Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:49 PM John Scully wrote: > ... From: Origami On Behalf Of Joseph Wu ... OK, the two of you will refrain from talking to each other directly, from commenting about the other's real world, Facebook or list-based actions, behavior, specific wording, rhetorical tactics, etc. Feel free to reference specific CoC-related material that the other posts, answer questions put forth in each other's posts, make suggestions or proposals about anything having to do with the desirability, design, use, implementation, or really anything specifically CoC-related that could move the discussion forward in some way. Anything else will not be let through. Are we having fun yet? Anne
Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
Sorry Joseph, are you saying that you have hacked my facebook, email and phones and know the exact details of every conversation I have had with anyone over the last two years? If not, then please do not impugn my character by implying that I am lying. You do not know what people have asked for. Considering that several other people who have responded in this conversation relayed very similar issues should put that top bed. There are very real problems with this kind of document ending up with extreme language due to a very vocal minority. As to arguments on facebook – don’t go there. That is NOT part of this conversation as per Anne’s request, and YOU use personal insults and bullying tactics in place of making arguments on facebook. You even stated that in a reply to Kate – that you were deliberately insulting me with the hope of provoking a response. How about you and I ignore each other, hopefully for the remainder of the life of the universe? I have zero respect for you and do not wish to converse with you in any form, ever. This will be the last response I make to you on this forum, or in fact any other. To the moderators – I do not think any further messages on this thread between Joseph and myself should be posted. Just reject anything wither of us says if it references the other. John From: Origami On Behalf Of Joseph Wu Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 10:41 AM To: The Origami Mailing List Subject: Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion On May 16, 2021, at 17:05, John Scully mailto:jscu...@ohiopaperfolders.com> > wrote: The background is that since the first person asked us about one a little over a year ago we have had maybe six people make what range from suggestions to demands about what should be included. The reason I pushed back so strongly was some of those demands. John, Can we please start with an attempt to discuss this in good faith? Your narrative of being the victim of unreasonable demands differs greatly from the accounts of trying to talk to you about this topic that I have heard from some of those “maybe six people”. Watching the way you present arguments on Facebook, it is pretty obvious that you like to sprinkle these sort of subtle stabs at the people you are arguing against in order to detract from their credibility. This sort of behavior is not conducive to a good faith discussion of the sort that Anne has set up for us here. Indeed, I question the need to bring up the circumstances of the argument about CenterFold’s code of conduct (or lack thereof) when this discussion is supposed to be about the pros and cons of codes of conduct in general. “The background” of the CenterFold situation is not relevant. Please stick to the topic at hand and take care not to impugn the characters of others. Thank you. -- Joseph Wu, Origami Artist (via iPhone) e: josep...@origami.as <mailto:josep...@origami.as> w: http://www.origami.as flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/josephwuorigami/ facebook: http://www.facebook.com/joseph.wu.origami
Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
> On May 16, 2021, at 17:05, John Scully wrote: > > The background is that since the first person asked us about one a little > over a year ago we have had maybe six people make what range from suggestions > to demands about what should be included. The reason I pushed back so > strongly was some of those demands. John, Can we please start with an attempt to discuss this in good faith? Your narrative of being the victim of unreasonable demands differs greatly from the accounts of trying to talk to you about this topic that I have heard from some of those “maybe six people”. Watching the way you present arguments on Facebook, it is pretty obvious that you like to sprinkle these sort of subtle stabs at the people you are arguing against in order to detract from their credibility. This sort of behavior is not conducive to a good faith discussion of the sort that Anne has set up for us here. Indeed, I question the need to bring up the circumstances of the argument about CenterFold’s code of conduct (or lack thereof) when this discussion is supposed to be about the pros and cons of codes of conduct in general. “The background” of the CenterFold situation is not relevant. Please stick to the topic at hand and take care not to impugn the characters of others. Thank you. -- Joseph Wu, Origami Artist (via iPhone) e: josep...@origami.as w: http://www.origami.as flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/josephwuorigami/ facebook: http://www.facebook.com/joseph.wu.origami
Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 7:05 PM John Scully wrote: > There are large parts of this that we can all easily agree on - the two > extremes. > First is anything that is an actual crime. Assault of any kind, violence, > threats of violence etc. If anything like that occurs then the police > should be involved. If someone reports the incident to admins, and no one > has yet called the police then that should be done, but anyone can call the > police. > Unfortunately, some might disagree with this first point. If there is a victim then their desire to pursue legal remedy and law enforcement involvement should likely be considered. There are some instances where the personal cost of trying to lodge a report to the police are too high to make that desirable for the victim, but it still may be prudent for the event to take action in some of those circumstances. As an example, one attendee corners another in an area with no witnesses or cameras present. They proceed to kiss and touch the person even though such interactions have not been affirmatively consented to. The person manages to escape the situation and wants the event to take some kind of action (as defined by the CoC, could range from monitoring to a warning to expulsion or other) but they do not want to try to file a police report because they know there is no physical evidence and so it would only be one person's word against the other and they realize that the police will also directly confront the offender about the incident which could bring additional harm back on the victim. If they know that the only way to report the incident to the event would be to also report it to the police they may be less inclined to report it at all. Now...the most difficult area is what I would call "social injustice" > rules. Some of the suggested CoC sent to us have long enumerated sets of > ways you should not offend people. > Problem with that is that on the one hand you are listing a lot of > things that only a very small subset of people will care about, and on the > other can never list them all. There is a reason that "murder" is against > the law, not "murder by shooting, murder by stabbing, murder by manual > strangulation, murder by garrote, murder by poison". > If you list "things that are bad" you sort of imply that things not on the > list are not bad. And you will continually be asked to add to the list. > The OUSA CoC (just used for convenience) says that harassment includes but is not limited to: * offensive communication related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, and age. * use of sexist, racist, ableist, or any other discriminatory or exclusionary language. >From my point of view, this is like saying that "murder, stealing, and assault" are against the law. It doesn't go into details about what different specific words are offensive, but outlines broad areas of language that are not tolerated. However, I want to draw attention to one part of your statement that seems troublesome to me. I don't think it is a "problem" that the list will include "a lot of things that only a very small subset of people will care about." Part of the point of a CoC is to make it clear that people in what are often marginalized groups feel comfortable attending because they know what will and won't be tolerated. If the majority of the attendees of an event are caucasion that does not mean that racist language is acceptable because "only a very small subset of people" are targeted by it. It's also not really a problem that people might ask to add things to the list or otherwise amend it, since the event organizers get to decide how they want to handle those requests. As with all parts of a CoC, it is up to the convention organizers to decide what should be included, how it should be implemented, and to publish it so that potential attendees can make informed decisions based on what they can expect at the event. If the Code of Conduct is too permissive, they know not to go. If the Code of Conduct is not permissive enough, they know not to go. Or, in either case, they can take their issues up with the organizers and lobby for changes. Again, it goes back to the organizers to decide what to include or not. The current method people use for making decisions about attending or not attending an event without a CoC is to rely on "whisper networks", word of mouth, or just their gut instincts as to how things will be handled. To be specific, one person asked that the CoC include "Mis-gendering > someone, even accidently is tantamount to physical violence. Therefore > please refrain from any use of gender pronouns". > That is one of the things I was referring to when I stated that I did not > want to be the "PC Police", or have an "overly PC CoC", which people took > real offence to. > Again, it is up to the organizers to decide what to include in the CoC. If this seems out of bounds to you, then you
Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
>John Scully wrote: >I would prefer a more general statement - something along the lines of "If >anyone does or says anything >that is making you or someone else uncomfortable >please report it to an admin and we will make a >determination and >take >appropriate action". Not a promise that "if you report it we will take action" Having read “good examples of CoC provided in the link offered by “kicking off the discussion”, I noted exclusionary language. I find Mr. Scully’s ideas to be “inclusive”, and well thought out for the broad range of cultures that attend the Origami conventions. Additionally, Mr. Scully recognizes the opportunity public law offers in dealing with CoC, and is asking open ended questions regarding managing uncomfortable incidents. It appears Mr. Scully has heard what people are saying, and is open to ideas. Such a positive approach. Orifun to all, Dianne
Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
I hope there can be some worthwhile decisions made regarding CoC for origami conventions, either based on OUSA, or something else that's generic while covering a creative community. If you follow artists in the comics and anime realms on Twitter, you'll find there has been horrible behavior over the years that's been written off at industry and fan events over the years. This isn't a distant past issue either – victims came forward last year to call out those who abused them, along with their protectors. I'd hope that acknowledging that there are bad actors out there regardless of the community would lead to a need for a CoC in the origami realm for events that have not already established one. The FAQ shared by Beth is a nice read, and is a good reminder that not everyone may report incidents, or may not feel comfortable coming forward, if there are no established rules in the first place. Alex // ab // alexbarber.com // visibleinlight.com On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 3:03 PM Elizabeth Johnson wrote: > Hello everyone! > > > Anne thought it would be helpful if I presented an intro to this topic, in > the interest of kicking off the discussion. As a somewhat neutral party > that was not directly involved in any of the precipitating events, and who > was also not a major player in the Facebook discussion, I’ve done my best > to try to represent this issue, and the concerns of those involved, fairly > and accurately. > > > … > > To put this in an even larger context, many non-origami convention > communities have been moving towards developing Codes of Conduct because of > the growing realization that this is just good policy. No specific > incidents or triggers need to have happened to legitimize their need. It’s > a cultural shift that is happening in other communities as well, as people > become aware that harassment occurs more often than people realize and that > victims are often afraid to report incidents unless there are procedures in > place for doing so. > > > This is my understanding of all this, to the best of my knowledge. When I > first heard about all of this, I was personally quite taken aback. I > imagine it may be surprising and upsetting for some of you to learn that > these kinds of issues could be happening in our close-knit community. But > the hope is that by raising awareness of these issues, we can take a > positive step towards ensuring that everyone feels welcome and safe within > our community. > > > Thank you all for your time.This is my very first post on the O-list, by > the way. Diving straight into the deep end! > > Beth Johnson >
Re: [Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
Thanks for kicking this off Beth. By the way - I do not remember the reply/quoting format you all like on the O-List. Could someone remind those of us who have rarely posted here about top-posting, etc? I do have some thoughts on this. Not just what should be in a CoC, but what should NOT be in a CoC. The background is that since the first person asked us about one a little over a year ago we have had maybe six people make what range from suggestions to demands about what should be included. The reason I pushed back so strongly was some of those demands. There are large parts of this that we can all easily agree on - the two extremes. First is anything that is an actual crime. Assault of any kind, violence, threats of violence etc. If anything like that occurs then the police should be involved. If someone reports the incident to admins, and no one has yet called the police then that should be done, but anyone can call the police. Second is the other extreme - classroom etiquette. The rules about not disrupting a class, the statement that anyone in the class should come get an admin to deal with disruption. Not touching someone's work without asking first. The rules that really apply to origami, separate from normal group guidlines. So - those two I think everyone can agree on very easily. Now...the most difficult area is what I would call "social injustice" rules. Some of the suggested CoC sent to us have long enumerated sets of ways you should not offend people. Problem with that is that on the one hand you are listing a lot of things that only a very small subset of people will care about, and on the other can never list them all. There is a reason that "murder" is against the law, not "murder by shooting, murder by stabbing, murder by manual strangulation, murder by garrote, murder by poison". If you list "things that are bad" you sort of imply that things not on the list are not bad. And you will continually be asked to add to the list. To be specific, one person asked that the CoC include "Mis-gendering someone, even accidently is tantamount to physical violence. Therefore please refrain from any use of gender pronouns". That is one of the things I was referring to when I stated that I did not want to be the "PC Police", or have an "overly PC CoC", which people took real offence to. I would prefer a more general statement - something along the lines of "If anyone does or says anything that is making you or someone else uncomfortable please report it to an admin and we will make a determination and take appropriate action". Not a promise that "if you report it we will take action",because some people report very odd things. A few years ago a man who had come into the exhibit approached Monica and complained that we "were allowing people to walk around half-naked". When she inquired what he meant by that he pointed to some people in sandals and told her that "Naked feet are disgusting and unsanitary". She politely told him that sandals meet the health regulations for restaurants, so they are certainly fine at a convention. He left in a huff. Please do not think that I am conflating reports of real harassment with silly things like that - I am just pointing out that the CoC must allow common sense to apply. Second issue I had was several people asking for people to be able to anonymously report others for bad behavior at our convention or other events "So that we can take action". But without specifying what that action should be. I took that to mean blacklisting, because I honestly do not know what other action you can take at a future event based on a report of something from a past event. Oddly, some of these pointed to the OUSA CoC as an example. But it does NOT say "anonymously". It says your identity can be kept confidential, which is entirely different. I asked straight up "Are you saying that we should allow anonymous reports of bad behavior at other events as well as at our own, and based solely on those reports blacklist people?". I never got a real reply to that, so I am not sure that is what they meant, but that was the request. And that was from several different people separated by months. I would like to see some real discussion here of those several general categories: 1) Should incidents at other events be reported through these same channels as real time incidents at our events? 2) Are we talking about blacklisting people? If so, based on what exactly? Note that I have no issue with that other than the opportunity for abuse of it. I mean - if Person X is disruptive and a problem (much less guilty of criminal conduct) at multiple events, why would anyone want them at future events? 3) Do we want to be acting as micro-managers of what is and is not allowable etiquette, or just broad statements that boil down to "don't be a jerk" (not in those words). Remember - this is specifically NOT about harassment, assault or any other serious offence. Keep in
[Origami] CoC - Kicking off the Discussion
Hello everyone! Anne thought it would be helpful if I presented an intro to this topic, in the interest of kicking off the discussion. As a somewhat neutral party that was not directly involved in any of the precipitating events, and who was also not a major player in the Facebook discussion, I’ve done my best to try to represent this issue, and the concerns of those involved, fairly and accurately. The issue of Codes of Conduct at conventions recently came up on FB and the discussion quickly melted down into a very emotional and heated exchange that was not only not productive but quite polarizing and upsetting to many. It’s terribly unfortunate because the primary objective was completely lost. And the objective, at its core, was to advocate for the adoption of Codes of Conduct at conventions. The purpose of moving this topic to the O list is to hopefully foster a more productive and respectful discussion of this important topic. There is no agenda here, but there are some objectives. These are: 1. Engage in a respectful discussion about Codes of Conduct. What they are, what they do, how they may be developed, structured, implemented, and so forth. This is important to ensure we at least all know the basics about what it is we are discussing. Here is one helpful primer: https://www.ashedryden.com/blog/codes-of-conduct-101-faq? 1. Engage in a respectful discussion about the issue of harassment. What this is, what it can look like, why some people are concerned about this issue in the origami community, how it relates to a Code of Conduct, and so on. 1. Allow people an opportunity to discuss their personal opinions about why this is important to them and / or what their personal concerns are regarding having Codes of Conduct at origami conventions. 1. Allow people to present factual data and expert opinions about the benefits and/or drawbacks of Codes of Conduct. 1. The purpose here is NOT to develop a consensus on this forum, but rather to begin a dialogue about this in a respectful, productive way that addresses everyone’s questions and concerns. 1. We also do NOT want to discuss what happened on FB or continue that conversation. This is an effort to step back from that and focus on the larger issue. *Where is this all coming from?* A few years ago, some women began discussing the issue of harassment at conventions. People who had personally experienced this began talking to others and then reaching out to even more folks to ask about their experiences. What emerged was a growing awareness that, unfortunately, there were women who had had negative experiences at conventions that fall under this broad but somewhat ill-defined umbrella of harassment. And to be clear, this is not just about women, but this is how the conversation started. Out of this, a few people reached out to some organizations to inquire about establishing some Codes of Conduct at conventions to address this issue. The goal was two-fold: to ensure that there were more clear boundaries set regarding behavior and, perhaps more importantly, to provide a process by which these incidents are handled. The impetus was never due to the notion that any particular convention was unsafe, or that there were incidents that occurred at any particular convention, or that reported incidents were being ignored or mishandled at any convention. The reality was that some women who had personally experienced harassment were having second thoughts about attending conventions due to past experiences. This alone was the impetus for reaching out to convention organizers to inquire about and advocate for the adoption of Codes of Conduct. CenterFold was one of the organizations that was contacted. And to be very clear, nothing specific happened at Centerfold that initiated this request. To put this in an even larger context, many non-origami convention communities have been moving towards developing Codes of Conduct because of the growing realization that this is just good policy. No specific incidents or triggers need to have happened to legitimize their need. It’s a cultural shift that is happening in other communities as well, as people become aware that harassment occurs more often than people realize and that victims are often afraid to report incidents unless there are procedures in place for doing so. This is my understanding of all this, to the best of my knowledge. When I first heard about all of this, I was personally quite taken aback. I imagine it may be surprising and upsetting for some of you to learn that these kinds of issues could be happening in our close-knit community. But the hope is that by raising awareness of these issues, we can take a positive step towards ensuring that everyone feels welcome and safe within our community. Thank you all for your time.This is my very first post on the O-list, by the way. Diving straight into the deep end! Beth
