If someone started a fistfight in the conference's bar after hours, would you be surprised if the conference chose to not invite that person back again, ever? Would you come to his defense by saying "It's not the conference organizers' responsiblity what happens in the bar afterwards!" Some of the commenters have this idea that if you behave like a jerk to someone, ONLY that person has the right to distrust you. WTF?
Let's get a little louder
101–110 of 149 posts
Re: Let's get a little louder
#102This sucks, period - there's no two ways about it. Things like this are why I am glad PyCon (us.pycon.org) has a code of conduct in place ( https://us.pycon.org/2012/codeofconduct/ ) which is enforced by staff. There is no place for this type of behavior, anywhere. I am sorry this happened to you Julia, it should not have, and the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the responsible party fro…
Could you take a closer look at that Code of Conduct? I'm having trouble finding the part where it says they'll take action over events that happen outside the conference. Event organizers are responsible for events that occur at the event. They are not there to police attendees both at and away from the event.
It says "all attendees are expected to show respect and courtesy to other attendees throughout the conference and at all conference events, whether officially sponsored by PyCon or not."
I think that an unofficial meet up for beer would count as a conference event, despite not being officially sponsored by PyCon.
There is no need to split hairs here. Unacceptable behavior does not suddenly become acceptable as soon as you walk out the door of the convention center. These informal meetups at a bar afterwards are still part of the sphere of events related to the conference.
And heck, even if it was somewhere completely unrelated to the conference, we should probably try to do something; for instance, if someone has been harassing me at other conferences, and I know they are likely to show up to another one, I may ask the organizers to forbid them based on their past behavior, even if it never happened at that particular conference.
This isn't to say that event organizers need to "police" anything. No one is asking them to do that. No one is asking them to keep an eye on every talk, and immediately expel someone who makes an off color comment. What's being requested is that a policy is put in place to define unacceptable behavior and its consequences, so when something truly unacceptable does happen, you know what to do about it, instead of just shrugging and saying "that sucks, but I can't really do anything."
Re: Let's get a little louder
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "and the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the responsible party from the conference." So just assume guilt and throw him out, sans investigation? That's completely unreasonable and why these are sticky situations. It isn't black and white. Even with an air-tight sexual harassment policy, you can't automatically assume that the accused is in the wrong.
Not blinking doesn't mean that one can't investigate. It just means that one shouldn't flinch at it.
What wpietri said - conference and other event organizers need to not balk at taking action, investigation, etc. This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or two daughters to be part of, that simple.
Re: Let's get a little louder
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not blinking doesn't mean that one can't investigate. It just means that one shouldn't flinch at it.
What wpietri said - conference and other event organizers need to not balk at taking action, investigation, etc. This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or two daughters to be part of, that simple.
Original quote:
>"the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the responsible party from the conference."
Shoot first, ask questions later?
This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or children to be part of, that simple.
Re: Let's get a little louder
#105I am really quite disturbed by all of the people who are responding something along the lines of "this isn't the conference organizer's problem, it's happening outside of the conference." I've seen several such replies, so rather than responding to one, I'm responding to the whole sentiment here. At a conference, there is a lot that goes on during unofficial off-hours, that is really an integral part of the conferenc…
> It sounds like the person in question had a history of > problems, as the organizer said he shouldn't have allowed > this person to come to the conference. Even then, it may be far from clear-cut. We don't know what those problems are. Have there been reports of harassment regarding this guy? If so, that's fairly clear-cut. But maybe this is just kind of a jerk, but hasn't done anything over the line before. While…
> I'm wondering where the rest of the community was when this harassment was going on at the bar. The victim says they were there in a group. So a whole group of conference attendees was just standing around, letting this victim be harassed?
From the post this read like a really uncomfortable /inappropriate conversation between two people, not a violent + public confrontation.
What do you expect other bar patrons to do? Listen in and chase the guy out of the bar because he made inappropriate advances? Do I need to point out that this behavior is fairly common in bars?
Look, not questioning that what the guy did was inappropriate but I think this expectation on the rest of the community is not reasonable.
Re: Let's get a little louder
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
What wpietri said - conference and other event organizers need to not balk at taking action, investigation, etc. This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or two daughters to be part of, that simple.
Original quote: > "the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the responsible party from the conference." Shoot first, ask questions later? This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or children to be part of, that simple.
That's one way to interpret that, but not the only way. You shouldn't complain about someone potentially rushing to judgment at the same time you're rushing to judgment.
Re: Let's get a little louder
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It sounds like the person in question had a history of > problems, as the organizer said he shouldn't have allowed > this person to come to the conference. Even then, it may be far from clear-cut. We don't know what those problems are. Have there been reports of harassment regarding this guy? If so, that's fairly clear-cut. But maybe this is just kind of a jerk, but hasn't done anything over the line before. While…
> Even then, it may be far from clear-cut. We don't know what those problems are. Have there been reports of harassment regarding this guy? If so, that's fairly clear-cut. But maybe this is just kind of a jerk, but hasn't done anything over the line before. All of this is idle speculation that is really besides the point. The point is that conferences should have a policy for how to deal with these kinds of situation…
Sure, I perfectly understand how bars work. Like you say, it's totally possible nobody at the bar knew this woman was being harassed. Especially if this guy has plenty of experience being a creep and has gotten good at doing without attracting attention.
What I'm saying, though, is that the people around them at the bar are far more likely to be able to assist than a conference organizer who's not physically there.
"The point is that conferences should have a policy for how to deal with these kinds of situations. Those policies are probably going to depend on a certain amount of judgement from the conference organizer."
I totally agree that there need to be policies. But policies are just words, and they won't get the job done alone.
What will get the job done is looking out for each other. In social situations, particularly bars, we should all be looking out for each other, especially women, since they're disproportionally the ones on the receiving end of predatory/harassing behavior.
If she went to the bar with a group, every single one of them ought to have been looking out for each other. And yes, I've been in scores of similar situations where I and others have looked out for the welfare of others. You don't need to be an obnoxious "white knight" about it; you don't even need to be overt. Creeps tend to look for girls whose friends aren't paying attention.
Example: Your female friend is caught in a conversation with a potential El Creepo. Play dumb and introduce yourself to the guy in a purely friendly way. Heck, maybe buy a round of drinks. Just knowing that somebody noticed him will often nip things in the bud.
Re: Let's get a little louder
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you take a closer look at that Code of Conduct? I'm having trouble finding the part where it says they'll take action over events that happen outside the conference. Event organizers are responsible for events that occur at the event. They are not there to police attendees both at and away from the event.
It says "all attendees are expected to show respect and courtesy to other attendees throughout the conference and at all conference events, whether officially sponsored by PyCon or not." I think that an unofficial meet up for beer would count as a conference event, despite not being officially sponsored by PyCon. There is no need to split hairs here. Unacceptable behavior does not suddenly become acceptable as soon a…
>Unacceptable behavior does not suddenly become acceptable as soon as you walk out the door
Nope, but the sphere of influence of the conference organizer does.
>think that an unofficial meet up for beer would count as a conference event ... >These informal meetups at a bar afterwards are still part of the sphere of events related to the conference.
I suppose so would paying a hooker and taking her back to your room or buying any number of drugs would fall under the convention organizers watchful eye as well? What about cheating on your significant other? After all you wouldn't have done either of those things there if it hadn't been for your attending the conference. While we're extending the conference attenders authority perhaps they should kick out those that don't tip enough at the dinner they have after the conference, or at the bar they went to afterwards.
You are trying to make it seem like splitting hairs, but it is not. The conference organizers only have any 'authority' over the conference and what happens at the conference. You are trying to extend that authority to basically anything that happens between conference attendees at any time or place during the days of the conference.
>we should probably try to do something
This phrase never, ever prefaces the right course of action.
>has been harassing me at other conferences, and I know they are likely to show up to another one, I may ask the organizers to forbid them based on their past behavior, even if it never happened at that particular conference
Sounds like a personal problem. One that should be handled personally, like, oh I don't know, choosing not to attend. You are now attempting to wield unrelated things as weapons against someone. Why stop at the conference, why not petition the airline not to sell this person a ticket? Or the hotel not to rent him a room? Or the rental car company not to loan him a car? After all, something should be done.
In your example, and in the event in the blog post, the group that should be 'doing something' about it is the person impacted by it, not the convention organizers. She walked off. She then tried to escalate her personal problem to others. That is inappropriate behavior as well, and it is asking convention organizers to police the actions of attendees.
Re: Let's get a little louder
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
What wpietri said - conference and other event organizers need to not balk at taking action, investigation, etc. This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or two daughters to be part of, that simple.
Original quote: > "the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the responsible party from the conference." Shoot first, ask questions later? This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or children to be part of, that simple.
> "Shoot first, ask questions later?"
Because that's exactly what I mean. Completely. Totally. Absolutely. Or not.
Re: Let's get a little louder
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even then, it may be far from clear-cut. We don't know what those problems are. Have there been reports of harassment regarding this guy? If so, that's fairly clear-cut. But maybe this is just kind of a jerk, but hasn't done anything over the line before. All of this is idle speculation that is really besides the point. The point is that conferences should have a policy for how to deal with these kinds of situation…
Sure, I perfectly understand how bars work. Like you say, it's totally possible nobody at the bar knew this woman was being harassed. Especially if this guy has plenty of experience being a creep and has gotten good at doing without attracting attention. What I'm saying, though, is that the people around them at the bar are far more likely to be able to assist than a conference organizer who's not physically there. "…
OK, sure. If your response is not "it's not the conference organizers problem" but "we should also try to look out for each other in social situations," I will agree wholeheartedly with that.
Yes, there are things that we should do while we are there in person. And there are things that should be handled at the conference organizer level, if there is someone who has demonstrated unacceptable behavior at the conference. And, of course, there is also the police level, for things that go so far beyond the bounds as to be able to make it to that level.
I was just concerned that a lot of people were saying things like "well, she doesn't have proof, so we should do nothing" or "well, this should be a police matter, so we should do nothing," and I thought that your comment might be along those lines, "the other people in the bar should have done something, so we shouldn't do anything." Sorry for having misinterpreted you, and yes, I agree that we should fight this kind of behavior at all levels.