[Linux-aus] Some Anti-Harassment Policies considered harmful

[Anestis Kozakis]

On 19 February 2011 22:28, Simon Lyall <simon at darkmere.gen.nz> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2011, Anestis Kozakis wrote:
>> Anyone who answers no has an icon of a camera with a red circle and a
>> line through it on their badge.
> [..]
>> If someone violates policy, the organisers have the right to demand
>> the photo be removed.  If the photographer doesn't agree, the
>> camera/device is confiscated by the organisers (with the assistance of
>> the security guards), the photograph deleted, and the photographer
>> banned from the next three conferences hosted/sponsored by Linux
>> Australia.  The photographer has no avenue to sue as he/she signed the
>> agreement.
>
> Exactly what is the point here? Some people don't want to be photoed and
> photographing those people against their wishes might come under the
> harassment policies, especially if it is done in a overt manner[1]

The point is protecting the rights of the attendees.

> However I think the suggested policy above is going a little too far. The
> most practical problem would be that a little stamp on a person's badge is
> not going to be viable more than a couple of metres away (and straight
> on). So anyone taking crowd, group, angled or action photographs is not
> going to be able to check badges before going ahead.
>
> There are a bunch of other objections too. I really can't believe we are
> discussing a policy that involves tacking a person, holding them down and
> deleting their data before banning them just for taking a photograph[2].

I never said anything about tackling the person.  Please tell me where
I said that!

As I said, this can be modified as seen fit.  This is just something
that came to me.  I've mulled it over for a few days, and I can't see
the bad side personally.  Security Guards are trained to handle
situations like this, but if someone refuses to do the right thing, as
per the agreement they signed when it is pointed out to them by the
organisers, that is when the Security Guards are asked to step in.

But, I really don't see many people refusing to do the right thing
after it is pointed out to them.

> [1] For many it is the act of being photographed rather than the existence
> of the photograph that seems to be the problem.
>
> [2] Seriously people, going into a mall, train station or central city
> street one day. Looks around and count the cameras looking at you.
>
> --
> Simon Lyall  |  Very Busy  |  Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/

-- 
Anestis Kozakis | kenosti at gmail.com | http://www.akozakis.id.au/