…onal information disclosure / public name and shame
- Loading branch information
| @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ This procedure has been adopted from the Ada Initiative's guide titled "[Confere | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Keep in mind that all conference staff will be wearing a conference t-shirt/button with the word “STAFF” on it (or otherwise clearly marked as staff). The staff will also be prepared to handle the incident. All of our staff are informed of the [code of conduct policy](/2013/about/code-of-conduct/) and guide for handling harassment at the conference. *There will be a mandatory staff meeting onsite at the conference when this will be reiterated as well.* | ||
|
|
||
| 2. Report the harassment incident (preferably in writing) to a conference staff member - all reports are confidential. | ||
| 2. Report the harassment incident (preferably in writing) to a conference staff member - all reports are confidential, please do not disclose public information about the incident until the staff have had sufficient time in which to address the situation. | ||
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
steviesteveo
|
||
|
|
||
| When reporting the event to staff, try to gather as much information as available, but do not interview people about the incident - Staff will assist you in writing the report/collecting information. | ||
|
|
||
| @@ -18,4 +18,6 @@ The staff is well informed on how to deal with the incident and how to further p | ||
|
|
||
| 3. If everyone is presently physically safe, involve law enforcement or security only at a victim's request. If you do feel your safety in jeopardy please do not hesitate to contact local law enforcement by dialing 911. If you do not have a cell phone, you can use any hotel phone or simply ask a staff member. | ||
|
|
||
| **Note**: Public shaming can be counter-productive to building a strong community. PyCon does not condone nor participate in such actions out of respect. | ||
This comment has been minimized.
dannguyen
|
||
|
|
||
| A listing of [PyCon staff is located here](/2013/about/staff/), including contact phone numbers. If at all possible, all reports should be made directly to [Ewa Jodlowska](mailto:ewa@python.org) (Event Coordinator) or [Jesse Noller](mailto:jnoller@python.org) (PyCon Chair). | ||
| @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ Give accused attendees a place to appeal to if there is one, but in the meantime | ||
|
|
||
| It is very important how we deal with the incident publicly. Our policy is to make sure that everyone aware of the initial incident is also made aware that it is not according to policy and that official action has been taken - while still respecting the privacy of individual attendees. When speaking to individuals (those who are aware of the incident, but were not involved with the incident) about the incident it is a good idea to keep the details out. | ||
|
|
||
| Depending on the incident, the conference chair or his designate may decide to make one or more public announcements. If necessary, this will be done with a short announcement either during the plenary and/or through other channels. No one other than the conference chair or someone delegated authority from the conference chair should make any announcements. | ||
| Depending on the incident, the conference chair or his designate may decide to make one or more public announcements. If necessary, this will be done with a short announcement either during the plenary and/or through other channels. No one other than the conference chair or someone delegated authority from the conference chair should make any announcements. No personal information about either party will be disclosed as part of this process. | ||
This comment has been minimized.
agentultra
|
||
|
|
||
| If some attendees were angered by the incident, it is best to apologize to them that the incident occurred to begin with. If there are residual hard feelings, suggest to them to write an email to the conference chair or to the event coordinator. It will be dealt with accordingly. | ||
|
|
||
90 comments
on commit 500a3d2
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
1+ |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Perhaps that should be reworded to be more gender inclusive:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Or just make it neutral: Depending on the incident, the conference chair, or designate, may decide... |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
done |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
+1 Public shaming brought public shame to us all. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Great decision, now this is professional :) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
+1 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Good work, Jesse. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
A fair addition. I note that it only requires that an incident be reported before publicizing, not that incidents not be publicized. I like it. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
It would be quite nice if, after the event, organizers could make an anonymized summary of what general things happened and how PyCon dealt with them. If everything is kept hush hush I think it means whatever learning happened about specific incidences is limited to those who were directly involved. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
We do; see the pycon blog Ian
…On Mar 21, 2013, at 8:21 AM, Ian Bicking ***@***.*** wrote:
It would be quite nice if, after the event, organizers could make an anonymized summary of what general things happened and how PyCon dealt with them. If everything is kept hush hush I think it means whatever learning happened about specific incidences is limited to those who were directly involved.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I'd love to see a way people can easily report incidents where they don't feel like they are in a position to confront in a private manner and it's during the middle of a presentation. I understand that it's easy to see this incident as an example of attempting to shame, but I see it as an attempt to report. I'd have no idea how to report otherwise during the presentation and with all of the information needed for the team members to respond. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This change seems to be designed specifically to make it harder to complain, and easier for a small group of people to cover up abuse. It reminds me of the "roach motel" dark pattern. Soon: "to complain publicly about any PyCon behavior, send a notarized statement from three different witnesses to our P.O. Box..." |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@hurleyit, are you saying we need a PyCon 911 system? There seems to be at least one PyCon Staff member (if not more) at all events. Also, if I understand correctly -- incidents don't have to be reported in real time. We don't need to build a police state at PyCon IMHO. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@killerswan, are you implying that PyCon covers up incidents? This was my first PyCon and it appears from the outside that things are trying to be done in the most transparent of ways while continuing privacy for all parties involved. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
To call it a police state is a bit much. But people could easily have anxiety disorders that make it hard to directly approach someone. Under this, they have no recourse but to leave the talk in order to get behavior that is against the code of conduct to stop. That's ridiculous. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@killerswan This change is designed to prevent mindless internet witch-hunts when things can be handled in much more responsible ways. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I'm with @hurleyit - There should be a way to report people without disrupting the entire conference for you. Most sports stadiums in the US now have ways to report rowdy fans over SMS. It could be as simple as a separate twitter account that you tweet at, it autofollows for 10-15 minutes, and then the reporter can DM images or details. Gives a public record (the initial "@pyconhelp hey, want to report a code of conduct violation") while offering a channel to privately share identifying information. Or someone could hack something together using Twilio or whatever. It's not a huge necessity, but it might make it easier to report in a way that's both transparent & fair to the reported... Just an idea. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@sujal, nice idea -- however it makes me wonder if we're over engineering a solution. From the outside, there appears to be just a few incidents from the entire conference (based on the blog posts) of many days and 2500+ people from all 50 states and many countries. Are we trying to fix an issue that doesn't exist? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@maestrofjp The issue exists. We already have one bug report and I've read many of them. I'd suggest looking at these incidents like bugs. We need an easy way for people to report bugs as they happen or these things don't get reported until much later and generally in a very public way. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@killerswan that seems like hyperbole to me. This is an attempt by Jessie to make the conference a safe and respectful environment for everyone. This discussion should stay in the realm of the rational for us to actually accomplish safety and security for everyone involved at PyCon. (Which I think is everyone's goal here, especially Jessie's) @jnoller @hurleyit as a bunch of Python hackers, I am sure that we could come up with a system where people can easily report incidents from their seats. :) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@aviraldg The context: half the people in any room are doing things like tweeting pictures of cool stuff they saw at the conference. To have a prohibition on doing the same thing with something bad is odd. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
In all honesty, I have a feeling that most "incidents" can be solved by just saying something. Off color comments and inappropriate jokes happen all the time at the office or in professional settings -- as much as we'd like to think it does not. I'd rather focus on how to we build community. To quote a commenter on a G+ thread - Kathleen Flippen (sorry, thread is marked as limited -- not public): "Perhaps we need to worry less about watching everything we say in a completely paranoid fashion, and working more towards encouraging open dialogue, meaning someone can tell you they find what you said offensive without fear, and you can apologize and not do it again? Maybe I'm just a dreamer? :)" |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@maestrofjp it's possibly over engineered... my buddy here was laughing at me for suggesting anything more complicated than a web form, but I like the transparency of having the initial tweet be public. I don't know how much Pycon needs it. I don't go to many conferences, Pycon included. This issue keeps coming up, though, and it might be a fun way to build something to help. That's all. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@maestrofjp In all honesty, I find that a privileged view. For some people, confronting others uses up a lot of energy and with certain groups, they would always be confronting others. It's also comforting to me to know that I would not be stuck in one of these situations with no way to resolve it that wouldn't open me up to being rude myself or a poor reaction from the person I'm addressing. I mean, look at the things people have written about her as it is. Many of them are misogynistic and horrible. I've had similar happen to me when I try to address it as you say. That's why I prefer to have a third party present during confrontations. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@sujal, I do worry about the possibility of false positives and I guess I do like the concept of "innocent until proven guilty." It is easy to take things out of context especially if you do not know the person. I assume that is why PyCon takes privacy on both parties seriously. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Bingo. Privacy, investigation before assumption
…On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Peter Farrell ***@***.*** wrote:
@sujal, I do worry about the possibility of false positives and I guess I do like the concept of "innocent until proven guilty." It is easy to take things out of context especially if you do not know the person. I assume that is why PyCon takes privacy on both parties seriously.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Well, if you want that, I suggest making it possible for people to privately report incidents while the event is happening through their phones or computers. Otherwise, people who feel like they are being harmed will only be left with a public report option or being forced to suffer through something. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Thank you
…On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Tracy Hurley ***@***.*** wrote:
Well, if you want that, I suggest making it possible for people to privately report incidents while the event is happening through their phones or computers. Otherwise, people who feel like they are being harmed will only be left with a public report option or being forced to suffer through something.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
+1 @jnoller - right on. I do find it interesting that during this comment thread that most of us (including myself) have made the assumption when discussing possible FUTURE incidents that the "offender" is guilty by the shear fact that something was reported. I think this underscores the why investigation needs to take place first in order to get the facts straight. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
iteration++ great to see a community not accepting an "off the shelf" policy and continuing to refine and iterate on it. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
+1 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Good job. Thank you for everything. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
+1 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I would love to see a reporting feature integrated into @lanyrd—or at least the basic emergency contact information displayed—so people will know how to handle these types of situations across different events. Maybe a code of conduct could be added to an event page as well—with one or several boilerplate options available. Just a thought. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I would hope most people would know this, but might it help to let people know that conversations during presentations should be kept to a minimum and at a volume that doesn't disturb those around them? What really got me about this was that the details of the conversation were a bit irrelevant. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I'm only speaking for myself here, but it seems to me that if I am bothered by someone at a conference, and for any reason it is not feasible to confront them assertively, and it is important enough that I cannot just solve the situation by disengaging - then I can leave the room and talk to conference staff. I don't believe that there is a forced choice either to make a public issue first, or just suffer in silence. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
So, because someone else appears to be violating the code of conduct, I need to miss out on the presentation? Really? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
How about we don't make inappropriate jokes out of respect for those attending the conference with us? While I think the incident is rather unfortunate it's an opportunity for the PyCon organizers to take a more pro-active approach to educating the community about what is and is not appropriate behaviour. Better reporting tools are not the answer. We should be educating people. This policy change shames the people who are willing to speak out against this kind of inappropriate behaviour. I myself had to respond to a situation where a male colleague was making disparaging sexist comments at PyCon of all places. I took the more discrete approach and other than ejecting myself from an uncomfortable situation I felt like I achieved nothing by it. I don't want to teach my daughter to program if she's going to be raised in a culture where she is just going to have to be conditioned to report it and deal with it. She shouldn't have to suffer this kind of behaviour in the first place. The PyCon organizers have a great opportunity here to take a positive, instead of an apologist, approach to dealing with this issue. I don't think I will be attending next year if this is how we as a "community" are going to handle these sorts of situations. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@agentultra Like any other behaviour that a community condemns, though, unless these incidents never happen (which we know to be false) there needs to be a policy to deal with them. However I do feel that if a 911/reporting app is required then we've already lost. I haven't been to many conferences in recent years but if the atmosphere necessitates such reporting tools then I'd steer clear. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@daviddoran I've had to sit through presentations where people in the audience were doing stuff like this and worse. Heck, I've had to sit through presentations I'd rather leave because the presenter was doing these sorts of things, but leaving would require inconveniencing more than 10 people as I tried to sneak past them to get out to the aisle and to leave. Most of the time is fine, sure. But it has and will continue to happen. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@hurleyit In a cinema, if someone is making noise you can ask them to quiet down. If they don't, you can step out and talk to the staff. Sure, in an ideal world everyone would be quiet and you'd never miss a minute of a film. But I don't expect the cinema to provide me a "Report A Moviegoer" app and I hope we never feel the need for one. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Which part of this is apologist?
…On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:57 AM, J Kenneth King ***@***.*** wrote:
How about we don't make inappropriate jokes out of respect for those attending the conference with us?
While I think the incident is rather unfortunate it's an opportunity for the PyCon organizers to take a more pro-active approach to educating the community about what is and is not appropriate behaviour.
Better reporting tools are not the answer. We should be educating people. This policy change shames the people who are willing to speak out against this kind of inappropriate behaviour.
I myself had to respond to a situation where a male colleague was making disparaging sexist comments at PyCon of all places. I took the more discrete approach and other than ejecting myself from an uncomfortable situation I felt like I achieved nothing by it. I don't want to teach my daughter to program if she's going to be raised in a culture where she is just going to have to be conditioned to report it and deal with it. She shouldn't have to suffer this kind of behaviour in the first place.
The PyCon organizers have a great opportunity here to take a positive, instead of an apologist, approach to dealing with this issue.
I don't think I will be attending next year if this is how we as a "community" are going to handle these sorts of situations.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@agentultra, I think we can all agree that root of all these social issues occur much earlier in life / schooling / family values / etc. However, it is unfair to think that PyCon can fix people. I agree education is the correct course, but we cannot expect people that make remarks to walk into PyCon with the CoC as a primer and suddenly act professionally. I learned early in young adulthood is that the world can be a nasty place even though I hold a rather idealistic on the world most days. I think the only recourse is for the conference to try their best involving sticky social issues and making everybody aware of the CoC. As we travel down this thread, I do applaud @jnoller and PyCon for trying their hardest and trying their best. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@daviddoran This isn't a cinema. I'm not at conferences for my entertainment. Feel free to not supply one. Don't cry "why is there no diversity" when you don't. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@hurleyit I was replying to your earlier comment above, by the way. That's sad to hear...I haven't attended many conferences the last few years so I'm not acutely aware of how prevalent this behaviour is. In my experience it hasn't been. But, sadly, it appears it's a bigger problem than I thought. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I don't think anyone should be forced to miss presentations, certainly not on account of other people acting foolish or bullying. But it should normally be possible to talk to conference staff briefly about it and then sit back down, if I want someone talked to or kicked out. I would personally only change seats or leave the room if I were very upset, to avoid becoming more upset, because in that case, awkwardly getting up or filling in from slides or videos would be a lesser evil compared to an uncontrolled escalation of the situation. This is just the personal best I can do with the bad situations which unavoidably happen to me from time to time, since I cannot control others. My point is that there are almost always other options in the mixture of talk and disengagement, so that there is not a forced choice between a bruising public blowout and passive endurance. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
It's apologist because you're taking away agency from the attendee who is discomfited and giving it to the PyCon staff. The policy that enforces the privacy of the perpetrator implies shame on the reporter. You are giving license to the PyCon staff to determine whether the event should be mentioned at all.
…On 2013-03-21, at 1:15 PM, Jesse Noller ***@***.*** wrote:
Which part of this is apologist?
On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:57 AM, J Kenneth King ***@***.*** wrote:
> How about we don't make inappropriate jokes out of respect for those attending the conference with us?
>
> While I think the incident is rather unfortunate it's an opportunity for the PyCon organizers to take a more pro-active approach to educating the community about what is and is not appropriate behaviour.
>
> Better reporting tools are not the answer. We should be educating people. This policy change shames the people who are willing to speak out against this kind of inappropriate behaviour.
>
> I myself had to respond to a situation where a male colleague was making disparaging sexist comments at PyCon of all places. I took the more discrete approach and other than ejecting myself from an uncomfortable situation I felt like I achieved nothing by it. I don't want to teach my daughter to program if she's going to be raised in a culture where she is just going to have to be conditioned to report it and deal with it. She shouldn't have to suffer this kind of behaviour in the first place.
>
> The PyCon organizers have a great opportunity here to take a positive, instead of an apologist, approach to dealing with this issue.
>
> I don't think I will be attending next year if this is how we as a "community" are going to handle these sorts of situations.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
We are providing channels that ensure the anonymity and safety to _everyone_
…On Mar 21, 2013, at 10:57 AM, J Kenneth King ***@***.*** wrote:
It's apologist because you're taking away agency from the attendee who is discomfited and giving it to the PyCon staff. The policy that enforces the privacy of the perpetrator implies shame on the reporter. You are giving license to the PyCon staff to determine whether the event should be mentioned at all.
On 2013-03-21, at 1:15 PM, Jesse Noller ***@***.*** wrote:
> Which part of this is apologist?
>
> On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:57 AM, J Kenneth King ***@***.*** wrote:
>
> > How about we don't make inappropriate jokes out of respect for those attending the conference with us?
> >
> > While I think the incident is rather unfortunate it's an opportunity for the PyCon organizers to take a more pro-active approach to educating the community about what is and is not appropriate behaviour.
> >
> > Better reporting tools are not the answer. We should be educating people. This policy change shames the people who are willing to speak out against this kind of inappropriate behaviour.
> >
> > I myself had to respond to a situation where a male colleague was making disparaging sexist comments at PyCon of all places. I took the more discrete approach and other than ejecting myself from an uncomfortable situation I felt like I achieved nothing by it. I don't want to teach my daughter to program if she's going to be raised in a culture where she is just going to have to be conditioned to report it and deal with it. She shouldn't have to suffer this kind of behaviour in the first place.
> >
> > The PyCon organizers have a great opportunity here to take a positive, instead of an apologist, approach to dealing with this issue.
> >
> > I don't think I will be attending next year if this is how we as a "community" are going to handle these sorts of situations.
> >
> > —
> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
> > —
> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Looks like the PyCon staff have a very detailed procedure on what to do
-- it's on the public website too:
https://github.com/python/pycon-code-of-conduct/blob/master/Staff%20Procedure%20for%20incident%20handling.md
J Kenneth King said the following on 03/21/2013 12:57 PM:
It's apologist because you're taking away agency from the attendee who
is discomfited and giving it to the PyCon staff. The policy that
enforces the privacy of the perpetrator implies shame on the reporter.
You are giving license to the PyCon staff to determine whether the
event should be mentioned at all.
##
Peter J. Farrell
OpenBD Steering Committee / Mach-II Lead Developer
http://blog.maestropublishing.com
Identi.ca / Twitter: @maestrofjp
Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents. Send OpenDocument instead! http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
That's not true.
The policy is only protecting the anonymity and safety of the perpetrator.
If the discomfited attendee has a problem with reporting then there's only so much we can do to make it as easy and seamless as possible.
However keeping these events private and discrete does nothing to dissuade the behaviour in the first place.
I actually think that the PyCon staff responded appropriately in the given situation as far as I understand the events that occurred.
However if you want to get more involved in this issue then I don't think you should limit attendees' ability to speak out against these issues as they see fit.
The problem isn't that there are going to be public shaming witch-hunts. The problem is that there are sexist people making inappropriate jokes in public places who don't want to be punished or humiliated for their actions.
…On 2013-03-21, at 1:59 PM, Jesse Noller ***@***.*** wrote:
We are providing channels that ensure the anonymity and safety to _everyone_
On Mar 21, 2013, at 10:57 AM, J Kenneth King ***@***.*** wrote:
> It's apologist because you're taking away agency from the attendee who is discomfited and giving it to the PyCon staff. The policy that enforces the privacy of the perpetrator implies shame on the reporter. You are giving license to the PyCon staff to determine whether the event should be mentioned at all.
>
> On 2013-03-21, at 1:15 PM, Jesse Noller ***@***.*** wrote:
>
> > Which part of this is apologist?
> >
> > On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:57 AM, J Kenneth King ***@***.*** wrote:
> >
> > > How about we don't make inappropriate jokes out of respect for those attending the conference with us?
> > >
> > > While I think the incident is rather unfortunate it's an opportunity for the PyCon organizers to take a more pro-active approach to educating the community about what is and is not appropriate behaviour.
> > >
> > > Better reporting tools are not the answer. We should be educating people. This policy change shames the people who are willing to speak out against this kind of inappropriate behaviour.
> > >
> > > I myself had to respond to a situation where a male colleague was making disparaging sexist comments at PyCon of all places. I took the more discrete approach and other than ejecting myself from an uncomfortable situation I felt like I achieved nothing by it. I don't want to teach my daughter to program if she's going to be raised in a culture where she is just going to have to be conditioned to report it and deal with it. She shouldn't have to suffer this kind of behaviour in the first place.
> > >
> > > The PyCon organizers have a great opportunity here to take a positive, instead of an apologist, approach to dealing with this issue.
> > >
> > > I don't think I will be attending next year if this is how we as a "community" are going to handle these sorts of situations.
> > >
> > > —
> > > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
> > > —
> > > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
> >
> > —
> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
> > —
> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Also, I can think of at least a few cases where leaving one's seat during a presentation might be difficult to impossible:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@agentultra I don't see the apologist line here. Rather, I read it as "We, as a community, want to build a positive and inclusive atmosphere. We believe that this is possible. Incidents and disagreements will happen and we believe that, from experience, it is harmful to all parties to jump to the court of public opinion. The aim is not to silence any injured party or protect any perpetrator." This is just my (optimistic) reading of the code of conduct as an outsider. At the end of the day, no one is under a gag order. The best way to ensure a great atmosphere is to have great people on the ground. It sounds like the PyCon people are doing pretty well and they're just trying to put their experience and thinking into writing. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
David, I do not doubt that Jesse and the PyCon organizers and volunteers have the best of intentions.
It may sound like I am accusing them otherwise but I am not. I am specifically referring to the implications that this policy implies.
It is not helpful in my opinion.
…On 2013-03-21, at 2:20 PM, David Doran ***@***.*** wrote:
@agentultra I don't see the apologist line here. Rather, I read it as "We, as a community, want to build a positive and inclusive atmosphere. We believe that this is possible. Incidents and disagreements will happen and we believe that, from experience, it is harmful to all parties to jump to the court of public opinion. The aim is not to silence any injured party or protect any perpetrator."
This is just my (optimistic) reading of the code of conduct as an outsider. At the end of the day, no one is under a gag order. The best way to ensure a great atmosphere is to have great people on the ground. It sounds like the PyCon people are doing pretty well and they're just trying to put their experience and thinking into writing.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@agentultra No I know you were talking about the policy and not the people. But I just think that "please don't make it public before we can talk" is helpful. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
That's fine. I disagree. I don't think it's any business of the PyCon organizers to tell me how I should respond to a situation that makes me uncomfortable. Their policy of responding to reported events is perfectly acceptable as it is. I've already made my case as to why.
Perhaps they should consult with activists who have more experience with these issues on the policy change before they stick with it.
Personally I can't get behind this. All that means is there will be one less attendee next year. I'm sure that there will be plenty of others who will take my spot.
…On 2013-03-21, at 2:33 PM, David Doran ***@***.*** wrote:
@agentultra No I know you were talking about the policy and not the people. But I just think that "please don't make it public before we can talk" is helpful.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I had someone on twitter offer a suggestion - is there any way we could include some of the reasoning for asking people reporting incidents to keep the information private until staff gets an opportunity to review and address the situation? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Any policy that limits the actions a victim can take to mitigate their abuse (within reason, and without allowing abuse to be conducted in the other direction) is vehemently anti-victim and pro-abuser, and frankly comes across as a way to prevent PR issues for the convention, while not doing anything to help prevent such abuse from occurring in the first place. It's a shame, given that it seems the con did a good job of responding to the event initially. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
We aren't changing the policy: we're clarifying it in such a way as to dissuade public explosions such as we have seen.
We _are_ trying to protect victims by keeping them anonymous, safe and providing channels by which incidents can be reported without fear of recourse or doxxing, or public vilification for speaking out. The point is to make a safe place with safe points of contact to quickly disclose incidents so that victims know they won't be subject to further abuse. Publicly disclosing (naming and shaming) on social media bypasses all safety checks in place and brings means that the victim, organizers and staff become the lightning rod for revenge.
…On Mar 21, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Christopher Genetti ***@***.*** wrote:
Any policy that limits the actions a victim can take to mitigate their abuse (within reason, and without allowing abuse to be conducted in the other direction) is vehemently anti-victim and pro-abuser, and frankly comes across as a way to prevent PR issues for the convention, while not doing anything to help prevent such abuse from occurring in the first place. It's a shame, given that it seems the con did a good job of responding to the event initially.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
If a person is a victim of abuse or harassment, it is certainly up to them with regards to whether or not they would like to talk about it publicly. Certainly many may choose NOT to do so, and these people should of course have their privacy respected; but disallowing someone the option of bringing it to public attention does so much more to protect the behaviors in question than it does to protect a victim. Now, disclosing the identity of someone ELSE who has been abused, without their permission, SHOULD of course be disallowed, as this infringes upon the agency and privacy of the victim, but that is not really what is specified as far as I can tell. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@Draconum In my experience, the vast majority of incidents where one or more parties are offended are not intentional. Often, sincere apologies are offered and the issue can be closed to the mutual satisfaction of all parties. The part that I see the PyCon staff attempting to fill here is that of a mediator. Given that role, it is entirely reasonable to expect they be given a chance to mediate before public accusations are made. Your stance - that "any policy that limits the actions a victim can take to mitigate their abuse ... is vehemently anti-victim and pro-abuser" - seems to imply that the person reporting is right and the person being reported is wrong. "Victim" and "abuser" are words that have very specific connotations associated with them, which may or may not be applicable. I fully believe that the primary mission of PyCon is to provide a safe and inviting venue for all attendees. I think we can all agree that the conversations that are being held at this very moment across social media are not conducive to meeting this goal. What I believe @jnoller and the rest of the staff are doing here is attempting to prevent this from happening again - and that this is entirely within the scope of their responsibilities in that role. Finally... this is on Github. If you fork this and issue a pull request, I can't imagine that it would not be considered and discussed. In the end, we are a community, and the only way problems get solved is when people speak up with a solution. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@lyndsysimon I'm not suggesting that anyone who reports an event is, by definition, always truthful, but I would contend that harassment, both reported and unreported, is far more common and pervasive than fake reports of harassment are. Especially considering the consequences for reporting - the woman who sparked this as a public issue has received a significant degree of violent threats since talking about it publicly, despite it being well established at this point that what's she is saying is true - there is VERY little incentive to make a false report. That said, this all comes across as the conference wanting to make the final determination of whether or not a report is legitimate before allowing someone to come forward in a public forum about it, and expecting a victim of harassment to trust that a conference will always make that call in their favor seems suspect; again, this far more serves the needs of the convention (which certainly does not want to deal with a PR issue, or indicate in any way to its attendees that problems may actually occur there) than it does any victim or potential victim, who, you know, may actually want to know what kind of environment to expect when they actually show up there. Keeping reports of what goes on out of the public eye simply hides the problems without really fixing them, and suggests that attendees who may wish to do things that make others uncomfortable can do so without the concern of their employers finding out about it, or, heaven forbid, the all-feared "raging feminists" people like to talk about. What also seems suspect is the degree to which people are quick to denounce such terms as "victim" or "abuser" because they suggest that any sort of abuse may have occurred. It seems dismissive; almost like putting one's head in the sand or covering ears because one doesn't wish to confront misconduct or acknowledge that it occurs within one's own community. This is part of the problem - without publicly acknowledging that misconduct does occur, it becomes especially difficult to eradicate. Indeed, how do you get rid of a problem that you don't have in the first place? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
All issues which occurred at pycon had public disclosure via the pycon blog.
…On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Christopher Genetti ***@***.*** wrote:
@lyndsysimon I'm not suggesting that anyone who reports an event is, by definition, always truthful, but I would contend that harassment, both reported and unreported, is far more common and pervasive than fake reports of harassment are. Especially considering the consequences for reporting - the woman who sparked this as a public issue has received a significant degree of violent threats since talking about it publicly, despite it being well established at this point that what's she is saying is true - there is VERY little incentive to make a false report.
That said, this all comes across as the conference wanting to make the final determination of whether or not a report is legitimate before allowing someone to come forward in a public forum about it, and expecting a victim of harassment to trust that a conference will always make that call in their favor seems suspect; again, this far more serves the needs of the convention (which certainly does not want to deal with a PR issue, or indicate in any way to its attendees that problems may actually occur there) than it does any victim or potential victim, who, you know, may actually want to know what kind of environment to expect when they actually show up there. Keeping reports of what goes on out of the public eye simply hides the problems without really fixing them, and suggests that attendees who may wish to do things that make others uncomfortable can do so without the concern of their employers finding out about it, or, heaven forbid, the all-feared "raging feminists" pe ople like to talk about.
What also seems suspect is the degree to which people are quick to denounce such terms as "victim" or "abuser" because they suggest that any sort of abuse may have occurred. It seems dismissive; almost like putting one's head in the sand or covering ears because one doesn't wish to confront misconduct or acknowledge that it occurs within one's own community. This is part of the problem - without publicly acknowledging that misconduct does occur, it becomes especially difficult to eradicate. Indeed, how do you get rid of a problem that you don't have in the first place?
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@jnoller Which, according to the proposed clarification at hand, seems like it might only happen if the conference itself determines that it is necessary to do so. My point is that it's not the conferences' call. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
+1 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@Draconum Not only that, but it fits the patterns people, especially women, often face when trying to deal with these issues, patterns that often end up perpetuating the status quo. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@Draconum Even if we discount the possibility of malice, there are still too many ways for things to go wrong. Identities can be mistaken, memories can be faulty, definitions can be unreasonable, evaluations of the situation can be based on incomplete information: I could go on. That's why there's a legitimate need for an independent review by an outside party. This can indeed be difficult for some people, but that doesn't mean it can be allowed to slide: indeed, it only makes it more important that reviews be done. There are three basic questions that need to be answered in order: whether wrong was done, whether it was done by the person reported, and what actions are appropriate and necessary in light of what was done. In all but the most egregious cases, the various parties to the incident are simply too close to it to be qualified to decide all three of these unilaterally. In cases egregious enough that we might decide one party to the incident can decide some of these questions unilaterally, the very nature of what was done renders those same parties even less qualified to decide the others. That's why, in cases of actual torts and crimes, we use courts for review. For workplaces and other matters within formalized groups of people, review boards exist to serve similar functions. The same should hold true here. Public shaming is a powerful thing, and contrary to what some say, it is not inherently evil. Some people really do need the threat of shaming to keep them in line, and some people really do need to be shamed for things they have done. But its power makes it dangerous, and malice is not the only danger scenario. That's why there need to be safeguards. This proposal isn't perfect -there needs to be more detail on the review process- but it's a step in the right direction. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Only that's not what the policy says. It asks people reporting a Code of Conduct violation contact staff first. That's all - no more, no less. If the abused party then feels the need to rally community support, then there is no prohibition from doing so. In my eyes, this is very Pythonic - we don't have private members of classes because "we're all adults here". The same concept applies. PyCon staff is asking for an opportunity to attempt to resolve any potential issues among peers. Nothing requires that all incidents must be reported, and nothing prevents the injured party from whatever they want afterwards if they do report. As for my own opinion, I support @jnoller's modification wholeheartedly and believe it might be helpful to have additional input from other members of the community. The intention is certainly not to limit the recourse of individuals being harassed, and if that can be clarified - it should be. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
How would this policy change apply to, for instance, an incident where a keynote speaker had inappropriate sexual material in their slides? Would people be allowed to take pics of the slide, tweet them, or blog about the incident, or would this policy change have a chilling effect on that? If people were to tweet/blog about it publicly, who do you think would be most vilified and attacked for their behaviour: the speaker who showed the slides in contravention of the policy, or the people who tweeted/blogged about it in contravention of the policy? Another question: What would be the effect of this policy if PyCon weren't responding well to incidents, but instead hushing them up or dismissing them out of hand? I'm not saying you would, but "don't talk about it publicly, we'll deal with it" requires a massive amount of trust to work. PyCon may be deserving of that trust, but the tech community at large isn't, at this stage. How will a potential attendee (perhaps one new to PyCon and Python) know whether to trust you more than the tech community at large? And what effect will this have on other organisations who clone your policy in future? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@lyndsysimon I would say, then, that the verbiage could probably use a bit more work if it's not intended to prevent or discourage speaking out by a victim. It certainly came across that way to me, and I am not the only one. That alone suggests that it's not entirely clear. Obviously this is not a committed/effective change and still in progress, so there is still some time for that to occur; and I apologize if I'm not coming across as being constructive here, or misunderstanding intentions (though, certainly, intention is typically difficult to ascertain in many situations, in the first place), but I'm simply concerned that PR or other concerns are being placed above those of the attendees and hope to ensure that is not actually the case. I think it is very GOOD, to be certain, that conference staff are provided training in the dealing with these situations, and that training appears to have been helpful in the diffusing of the situation that sparked this whole conversation, at least on-site. I think that does show that the conference is working towards making its space safe, and that's obviously something I like to see. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@Skud what you're saying is essentially my concern, as well - not every conference or convention actually has procedures in place that appear to be as developed as those at PyCon seem to be, and saying "we'll take care of it, no need to alert anybody else about this matter" does seem to require a great leap of faith on the part of a victim. It's grand that, in this particular case, it was dealt with well by the convention - something that the person bringing all of this up does mention in detail - but that has, historically, not always been true in every situation, at every conference. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@thespooniest I don't really disagree with you, for the most part. Any situation like this is going to be tricky for all parties, and it may well be, for all I know, that PyCon is the party best equipped to diffuse them. My issue is still that discouraging the public reporting of one's experiences has the (perhaps unintended) effect of reducing the visibility/awareness of negative events that occur, and it's the public awareness/backlash that may actually discourage others from engaging in similar behavior. And it's been pointed out by @lyndsysimon that the intention here isn't to discourage public reporting of one's experiences, but that is apparently something that is not yet clear based on the current proposed wording, in my opinion. Perhaps I'm not being helpful in that I don't have a re-wording to propose, but hopefully my and others' concerns will better inform the final outcome of any changes or clarifications made to the policy. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
It's really too bad people don't have the common decency to learn to work things out with each other. Short of a really serious issue anyway. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
One of the reasons women don't always complain about these incidents is that it gets very wearing for them continually having to wear the mantle of educator, since these situation appear to arise in boundless number. Given the strength of the misogynist camp it's hardly surprising that women are reluctant to speak up.
S
On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:16 AM, Tracy Hurley wrote:
@maestrofjp In all honesty, I find that a privileged view. For some people, confronting others uses up a lot of energy and with certain groups, they would always be confronting others. It's also comforting to me to know that I would not be stuck in one of these situations with no way to resolve it that wouldn't open me up to being rude myself or a poor reaction from the person I'm addressing. I mean, look at the things people have written about her as it is. Many of them are misogynistic and horrible. I've had similar happen to me when I try to address it as you say. That's why I prefer to have a third party present during confrontations.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
## Steve Holden steve@holdenweb.com +1 571 484 6266 @holdenweb
Python classes (and much more) through the web http://oreillyschool.com/
Conferences and technical event management at http://theopenbastion.com/
Next event: ApacheCon NA 2013: Feb 26-28 http://na.apachecon.com/
Community events: Barcamp Feb 24 Hackathon Feb 25 Development Mar 1/2
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Well, how about "the accusation might be incorrect"? If you need more than that, you aren't sufficiently concerned about confidentiality.
S
On Mar 21, 2013, at 11:54 AM, Lyndsy Simon wrote:
I had someone on twitter offer a suggestion - is there any way we could include some of the reasoning for asking people reporting incidents to keep the information private until staff gets an opportunity to review and address the situation?
https://twitter.com/lastnora/status/314802287753195520
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
## Steve Holden steve@holdenweb.com +1 571 484 6266 @holdenweb
Python classes (and much more) through the web http://oreillyschool.com/
Conferences and technical event management at http://theopenbastion.com/
Next event: ApacheCon NA 2013: Feb 26-28 http://na.apachecon.com/
Community events: Barcamp Feb 24 Hackathon Feb 25 Development Mar 1/2
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I doubt very much that "the conference" intends to proscribe the actions of someone raising a complaint. It's perfectly reasonable to ASK complainants that they not escalate the situation until it can be considered.
Someone making a complaint can do what they want (and Adria whatsername did, and was vilified for it). The conference, however, will maintain the privacy of all parties.
S
On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:57 PM, Christopher Genetti wrote:
@jnoller Which, according to the proposed clarification at hand, seems like it might only happen if the conference itself determines that it is necessary to do so. My point is that it's not the conferences' call.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
## Steve Holden steve@holdenweb.com +1 571 484 6266 @holdenweb
Python classes (and much more) through the web http://oreillyschool.com/
Conferences and technical event management at http://theopenbastion.com/
Next event: ApacheCon NA 2013: Feb 26-28 http://na.apachecon.com/
Community events: Barcamp Feb 24 Hackathon Feb 25 Development Mar 1/2
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Indeed it is. What's the point?
S
On Mar 21, 2013, at 2:45 PM, Nathan Lilienthal wrote:
It's really too bad people don't have the common decency to learn to work things out with each other. Short of a really serious issue anyway.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
## Steve Holden steve@holdenweb.com +1 571 484 6266 @holdenweb
Python classes (and much more) through the web http://oreillyschool.com/
Conferences and technical event management at http://theopenbastion.com/
Next event: ApacheCon NA 2013: Feb 26-28 http://na.apachecon.com/
Community events: Barcamp Feb 24 Hackathon Feb 25 Development Mar 1/2
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@Skud Valid points! Remember, we're using the staff and attendee template from the Ada Initiative and GF wiki; I'm not 100% on the wording, ironically because I wrote them early in the morning after a nice round of harassment. I'd love alternative wording to get the general point across: We want everyone to come to staff first so we can help keep all of us safe - this is as much for people reporting harassment and assault as it is for the unpaid volunteers triaging difficult situations. The goal (I hope, obviously) isn't to have a chilling effect; its to discuss how to get everyone to use the proper channels (e.g. staff) to rapidly deal with situation and especially protecting the names and identities of the reporters. It also, as a side effect, protects the accused of potential false reports from getting posted publicly first and ruining their lives. http://pycon.blogspot.com/2013/03/pycon-response-to-inappropriate.html Those two were the public disclosures done by pycon staff, per our own guidelines. So yes, I believe in responsible disclosure. To everyone else: Thank you for your comment. I will be bowing out of this discussion as I am no longer PyCon chair; my successor will be following up on this discussion and probably do better wording than me based on feedback. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@jnoller Will you still be maintaining this repo? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@kstrauser The repo will in fact live on, I've handed admin rights to my successor, you'll note that the repo is not under my personal name due to this. I hope that we can all discuss proper wording to get to the soul of what I was trying to poorly convey. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@jnoller, my compliments on the thoughtful draft addition, and thanks for your leadership. Two minor copyediting niggles:
Best Regards, |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@rickmoen - can you check out tip? I merged a PR from @pythonchelle today that fixes the verbiage I failed at. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@jnoller: Tip of the Panama hat to @pythonchelle for that rewrite, which certainly looks good to me, FWIW. Best Regards, |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@jnoller Not a failure at all, rather a very important step along the
way to an even better CoC. I hope my edit can be a stepping stone,
too.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
+1
Small positive improvements: http://reinout.vanrees.org/weblog/2011/06/07/lightning-talks.html#making-a-small-positive-difference-steve-holden
S
On Mar 22, 2013, at 2:02 PM, Michelle Rowley wrote:
@jnoller Not a failure at all, rather a very important step along the
way to an even better CoC. I hope my edit can be a stepping stone,
too.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
## Steve Holden steve@holdenweb.com +1 571 484 6266 @holdenweb
Python classes (and much more) through the web http://oreillyschool.com/
Conferences and technical event management at http://theopenbastion.com/
Next event: ApacheCon NA 2013: Feb 26-28 http://na.apachecon.com/
Community events: Barcamp Feb 24 Hackathon Feb 25 Development Mar 1/2
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Looks good. Thank you for the changes to the PyCon Code of Conduct. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Love that this is happening on GitHub. This sets a great example. |


While English isn't my first language, wouldn't "please do not disclose information publicly about the incident" be more correct than "please do not disclose public information about the incident"?