On 12/12/2010 06:06 PM, Martín Ferrari wrote: > that's just diluting what harassment means. This is perhaps why Richard re-titled the proposed policy "Standards of Respect", and not "anti-harrassment" (yes, the subject of the thread is different): http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/StandardsOfRespect > Also, what I read there would forbid stuff that happens in other kinds > of conferences: . Uh, there are also conferences devoted to white supremacy, and conferences devoted explicitly to how to market the latest proprietary software. People who want to go to those conferences can certainly go to them, but i'd rather not see those things be considered acceptable behavior for debconf. If someone started advocating, say, white supremacy at debconf, i would hope they would be told directly and firmly that this was not reasonable or acceptable for the conference, and that they should stop doing so or leave the conference. I'd rather the conference seem unwelcoming to a few bigots than seem unwelcoming to everyone who disagrees with white supremacy. > And in the end, what makes clothing sexualised? You're right -- there is no absolute distinction here, just as there are many unanswerable questions about what makes Debian work technically the right way. People who are attending and running the conference need to be aware of what makes potential participants feel unwelcome, and act on that. I do not buy the argument that just because lines are occasionally blurry, we should therefore not bother to encourage people to behave decently to one another in an event we are responsible for. > I have been suggested by a friend to > change my wallpaper in DC7 because she found it objectifying, and I > complied with the request on the grounds of not making anyone feel > bad; Exactly. It sounds like the person who felt your setup was in poor form was not so repulsed that she felt ok to talk to you about it directly. She talked to you, you heard her concerns, you were reasonable, and you remedied the situation. Therefore, neither of you needed to deal with any sort of policy. Had you been unreasonable about it (or had the image been so grossly repulsive that she was discouraged from even talking to you about it in the first place), the policy would be there to back up someone who was legitimately concerned about being made to feel unwelcome. > So, to conclude, I don't think it is a good idea to adopt this text. I disagree with your conclusion. Regards, --dkg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature