On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 10:13:53AM -0400, Marina Zhurakhinskaya wrote: > On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Christophe Fergeau <cferg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In my mind, there is not much point in talking about a anti-harassment > > policy if it's not going to be enforced. > > "organizers will help ensure the harassment stops if it does occur" is > about enforcing the policy.
Sorry, I was not talking about the policy being discussed, what I meant is that if we say we have an anti-harassment policy, it should be implicit that it's going to be enforced in case of problems. > > > > >> Sexual language and imagery create a sexualized environment, which is > >> uncomfortable to some people > > > > Should I make a list of things that make me uncomfortable so that we add > > them to the policy? It's also quite easy to find non-sexual images that > > will make a lot of people very uncomfortable, even sick but which are > > not forbidden by this policy (some parts of 4chan are a good source for > > that). > > Sexual language and imagery are a common concern. If there are other > types of concerns people think are worth listing, they can be added. > E.g. it can be "Sexual or violent language and imagery are not > appropriate for any conference venue, including talks" This is a common concern in some circles yes. What we seem to be doing here is assuming people are going to do bad (ie are going to be jerks), and to avoid this, we have to put ourselves in the position of censors. I'm sorry, but I don't think we should be doing that. I'd rather assume people will do good, tell them we trust them to behave appropriately, and possibly reminding them to be wary of others' sensibilities. This seems much more positive to me and more rewarding for our community. Also, how do we define 'sexual'? Is http://www.quandjeseraigrande.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Pub-Galeries-Lafayette-Jean-Paul-Goude1.jpg some sexual imagery which should be banned? (NB: this is an ad campaign from a big French department store prominently visible in Paris metro). Content which is OK in the US would probably be frowned upon/unsettling from some more 'traditionalist' countries or background. How do we set the bar here? All in all, I'm not a big fan of the whole policy as it is now, which roughly tells people "we suspect you all of being potential offenders, we are warning you, we are watching you and will take action!". This is definitely not friendly, and not how I'd like to be welcomed when coming to a real-life party. However this is similar to what we had in A Coruña, and I understand it can be reassuring to some people, especially if they encounter some issues at the conference. I'm not ok with adding some arbitrary censorship in there and pretend it's related to anti-harassment. Christophe
pgpNBimTZIHda.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ guadec-list mailing list guadec-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/guadec-list
