[Linux-aus] Code of Conduct.. Into the fray, I go again.

Silvia Pfeiffer silvia at silvia-pfeiffer.de
Mon Nov 28 20:20:31 EST 2011

The new CoC clearly excludes material not appropriate to minors. Sure
that applies to any of this stuff, so therefore your "loophole" seems
closed to me.


On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Rob Thomas <xrobau at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ooh, I said to myself, the new CoC is out, I see. Great, lets see if
> they've fixed the loophole that everyone got upset about at LCA2011..
> Um. No.
> The cause of the riot we had on the lca2011 mailing list earlier this
> year was that Mark Pesce's presentation was _not_ sexual (the act of
> sexual intercourse, or implying sexual intercourse). It was EROTIC.
> Thus, it did not violate the CoC, nor the sexual harassment policy.
> So what have you changed?
> - sexual or violent imagery;
> - exclusionary language;
> - exclusionary humour of any kind;
> - language which is not appropriate for an all-ages audience.
> Well, the word 'sexual' is still there. Wasn't the consensus that the
> word 'sexual' be changed to 'erotic'?
> From my perspective, Mark's presentation did not upset me at all. I
> found it enlightening, and humorous. But it upset some people, and
> those people are the ones we need to care about. Those people (to me)
> seem to feel uncomfortable about EROTIC imagery. Shouldn't we just fix
> this properly, once and for all?
> s/sexual/erotic/g
> (Admittedly, Mark's presentation would now impinge LIGHTLY upon the
> 4th point - I think he said fuck once or twice, but you hear more than
> that in a high school playground)
> --Rob
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus

More information about the linux-aus mailing list