Re: [guadec-list] anti-harassment policy

[Alexandre Franke <alexandre franke gmail com>]

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 srcf ucam org> wrote:
> I'm uncomfortable attending a conference run by people who feel
> uncomfortable with having such a policy. Such policies have proven more
> effective than generic "Be friendly" policies in creating an atmosphere
> of safety, and despite frequent claims that they'll result in a chilling
> effect there's been no evidence of that whatsoever.
>
> I've been to five conferences so far this year. All have had a strong
> anti-harassment policy. People have complained about the lack of tea.
> People have complained about the distance from an airport. People have
> complained about having a rail freight line running through the
> convention centre. I have heard *no* complaints about the code of
> conduct. I have seen nobody's speech stifled. I have seen no false
> complaints made.

Have you been to FOSDEM?

Have there been complaints about the FOSDEM policy not being enough or
people boycotting the FOSDEM because of the lack of a stronger policy?

> Given that many large conferences (including OSCON, LCA, the OpenStack
> summit and every Linux Foundation event) with a cumulative total of
> thousands of attendees have implemented such policies, if chilling
> effects were likely shouldn't we have seen complaints already?

You're using an argument that's been rightfully dismissed when used
the other way around. "If harassment was such a big problem, I would
have heard about it".

When people get uncomfortable (be it because they've been harassed or
because they feel oppressed by a policy), it is not reasonnable to
expect them to talk openly about it.

-- 
Alexandre Franke