Thanks, Brianna, and sorry for not having been able to answer earlier. I think two things would be useful: being specific about who are the points > of contact. Perhaps this could be part of the intro spiel. Ideally they > would be mentioned by name and be standing at the front of the room to be > visible. >
Yes, I think it's a matter of having a good script. Also of having organisers coming forward. I know I sound like a broken record, but nothing of this works without people saying, in this case "I'm happy to be a point of contact for the Code of Conduct" (or to find talks, to help with the room, etc.) > > Second is having a clear idea about what action those people might take, > when a report is made. The Geek Feminism wiki has a ton of information on > Code of Conducts and a page all about responding to reports: > http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Responding_to_reports > > I suggest this as a starting point, not that everything here should be > adopted wholesale for MPUG. I think it is important that the organisers > "own" the policy in that they have been deliberate in their thinking and > this is actively how they want to approach it. > Yeah. Something I don't want, however, is to make the process too heavy either. This is two hours a month on a purely volunteer basis. So a compromise between effectiveness and expediency must be found. > > Another thing that is cool is encouraging bystanders to speak up if they > hear/see something inappropriate. I went to a talk by Karen Sandler earlier > this year and she had the whole audience practice saying "Dude, that's not > cool". It is pretty cheesy but it's not a bad ice-breaker, and I actually > heard someone at a later talk say it - so it works! I think this is really > great because a lot of small things may not constitute harassment but > nonetheless can make you feel unwelcome. Having someone else speak up like > that feels amazing. And also, it shows that you don't have to perfectly > articulate exactly why something was inappropriate, or berate someone for > what may be an innocent or just thoughtless mistake. > Sure, and that's an exercise I'd enjoy at Pycon. Which is once a year, and where I'd do it once, surrounded by many ( > Dunbar number) strangers. At MPUG, monthly, surrounded by < 30 mostly the same people, I would feel patronised if I were asked to do it a second time. Having said that, "that's not cool" is a good callout. I'll try to edit a mention to the CoC in the mailing list interface today, and I'll keep in mind to ask Pycon people whether they can have an org-agnostic CoC that can just be referenced by anyone. b > > cheers, > Brianna > > > > On 10 March 2015 at 14:34, Huw Davies <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> On 10 Mar 2015, at 1:56 am, Tim Krins <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Huw, >> >> It is probably because the link you clicked on in this email is part of >> the Wiki wording, and the sending email client has include the pipe >> character in the URL it detected. >> >> If you strip out the wiki markdown formatting, you will get >> http://2013.pycon-au.org/register/code_of_conduct , which should link >> you to the article. >> >> >> Thanks to all who pointed this out. Now that I can see it, I very much >> agree with it. >> >> Huw Davies | e-mail: [email protected] >> >> Melbourne | "If soccer was meant to be played in the >> >> Australia | air, the sky would be painted green" >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> melbourne-pug mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug >> >> > > > -- > They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment: > http://modernthings.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > melbourne-pug mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug > >
_______________________________________________ melbourne-pug mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug
