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