[Linux-aus] Linux Australia Code of Conduct - revised draft

[Russell Coker]

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011, Paul Shirren <shirro at shirro.com> wrote:
> On 27/11/11 10:08 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
> > http://www.pocruises.com.au/alreadybooked/pages/bookingpassagetermscondit
> > ions.aspx
> > 
> > An example of this is the typical contract for a cruise ship.  From the
> > above
> 
> LCA2010/LCA2011 covered the legal side with a couple of paras and a
> bullet list in the Terms and Conditions giving the "Captain" the power
> required. Isn't the Code of Conduct a separate thing.

A large part of the discussion here has been based on the assumption that 
there isn't a separation between T&C and a CoC.

I don't have any objection to having a very short T&C and having a CoC as an 
informative document with no contractual relevance.

> Perhaps the extra
> detail in a policy document like the CoC might help the organisers to
> ensure that matters are handled consistently and correctly. I suspect
> ships have extensive procedure manuals guiding the captain and crew
> despite the terse T&C.

I'm certain that ships have very extensive procedure manuals covering all 
sorts of situations that can arise when out of contact.  But they don't choose 
to publish such things.

I would be surprised if the LCA organisers didn't have some sort of plan for 
such things which isn't public.  Probably not a procedure document but surely 
at least an informal agreement between conference organisers about how to do 
things in a consistent manner.

> I think the draft policy is worthwhile but may be trying to address a
> lot of things and perhaps is more successful in some areas than others.
> For me the weakness is the bullet list items. I think they could be
> expanded as a two or three word description leaves some things unclear
> unless you have a lot of context. Previous online discussions have shown
> items like "unwanted photography" are not universally understood. The
> other shorter policies have a much easier job to do and I think they do
> it better as a result.

I'm not convinced that "unwanted photography" is misunderstood.  It seems to 
me that some people believe that any conference policy against harassment etc 
is an infringement on their rights that should be opposed at every turn.

What has been discussed in terms of restrictions on photography is apparently 
similar to the laws in some countries, so it's not as if it's something that 
can't get accepted by a parliament/congress or understood by millions of 
citizens of a country.

One example of photography issues that has been cited was when women gave the 
bird in the direction of the photographer as the last ditch effort at opting 
out of a photograph.  It seems to me that when every effort at communication 
less than giving the bird has been rejected the problem is not one of 
understanding but of being willing to accept disagreement.

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/