 |
 |
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Tim Spalding <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I'd support removing or somehow couching language about any organizer, > including any volunteer, immediately ending a talk. > > All the other sanctions seem to involve the likelihood of deliberation > involving some time and multiple people, and some possibility of a > misunderstanding being cleared up. I don't think a single volunteer—who, in > theory, is granted the power to ban someone for life!—is going to ban > someone or refuse to post a talk online without thinking about it for a > while and involving other organizers. I disagree with this proposal. Code4lib by its nature has backchannels in which collective deliberation and decision can happen somewhat instantaneously. If a talk is deeply offensive, in, say, the first two minutes, I would want to put a stop to it. > I propose that the right reaction to an offensive talk is for people to > walk out of it while it's going on, and to deal with any sanctions required > AFTER the talk is over, when there's time and space to get the decision > right. This presumes those offended are uncomfortable enough to walk out. I find this assumption deeply problematic. Mark