30 Oct
2015
30 Oct
'15
4:10 p.m.
Excellent, count me in. Can we fix a meeting on Friday evening? On 30 Oct 2015 15:48, <jurgen.gaeremyn@telenet.be> wrote: > Hey all, > > <tldr;>Summary, idea for action at the end</tldr;> > > I'm seeing two explicit camps here. On the one hand, we've got existing > volunteers (including staff) that are swamped by loads of work, and when > making the cost/benefit (un)conscious analysis end up feeling that they > can't take up yet another task. > On the other hand, there's a group of people that needs to be split up > into 2 groups: (1) people who were a victim of (un)intentional harassment > and (2) people who step up to protect the people who are in the first > group. Both see the need for clarity. > > The clarity is twofold: > (1) Victims of harassment need to know where they can find help or means > to report > (2) Clarity as to what isn't acceptable in our group. > > So there's the obvious: illegal stuff is not acceptable. And immediately > taking legal actions is the way to go if so... (so now we're all gonna call > the cops if we see someone smoking pot?) > > First thing a victim needs, is a safe haven, a place to sound their nasty > experience and hear someone who acknowledges this story. This does not > imply numbly believing all that a person says (as also a victim always > starts from a subjective experience and his/her impression is not always in > line with the intent of the called offenders). > What are typical expectations: > - solve my problem, take corrective actions (eg. thievery) > - report an issue so this can be fixed (isn't this in the open source > spirit?) (eg. non-accessible spaces) > - report an issue so this won't happen to others in the future > > Typically this kind of psycho-social skillset is something not as present > with many developers (just as not that many social workers are great devs, > it's a skill too). > I consider myself skilled in this matter, and would be glad to volunteer > to man a help-point for harassment reporting or minority issues (in FOSDEM, > females are a minority as are people with a handicap, even more than the > traditional ethnical minorities). > > I can imagine there are more (potential) volunteers that would be glad to > step up to man this place for time slots during FOSDEM. Possibly in this > team not all volunteers will be as skilled (but the same goes for the > network team), but I'm convinced that this is a team that can actually grow > through the years. > > This volunteer team should have direct access to key staff, and will only > do this if they judge this as important/acute. > Complaints should be stored (anonymized), these volunteers can take notes. > Staff can evaluate these statistics after the event (and no longer be > surprised about this, now the third year) > > A place where you can talk (and cry) discretely is a good idea. I hope > that is something that could be arranged with the ULB. I'd be glad to > contact the conseiller en prévention to talk about this topic. Psychosocial > concerns is an import topic on corporate safety nowadays... > > The key staff isn't the team that should work on working out procedures - > this isn't their skill set + they already work 25 hours per day to have a > great FOSDEM... > > Putting my money where my mouth is... I'm willing to help on this. > > Grtz, > Jurgen. > > >>>>>>> SUMMARY - PROPOSAL FOR ACTION <<<<<<<< > - Have a room (and phone number?) where someone can report issues. > - Have a new TASK in the volunteers application. > - Have an (anonymized) register of complaints. > - Have a follow-up and procedures. > > ------------------------------ > *Van: *"Emanuil Tolev" <emanuil.tolev@gmail.com> > *Aan: *"Pieter Hintjens" <ph@imatix.com> > *Cc: *"FOSDEM visitors" <fosdem@lists.fosdem.org> > *Verzonden: *Vrijdag 30 oktober 2015 15:25:35 > *Onderwerp: *Re: [FOSDEM] It's time for a Code of Conduct > > On 30 October 2015 at 14:20, Emanuil Tolev <emanuil.tolev@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 30 October 2015 at 14:03, Pieter Hintjens <ph@imatix.com> wrote: >> >> It would be useful to put down a central meeting point for volunteers >> interested in this, so that there's a central place reports can come to, >> and so the volunteer group can organise each day. I'm inclined to suggest >> the desk at K, the only problem with that being that it can be quite >> crowded. But it does have a supply room in the back if immediate private >> conversation is required, and it's close to the staff room for serious >> reports. >> > > Actually apparently there already is a staff member who coordinates this > aspect (see other thread by Johan). Now he's mentioned it I do recall being > told there was one when I last volunteered. Perhaps we can form a more > organised group this year while reporting any incidents to that person, and > working on producing simple and short briefs on what to do in > after-the-fact situations. A conduct hack! > > >> >> Greetings, >> Emanuil >> >>> >>> -Pieter >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.pro> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > On 30/10/15 14:10, Andreia Gaita wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.pro >>> >> <mailto:daniel@pocock.pro>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 30/10/15 13:06, Andreia Gaita wrote: >>> >> > This is not a question of "Why". It's a question of "When". If >>> you're >>> >> > asking why, especially in shocked, appaled or sarcastic tones, >>> you >>> >> > seriously should take it upon yourselves to rethink your >>> attitude >>> >> > towards other people and maybe realize that being an >>> unempathetic >>> >> > asshole might work well when you're chugging beers with your >>> >> mates, but >>> >> > doesn't really help towards making the tech environment a place >>> where >>> >> > everybody can feel safe and supported. >>> >> > >>> >> > You want to know why a code of conduct is needed? Because of >>> you, >>> >> that's >>> >> > why. >>> >> >>> >> You have written about people being unempathetic but I feel this >>> >> conclusion fails to show empathy with the people you are trying to >>> >> convince. You literally conclude with an "us-and-them" posture. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Why would I be empathetic towards people that are being sarcastic and >>> >> dismissive of something that has been clearly shown to be important >>> >> through countless examples and conversations over the years? Why am I >>> >> the one required to be empathetic towards people who apparently don't >>> >> think that this is important because it doesn't happen to them? >>> >> >>> > >>> > Because you obviously care about this and that is the effort that >>> > leaders sometimes have to make when they want to change something. >>> > >>> > Also, because it will show how you would negotiate with people in a >>> > real-life conflict situation, listening to both sides and gaining their >>> > trust, no matter how you feel about it personally. >>> > >>> > At no point was I trying to defend any of the more ridiculous things >>> > that have been said in this discussion. It is not about showing >>> empathy >>> > with such comments but looking behind them to try and work out how to >>> > reach the people who made them. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > >>> > Daniel >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > FOSDEM mailing list >>> > FOSDEM@lists.fosdem.org >>> > https://lists.fosdem.org/listinfo/fosdem >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FOSDEM mailing list >>> FOSDEM@lists.fosdem.org >>> https://lists.fosdem.org/listinfo/fosdem >>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > FOSDEM mailing list > FOSDEM@lists.fosdem.org > https://lists.fosdem.org/listinfo/fosdem > > > _______________________________________________ > FOSDEM mailing list > FOSDEM@lists.fosdem.org > https://lists.fosdem.org/listinfo/fosdem >