Re: [Ghm-discuss] FOSDEM Dinner
Hello, Thomas Schwinge, on Tue 17 Jan 2017 13:32:42 +0100, wrote: > > If you're interested, drop me a confirmation :-) > > I'll be there! Justus, Samuel? I'm arriving on saturday morning only. Samuel
Re: [Ghm-discuss] My idea for GHM 2017
John Darrington, on Wed 21 Sep 2016 12:37:01 +0200, wrote: > In Europe there are various "Gruppenunterkunft" hostels - places which have > basic accommodation plus a seminar room for smallish conferences. Why don't > we hire such a place for the week-end? Debconf tends to have this kind of arrangement, and it's indeed very fruitful for the various reasons you have mentioned :) Samuel
Re: [Ghm-discuss] The posh talk does not complain with the policy
Alfred M. Szmidt, le Tue 12 Aug 2014 05:06:45 -0400, a écrit : It is not absurd at all, can you explain _what_ is offensive, exactly? Can you make a rational, strict and consistent decision, based on the currently worded policy, that does not change between conference organisers as to what is considered offensive? I'd almost say that offensive is subjective *by definition*, since depending on the people and the situation, something will be considered offensive or not. The policy is there to manage this situation. It is not saying that offense will immediately be followed by exclusion (since one can't even decide simply what is an offense or not). It is saying that people who feel offensed have the right to ask for the origin of the offense to stop, or more *if it does not stop*. Yes, it means limiting freedom of speech, for the sake of respecting people who feel offensed by what happens. But again, it depends on the situation. With some careful forewords, something that could be considered offensive will not be. Yes, that's all blurry and irrational, but that makes sense, for human relations; they're not programs with non-ambiguous meaning. Samuel
Re: [Ghm-discuss] The posh talk does not complain with the policy
Luca Saiu, le Tue 12 Aug 2014 11:22:07 +0200, a écrit : * knowing some marvelous sexual technique *is* technical information, and educating people about it is good for society. Preventing people from disclosing such information is morally unacceptable. Sure. But the GHM is not supposed to be about that, so people who feel they would be offensed by such a talk should be able to think that they can come to GHM without any risk of being offensed by the talks there. Samuel
Re: [Ghm-discuss] The posh talk does not complain with the policy
Alfred M. Szmidt, le Tue 12 Aug 2014 05:45:33 -0400, a écrit : Yes, that's all blurry and irrational, but that makes sense, for human relations; they're not programs with non-ambiguous meaning. Then it would be simpler, more rational and less blurry, to simply write: Be Nice, if you are not nice Bobcats will come for you. [[Picture of a Bobcat]] That alone says more than the current wording. I wouldn't say more. But I agree that it basically means the same in the end. I'd however avoid the joke about Bobcats, as it could let people think it's not serious after all, while it *is* a serious matter. Samuel
Re: [Ghm-discuss] The posh talk does not complain with the policy
Luca Saiu, le Tue 12 Aug 2014 12:21:54 +0200, a écrit : I'm surprised by all these attempts of avoiding offense at all costs. I've always thought that what counts is the *intent* of the speaker; Err, well, unfortunately, no. Somebody feels offensed by what she/he experiences, not by what was intended. That's why I was talking about careful forewords. Knowing that what you will say can be taken as offensive by some people, forewords can prevent that from happening, and everybody will be fine. If somebody is offended by a remark which was not meant as an attack, too bad: she's wrong. No. She can not change the way she feels. At best what she could think would be I was wrong coming to this event. Which is precisely what we want to avoid. By the way: if something is illegal then it's already prohibited and you don't need any policy for that. Just like a lot of things, yes. But reminding the law is necessary, otherwise it's not effective. Think about selling alcohol to 16yrs is illegal and such signs. There are a lot of laws which are not effective just because nobody knows about them even remotely. Call the cops. AIUI, cops don't come for everything illegal, just things which require physical force. Samuel
Re: [Ghm-discuss] Talk wish list
Hello, Luca Saiu, le Tue 28 May 2013 20:47:36 +0200, a écrit : * A talk about the new GNU/Hurd distribution and/or recent developments (I think Samuel Thibault is working on SATA DDE, for example); I have actually implemented SATA in gnumach for now, because it was really urging, and I didn't want to take the time to work on the disk DDE interface yet. I'll however be glad to come for another talk, notably since there are new nice things to talk about since last time (I might be able to give a joe-user-started-openvpn demo if the current ssl issue gets solved in the meanwhile) Samuel
