3 ms·

Exactly. If you're sitting in a restaurant eating with some acquaintances/friends, you shouldn't expect privacy there either. The table next to you can get offe

Exactly. If you're sitting in a restaurant eating with some acquaintances/friends, you shouldn't expect privacy there either. The table next to you can get offended with some random inside joke that includes the words "penis", "boob", or maybe even "yoga pants." No jokes allowed unless you're wrapped in a Faraday cage filled in with sound proof material. None whatsoever.

mistercow 14y ago
That analogy is completely ridiculous. Restaurants are not venues that require customers to agree to a code of conduct barring inappropriate jokes. They're also not the kind of places where people are sitting quietly and near enough each other to hear jokes told quietly.
- marshray 14y ago
  Python conventions are places where people can overhear my conversation, take pictures of me, and publicize them as personal accusations with impunity? I've been to plenty of conferences and I haven't heard of this happening, except to politicians when they forget there are microphones and news reporters around. This is why our society does, in fact, have a separate set of privacy rules for people classified as "public figures". So the rest of us can hang out and chat in comfort by assuming in all probability the absence of a news reporter or papparazi trying to play "gotcha" with a camera and microphone.
  - mistercow 14y ago
    Let's keep the threads of argument separate here. On the one hand, we have the question of whether or not that joke was acceptable in that situation, and in the ancestor comment, danilocampos was arguing that it was not. I tend to agree. Then there is the separate question of whether publicly shaming the person as Richards did was an acceptable response. I certainly do not think it was. But it's a separate issue.
    - marshray 14y ago
      You don't believe in "proportionate response"? The degree of the reaction is completely separate from the degree of the offense? Consider Oritz vs. Swartz.
      - mistercow 14y ago
        I don't understand why you think I don't believe in proportionate response, based on my previous comment. The reaction by Richards was not an official reaction by the organizers of PyCon. If a teenager shoplifts a stereo from a store, and a vigilante witnesses it and shoots him in the head, I think we can all still agree that the teenager was in the wrong. The fact that the vigilante was even more in the wrong doesn't change that.
        marshray 14y ago
        Apologies to all teenagers, I know you're tired of being used to epitomize offenders all the time. I told you you'd regret that whole lawn incident. Because the two offenses aren't separate in the other direction. Teenager [commits offense], vigilante witness shoots offender in the head. Where [offense] is A. shoplifts stereo, vs B. shooting store employees and preparing to shoot innocent bystanders. If (A) the vigilante is a murderer, if (B) he's a hero. So the ethics of the teenager's action (A or B) can be evaluated on its own, but the REaction of the vigilante can only be judged in the context of the teenager's action. The two actions are not mutually independent. One action is independent, but the other is dependent.
- jessaustin 14y ago
  If PyCon is one of these "venues that require customers to agree to a code of conduct barring inappropriate jokes", many people will consider whether it's a venue in which they feel safe.
  - mistercow 14y ago
    Safe? Why would that make anyone feel unsafe?
    - derefr 14y ago
      Conventions--and especially "hallway conversations" at conventions--tend to be one of the places people traditionally have a social more for being "private even when it's not private" (think Las Vegas.) It is a social more of such places for people to treat any conversation happening around them which is not intended for their ears, as if it wasn't happening. Restaurants are another good example of such a place. There are many things I can say to people, which they will themselves appreciate hearing, but which I would feel unsafe saying, say, on the record on a public message board. Usually, if one wants to say these things "in confidence", one doesn't find a truly private space (a closed and sealed room)--one just relies on the social-etiquette confidence of a place like a restaurant.

mistercow 14y ago

That analogy is completely ridiculous. Restaurants are not venues that require customers to agree to a code of conduct barring inappropriate jokes. They're also not the kind of places where people are sitting quietly and near enough each other to hear jokes told quietly.

marshray 14y ago
Python conventions are places where people can overhear my conversation, take pictures of me, and publicize them as personal accusations with impunity? I've been to plenty of conferences and I haven't heard of this happening, except to politicians when they forget there are microphones and news reporters around. This is why our society does, in fact, have a separate set of privacy rules for people classified as "public figures". So the rest of us can hang out and chat in comfort by assuming in all probability the absence of a news reporter or papparazi trying to play "gotcha" with a camera and microphone.
- mistercow 14y ago
  Let's keep the threads of argument separate here. On the one hand, we have the question of whether or not that joke was acceptable in that situation, and in the ancestor comment, danilocampos was arguing that it was not. I tend to agree. Then there is the separate question of whether publicly shaming the person as Richards did was an acceptable response. I certainly do not think it was. But it's a separate issue.
  - marshray 14y ago
    You don't believe in "proportionate response"? The degree of the reaction is completely separate from the degree of the offense? Consider Oritz vs. Swartz.
    - mistercow 14y ago
      I don't understand why you think I don't believe in proportionate response, based on my previous comment. The reaction by Richards was not an official reaction by the organizers of PyCon. If a teenager shoplifts a stereo from a store, and a vigilante witnesses it and shoots him in the head, I think we can all still agree that the teenager was in the wrong. The fact that the vigilante was even more in the wrong doesn't change that.
      - marshray 14y ago
        Apologies to all teenagers, I know you're tired of being used to epitomize offenders all the time. I told you you'd regret that whole lawn incident. Because the two offenses aren't separate in the other direction. Teenager [commits offense], vigilante witness shoots offender in the head. Where [offense] is A. shoplifts stereo, vs B. shooting store employees and preparing to shoot innocent bystanders. If (A) the vigilante is a murderer, if (B) he's a hero. So the ethics of the teenager's action (A or B) can be evaluated on its own, but the REaction of the vigilante can only be judged in the context of the teenager's action. The two actions are not mutually independent. One action is independent, but the other is dependent.
jessaustin 14y ago
If PyCon is one of these "venues that require customers to agree to a code of conduct barring inappropriate jokes", many people will consider whether it's a venue in which they feel safe.
- mistercow 14y ago
  Safe? Why would that make anyone feel unsafe?
  - derefr 14y ago
    Conventions--and especially "hallway conversations" at conventions--tend to be one of the places people traditionally have a social more for being "private even when it's not private" (think Las Vegas.) It is a social more of such places for people to treat any conversation happening around them which is not intended for their ears, as if it wasn't happening. Restaurants are another good example of such a place. There are many things I can say to people, which they will themselves appreciate hearing, but which I would feel unsafe saying, say, on the record on a public message board. Usually, if one wants to say these things "in confidence", one doesn't find a truly private space (a closed and sealed room)--one just relies on the social-etiquette confidence of a place like a restaurant.