4 ms·

Much as I'm glad to see something along these lines, I'm a little taken aback that it took this long to publish. Even the original post refers to "last Oscon,"

• kscaldef 15y ago
  This OSCON is the first (that I know of) where speakers started withdrawing their talks over the lack of a policy.
  • pyre 15y ago
    That somehow seems worse. It took community pressure from the speakers to get O'Reilly to have some sort of a policy against harassment/stalking/offensive behavior?
    • yardie 15y ago
      You can sort of see why. Some of the commenters in this post equate having a modicum of decency to, "they're takin' our freedoms!". I'm sure the OSCON staff tried to ignore the situation and not assume it was a big deal until it became a big deal.
    • dfxm12 15y ago
      I get your point, and I understand why this happened, but before recent events, O'Reilly's viewpoint was probably: Why would O'Reilly think it needs to have policies outlawing unprofessional and possibly illegal behavior in a professional conference?
      • jimwise 15y ago
        Yes -- one could argue this opens the door for other bad behavior at OSCon, since it's not on the (new) list of things not to do. That's the problem with putting these things in writing -- the more rules you write down, the stronger the impression that whatever's not on the list isn't against the rules.
        • pyre 15y ago
          > one could argue this opens the door for other bad > behavior at OSCon It's already been happening though. It's not like leaving it out of writing preventing incidents from happening.
  • vanadium 15y ago
    It was done largely in solidarity with Noirin Plunkett, Director and Executive VP at the Apache Software Foundation, who had to deal with harassment at OSCON and physical assault at ApacheCon: http://blog.nerdchic.net/archives/705/ http://blog.nerdchic.net/archives/705/
    • tzs 15y ago
      Has this alleged assault been proven? I don't recall reading about any charges being filed. Based on her original blogging about the alleged incident, I suspect we are not getting the full story.
      • rbanffy 15y ago
        This implied accusation of the victim to be, somehow, the cause of the misconduct (as in "you can't expect to be dressed like this and not attract unwanted attention") is one of the reasons such attacks are sometimes not reported. Imagine if someone breaks into your home and steals your TV and, when you file the report at the police station, the cops implies that, by having a simple lock, you actually invited people in to steal your TV.
        • tzs 15y ago
          There's a big difference between dressing suggestively and going around at a drunk party touching a bunch of men intimately, and then moving off with a group to a restaurant and continuing to drink and touch people.
          • rbanffy 15y ago
            And that's what I said about implying the victim, somehow, caused the abuse, that the victim actually wanted to be abused.
            • tzs 15y ago
              When you go around actually touching people intimately, you are not a victim nor abused if some of them interpret that as you wanting to be touched back and act on that. It only becomes abuse if they don't back off if you tell them to stop at that point.