

## 3 Background

## 4 Framing this work

_The Problem with Civic Inclusion Efforts_

Since its nascent days nearly a decade ago, ‘civic technology’ has grappled with the never-simple question of: ‘Civic for whom?’ The civic technologists devising the solutions and planning the interventions –– are they the ones whose lives stand to benefit most from public sector innovation? Or is it the individuals living at the margin of society who actually need robust public social safety nets the most? Alternatively, is it politicians?

Any strong believer in democratic principles would rightly note that it benefits everyone when we have more civic and informed communities. Empowered communities are more robust, more innovative, and produce more collective prosperity than disempowered ones as seen in the data from almost all major United Nations Economic Development Indicators. The topic of correcting systemic inbalances for the long haul gets **[???]**

# Proposal

**The Purpose**

The Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility (IDEA) BAT will be a multi-brigade effort to exchange knowledge and resources to develop a shared framework for DEI efforts across the brigade network. This collective effort should result in the creation of a DEI Toolkit that is open-sourced, reproducible, and shared with all brigade members, and adaptable by the constituents they serve, and other organizations.

**The scope of the BAT with start and end time; which should be no more than 12 months. Successful and ongoing BATs can renew their teams after one year. \***

The scope of the BAT is to align efforts and resources and create an action plan that identifies IDEA BAT projects that all participating brigades can work on and a framework that can be deployed successfully for any brigade project process. This action plan will also create timelines and milestones so that all success criteria (metrics) are completed. Our proposed timeline for this scope is eight months.

**The success criteria (metrics) \***

1. **Creation of IDEA Toolkit hosted in Gitbook**

2. **IDEA Content Strategy for Brigades website**

3. **Community Outreach Strategy**

4. **Network Visualization/Map of IDEA ecosystem**

**List of Brigades working together to start the brigade action team. \***  
OpenOakland, Open Savannah, Hack for LA

**Proposed kickoff date**  
May 30, 2018

**Back-up proposed kickoff date \***  
June 15, 2018

**Back-up proposed kickoff time \***  
12:00pm

**Proposed end date \***  
January 31, 2019

Designate the following leadership roles with names and email addresses:

**Co-Chair names \***  
Ramy Kim, Richard Ng (OpenOakland)  
Carl V. Lewis (Open Savannah)

**Chair GitHub username \***

**Chair email address \***  
[richard@designgoodbusiness.com](mailto:richard@designgoodbusiness.com)  
[ramy@openoakland.org](mailto:ramy@openoakland.org)  
[Carl@opensavannah.org](mailto:Carl@opensavannah.org)

**Secretary name \***  
We have no secretary, as the co-chairs will be equally responsible for project management and administration

**Secretary GitHub username \***  
N/A

**Secretary email address \***  
N/A

**NAC sponsorship member \***  
Nina Kin (Hack for LA, NAC Member-At-Large)

**Name of BAT used for all infrastructure (Google Drive, GitHub, Google Group, Slack channel, etc.) \***  
IDEA BAT

**Additional Interbrigade Collaborators & Contributors:**

Deirdre Hirschtritt (OpenOakland)  
Bethany Patrick (Civic Data Alliance)  
Margeaux (Civic Data Alliance)  
Nina Kin (Hack for LA)  
Tamura (Hack for LA)  
Victor Ogundipe Jr (Open Toledo)

# NOTES & RESOURCES:

Open Austin’s Civic Tech Canvass  
Code for Charlotte: bat-matchmaking  
OpenOakland DEI Survey (Google Forms)  
OpenOakland DEI Survey Narrative  
Open Savannah Diversity Treatise  
Hard and fast policies  
Context-specific policies

UBM

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![miklb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/miklb/32/73_2.png) [@miklb](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/miklb)\
**Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 5:22am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/7 "2018-06-07T05:22:59Z")

</div>

I have two **[???]** where I think something is missing, possibly missed in a copy/paste.

I thought about just putting this into a repo so could see a diff but wasn’t sure if you wanted to put it in public yet. I’m assuming this will eventually be some kind of [CC license](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)

I should be clear I think this is a great idea and will be helpful guiding new brigades as well as brigades re-establishing their footing. Thank you.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![chris](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/chris/32/10_2.png) [@chris](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/chris)\
**Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 5:23am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/8 "2018-06-07T05:23:45Z")

</div>

@miklb the top post in this topic is a wiki, you can edit it directly and your changes will be tracked!

Click the little button near the top right of the top post that has a little pencil and a number

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![miklb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/miklb/32/73_2.png) [@miklb](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/miklb)\
**Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 5:24am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/9 "2018-06-07T05:24:54Z")

</div>

oh, neat. I didn’t realize that. That feature should probably be better documented.

I probably need to customize the CSS and bump up the global font size as well around here.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![chris](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/chris/32/10_2.png) [@chris](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/chris)\
**Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 5:27am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/10 "2018-06-07T05:27:06Z")

</div>

@miklb totally agree! it’s the key thing that sets Discourse apart but it’s hard to find. Discourse is really a wiki dressed like a forum. Been thinking about starting a getting started topic. I think we’re aiming to make heavier use of the wiki feature than most instances usually do

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![miklb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/miklb/32/73_2.png) [@miklb](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/miklb)\
**Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 5:29am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/11 "2018-06-07T05:29:26Z")

</div>

I still prefer markdown documents in a git repo with PRs for formal documentation but for adding new information and fixing formatting the wiki feature is great.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![carlvlewis](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/carlvlewis/32/317_2.png) [@carlvlewis](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/carlvlewis)\
**Post date:** [June 8, 2018, 4:47pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/12 "2018-06-08T16:47:00Z")

</div>

Seems as though oauth wants me to start a new account.

I have a gitbook version [I’m drafting of this](https://code-for-america-brigade-network.gitbook.io/ideabat/) because, yes, I, too, find it easier to write in Markdown, and get distracted by formatting options in Google Docs.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![carlvlewis](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/carlvlewis/32/317_2.png) [@carlvlewis](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/carlvlewis)\
**Post date:** [June 8, 2018, 4:56pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/13 "2018-06-08T16:56:25Z")

</div>

It’s sooo much more than a wiki when you can install plugins!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![chris](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/chris/32/10_2.png) [@chris](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/chris)\
**Post date:** [June 8, 2018, 7:29pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/14 "2018-06-08T19:29:22Z")

</div>

+100 for Gitbook, once a proposal gets into jumbo-formatted-document territory Github+GitBook+Pull Requests is probably the way to go. Maybe we only use Discourse’s wiki feature for early outlining and then collecting references. There isn’t any workflow for proposing and discussing changes

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ramymik](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/ramymik/32/106_2.png) [@ramymik](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/ramymik)\
**Post date:** [June 8, 2018, 9:54pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/15 "2018-06-08T21:54:30Z")

</div>

Agreed @chris. 1. We should get this version in Discourse submitted as a proposal to NAC. 2. Then we can start plugging away at Gitbook. Cool @carlvlewis [edited to include Carl]

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jhibbets](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/jhibbets/32/68_2.png) [@jhibbets](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/jhibbets)\
**Post date:** [June 19, 2018, 3:46am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/16 "2018-06-19T03:46:48Z")

</div>

I think it was supposed to be Trust.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![miklb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/miklb/32/73_2.png) [@miklb](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/miklb)\
**Post date:** [June 19, 2018, 1:52pm UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/17 "2018-06-19T13:52:42Z")

</div>

the “A” was accessibility

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mmazanec22](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/mmazanec22/32/506_2.png) [@mmazanec22](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/mmazanec22)\
**Post date:** [June 9, 2019, 1:37am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/18 "2019-06-09T01:37:38Z")

</div>

Hey all-- I’m thinking about trying to get some collaborative accessibility learning efforts going, including at the very least compiling resources and maybe something like a WCAG book club. Is this BAT still active?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mari](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discourse.codeforamerica.org/mari/32/992_2.png) [@Mari](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/u/Mari)\
**Post date:** [July 1, 2023, 7:08am UTC](https://discourse.codeforamerica.org/t/idea-inclusion-diversity-equity-acessibility-bat/152/19 "2023-07-01T07:08:15Z")

</div>