Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 21:22 -0600, Stormy Peters wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Joanmarie Diggs
> <joanmarie diggs gmail com> wrote:
> >
> > As a matter of fact, personally I am not jazzed by the entire ending:
> >
> >        Please keep in mind that the GNOME Foundation is not the right
> >        forum to debate whether someone should feel offended or not; you
> >        should simply avoid offending people even if you do not share
> >        their views. These guidelines do not constitute censorship since
> >        you have many other forums and opportunities to say whatever you
> >        wish.
> >
> > It is neither "positive" nor "welcoming" to would-be speakers -- and
> > thus contrasts rather starkly with bullet point 1 under "Guidelines."
> I agree. And it is obviously a reaction and implies that we have problems.
> I also agree with Lefty that it's there for a reason.
> Perhaps we could replace the above text with something like this:
> "If someone in your talk is offended, please try to avoid a
> conversation about whether or not they should be offended. Remember
> our community is very diverse and while we all share a common mission
> to provide a free GNOME desktop to the world, we do not always share
> religions, politics and other views. Focus on the subject of your talk
> and stick to the issues being discussed without making them personal.
> As the speaker, you may have to remind the audience of this. While
> it's hard, do your best to do it in a neutral, non argumentative way.
> Suggest that topics not relevant to GNOME (raised by you or others in
> the audience) be moved to a more appropriate non-GNOME forum. If you
> need help, please contact the GNOME board or GNOME Foundation member.
> But don't worry! These problems do not happen very often - we are just
> trying to help you out if they do. Most audiences are very friendly
> and welcoming of topics about GNOME.
> Please go out and speak about GNOME and enjoy!"

The last paragraph, which I first suggested, was initially very short. I
think it was effective without appearing too important. It's main aim
was to prevent pointless distracting discussion. That's still possible
if we don't turn the paragraph itself into an essay.

It's useless to expand the text so much, attempting to explain the
explanation, with extra explanation, just repeating the core text with
slightly different waffling text. The document should be simple and
meaningful, pointing out simple common sense. Please don't ruin it. 

> Perhaps we could link to a list of skills on how to deal with
> difficult questions as a speaker? I don't know of a page like that,
> but I've been taught a number of ways over the years, so I could put
> one together.

Again, I think that's making too much of it. I don't believe we want our
speakers to read a huge manual on how to behave. We do want to remind
them to be reasonable, and we want attendees to know that we have basic

murrayc murrayc com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]