Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Let's get a little louder

juliaelman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 149 posts

Re: Let's get a little louder

#61

Post by ta12121 »

icebraining wrote: post #35
xutopia wrote: post #14

I've gotten into a bar fight to protect a woman I did not know. I almost got into a fight in the subway for the same reason, twice. However I can't stand these kinds of stories. All I hear is one socially awkward guy trying really hard in the worst possible way. I'm conflicted because on the other hand the guy seemed like an asshole but I have only one side of the story and feel like it would be jumping to conclusion…

I then (...) asked how his daughter was, thinking that would snap him out of it. And with a blank stare he said bluntly, "She's a slut." I'm having much trouble seeing what kind of person except an extreme asshole would say something like this. Regardless of what they really think.

Someone who's frustrated and being unable to control their teenage daughter?

Re: Let's get a little louder

#62

Post by jeremyarussell »

Since this does happen, (even if we don't know that this guy did anything to this girl.) then I think a bigger question to ask is pretty simple and will surely do better in the long run. When someone around you acts like a pig, girl or guy (I've seen some girls act downright crazy when alcohol gets into the mix, it's the thing to do when you want to act out your deepest desires, liquid courage I call it.) call them out at it. If you see someone groping someone else when they don't want, let them know it's not cool and you won't stand here while they do it. Same thing for any sexual advance that is unwelcome. You can usually tell when it's unwelcome when the receiving party looks nervous and tries to politely get out of the situation.

The below kinda-quote (it's disputed if it was Burke, or if it was said exactly thus.) comes to mind and rings pretty loud.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" - Edmund Burke

As an exiting thought, the pressure to be civil needs to come from peers. Meaning, guys don't let guy friends harass, and girls don't let girl friends harass.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#63

Post by booty »

I've been in this conference organizer's shoes before.

On one hand, running a conference/convention is difficult enough without being asked to referee personal conflicts. It almost inevitably devolves into a he-said/she-said kind of argument.

But on the other hand, if we take that kind of an attitude, that's essentially a signal for predatory men to go ahead and harass women (or worse). That's pretty much what predatory men have been doing since the beginning of history - acting with impunity since claims of rape or harassment are almost impossible to prove if there are no additional witnesses or physical evidence.

What we've done is to stress proper conduct before the event, and if there are repeat complaints about somebody they're removed from the community permanently.

It's not a perfect process and we've given some "second chances" to people that we've later regretted.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#64

Post by wpietri »

stfu wrote: post #10

Somehow I see no causation between a conference and the drunken comments by its attendees at a bar. Trying to argue that a conference organizer should hold some moral responsible for the people attending seems to me just ridiculous. He looked at me and sighed, confessing that he never should have allowed this guy to come to the conference. Here the Wait. What? Really? seems to be better placed - is there somebody rea…

> Trying to argue that a conference organizer should hold some moral responsible for the people attending seems to me just ridiculous.

Part of creating a conference is trying to get the right people to attend.

The reason many people come to the conference isn't the content of the sessions, which could be delivered much more efficiently on-line. It's the conversations.

As an example, consider TED. I'm not sure how it is now, but at least in the early days, things were carefully arranged to encourage a ton of interaction. Speakers were strongly encouraged to stay for the whole thing. There was plenty of time for interaction, and the locations and events were chosen to keep people there and mingling. Certainly the things I remember most fondly are my personal encounters, not the admittedly great talks.

So yes, any smart conference organizer is going to be very concerned with who's attending, if only because that's a major part of the product being sold.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#65

Post by wpietri »

yock wrote: post #27
davidw wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the more reason to have a well thought-out policy in place for how to deal with a potentially explosive situation.

If a conference wants to have a policy governing the actions of their attendees whilst at the conference , wonderful. If a conference thinks they have any right to govern the actions of people who happen to be attendees whilst not at the conference , then they can go pound sand. It's sad that this woman was apparently treated so poorly, but there's no possible way for a conference to write a legally-binding code of c…

The conference gets to invite whoever they want. It's a private event, and they can set any conditions they choose for attendance. They can indeed write that policy and enforce it by revoking access. As far as I know the only US limits are when you're excluding a group legally protected from discrimination.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#66

Post by wpietri »

supernooneo wrote: post #21
davidw wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the more reason to have a well thought-out policy in place for how to deal with a potentially explosive situation.

Unless it involves a trial by jury, I don't think it's fair to ban people based on it.

Trial by jury is a mechanism we use to limit the actions of the state, to make sure its power over individuals is fairly applied.

In the US, people are generally free to associate with whomever they want. That includes the right to not associate with people. If a bar owner or a conference organizer wants to throw somebody out, that's perfectly within their rights unless they've contracted otherwise. Equally, patrons are welcome to their business elsewhere if they choose.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#67

Post by zalew »

pinko wrote: post #16
stdbrouw wrote: post #2

That really sucks, and maybe the conference organizers could have been better at coming up with a way to deal with this, but I don't know what a sexual harrassment policy would solve. Sexual harrassment is immoral and depending on the nature punishable by law. Spelling that out would be like spelling out that you'd prefer people not to defecate in the hallways. We need to find solutions, not add organizational scar t…

The difference is that defecating in the hallways isn't a routine practice in our industry, but sexual harassment of the sort she describes is. There's a need for more awareness and action within the community -- and a hands-off "let the law take care of it" attitude ignores that a lot of this happens out of the public eye, and can only be stopped when people close to it take a more public stand against it.

I could stick the story she described to any industry, or even any bar in town and no industry at all.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#68

Post by blubbar »

Avenger42 wrote: post #17
supernooneo wrote: post #4

Careful that she is making an accusation here, but it is not proven, and prior bad behaviour (that's also an unproven accusation) is not an indicator of present guilt. I don't think we should ban people from conferences based on unproven accusations.

This isn't the stock market. Past behavior is an indicator of present/future behavior. It's not the only indicator, certainly, but when a large number of people are telling you the same thing, then you have a responsibility to discover why that is. The organizer's reaction made it sound like he had reservations about inviting this person, due to older reports similar to the author's.

>Past behavior is an indicator of present/future behavior.

But a pretty bad one. I wouldn't mind if a murderer would give talk (if it was good). And not about the murdering, but about let's say ReiserFS.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#69

Post by wpietri »

Jach wrote: post #31
shadowfiend wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is hardly “some random bar encounter”. This is the latest in a string of publicly described issues with sexual harassment in the tech community, both at conferences and elsewhere. The same rule applies here as with bugs reported by users: if one person is talking about this out loud, it means dozens are probably running into it and staying silent. That is unacceptable. And to consider conference organizers respons…

The other uncharitable interpretation is: "What did you expect when you get drunk men and women together at a bar?" But focusing on the GP's general point, I feel like this was more of a failure of the bar (shouldn't they be on the lookout for these things?) than the conference. Also, if you're being harassed at a bar, why don't you immediately tell the bar owner/tender/bouncer or police instead of waiting a full day…

Perhaps you can tell us about the times you've been sexually harassed and immediately reported it?

Having never been harassed like that, I don't know quite what I'd do. But I can think of any number of times I've taken a little while to go from "what the fuck just happened?" to feeling confident enough in my analysis to raise a ruckus.

Re: Let's get a little louder

#70

Post by mtrimpe »

Hytosys wrote: post #33
dpeck wrote: post #28

Maybe I'm missing something but why not handle it with the safeguards at the venue? The conference is not in the business of protecting its attendees from unwanted advances, especially outside of the conference areas/sponsored events. Why not speak to the manager of the bar and have him escorted out? If it happens at the hotel, do the same with the hotel manager. People in the service/hospitality industry know how to…

Agreed. Why is the development community (this conference in specific) being held responsible for the acts of an individual who happens to reside within? This is clearly something that should be taken care like an adult of outside of a private community. The story is a bummer, but the author's response to the situation is quite childish and this blog post seems somewhat irrelevant.

And the response from the organizer should have been very simple and straight-forward: Ask the person to leave the conference and ideally, if it still had to take place, canceling their talk as well.

I doubt anything but praise would have resulted from that, even though the best outcome would be that it was kept private and became a little piece of background gossip floating around the Django-community.

Post reply on HN