Although it is probably unnecessary to make the situation any worse but making any further comments, I'm pretty depressed and disappointed by some things that have been said on the recent interminable thread.
Please consider that the audience of this list is intended to be diverse.
If you're considering saying anything that you suspect might be likely to cause offense, alienate or margnialise some members of the group - please keep it to yourself.
I had an amazing thought provoking time at the trampoline unconference on Saturday and so sent an invitation to all attendees to get involved in MXUG.
If i'd joined the MXUG email group as a result of that invitation and the only representation of the group I'd seen was this recent thread, I would unsubscribe and never consider attending a meeting.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 05:21:13PM +1100, Julian Doherty wrote: > Can we put this all behind us? It's all incredibly off-topic and distracting > for a tech discussion group.
It would be nice to, but without a consensus about what the group considers appropriate behaviour, it will just crop up again in the future. I think we need to settle that first.
Kathryn Andersen -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <http://www.katspace.org> / \ | \_.--.*/ | GenFicCrit mailing list <http://www.katspace.org/gen_fic_crit/> v | ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
How about the Common Man criterion and the Intent criterion?
- Don't do anything that might be reasonably considered to cause offence.
- Don't do anything specifically to cause offence.
Basically boils down to 'think before you speak' and 'don't be an ass.'
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 05:21:13PM +1100, Julian Doherty wrote:
> > Can we put this all behind us? It's all incredibly off-topic and
> distracting
> > for a tech discussion group.
> It would be nice to, but without a consensus about what the group
> considers appropriate behaviour, it will just crop up again in the
> future. I think we need to settle that first.
> Kathryn Andersen
> --
> _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <http://www.katspace.org>
> / \ |
> \_.--.*/ | GenFicCrit mailing list <
> http://www.katspace.org/gen_fic_crit/>
> v |
> ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
> Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
> - Don't do anything that might be reasonably considered to cause offence.
I don't think that offence - in and of itself - is a good criterion by
which to judge communication. Honest communication is not easy; if
you foster an open, honest environment, then people _will_ be offended
from time to time. I think a far better approach would be to agree on
a set of shared values, and evaluate communication on that basis.
To take an example: Kathryn, Mark, Pete, myself and the others who
complained on the previous thread _clearly_ caused offence to some of
the people who thought it was acceptable. I _knew_ in advance that
I'd be causing offence to some people, but I acted in a manner that I
judged appropriate to achieve my values.
If you go your entire life without saying something that might be
reasonably considered to cause offence, you're probably not saying
much of great import.
> - Don't do anything specifically to cause offence.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:49:34AM -0700, Duncan Bayne wrote:
> > - Don't do anything that might be reasonably considered to cause offence.
> I don't think that offence - in and of itself - is a good criterion by > which to judge communication. Honest communication is not easy; if > you foster an open, honest environment, then people _will_ be offended > from time to time. I think a far better approach would be to agree on > a set of shared values, and evaluate communication on that basis.
Yes. I think it's more helpful to state such a thing in a positive rather than a negative way. Another list I'm on has just two very simple rules: "Be polite. Be helpful."
Kathryn Andersen -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <http://www.katspace.org> / \ | \_.--.*/ | GenFicCrit mailing list <http://www.katspace.org/gen_fic_crit/> v | ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:49:34AM -0700, Duncan Bayne wrote:
>>> - Don't do anything that might be reasonably considered to cause >>> offence.
>> I don't think that offence - in and of itself - is a good criterion >> by >> which to judge communication. Honest communication is not easy; if >> you foster an open, honest environment, then people _will_ be >> offended >> from time to time. I think a far better approach would be to agree >> on >> a set of shared values, and evaluate communication on that basis.
> Yes. I think it's more helpful to state such a thing in a positive > rather than a negative way. Another list I'm on has just two very > simple rules: "Be polite. Be helpful."
Do you think that would have been helpful here?
I would hope that at least a draft is a "solved" problem - is there something that we can lift from somewhere where:
i) we would have been able to cite the policy in this case? ii) the group that uses it appears to have established a positive environment?
A good yardstick to my mind is: "don't say anything that you wouldn't be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall.".
What about also creating mxug-talk, so that mxug can be kept entirely technical? The same kind of guidelines should apply, of course, but it would give people who wanted to a way of opting into/out of the more off-topic discussions the ability to do so.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:04:18PM +1100, Tobias Sargeant wrote:
> A good yardstick to my mind is: "don't say anything that you wouldn't > be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall.".
Good one! I like that.
> What about also creating mxug-talk, so that mxug can be kept entirely > technical? The same kind of guidelines should apply, of course, but it > would give people who wanted to a way of opting into/out of the more > off-topic discussions the ability to do so.
I don't really think that's needed, though.
Kathryn Andersen -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <http://www.katspace.org> / \ | \_.--.*/ | GenFicCrit mailing list <http://www.katspace.org/gen_fic_crit/> v | ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
> On 27/10/2009, at 10:54 PM, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:04:18PM +1100, Tobias Sargeant wrote:
> >> A good yardstick to my mind is: "don't say anything that you wouldn't > >> be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall.".
> > Good one! I like that.
> +1
+1
I assume we want this group's members to be diverse and for the content to have intellectual value.
It can't be hard to classify something as possibly offensive, and to re-express it without losing intellectual content. Some kind of filter (neural networks?) and text modifier (markov chains?) would be ideal. But until someone creates that, let's just do what we do at work and uni and the Bourke st. mall.
I'd still like something more concrete - without the context of this
discussion, the meaning behind "don't say anything that you wouldn't
be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall" could easily be
lost. I know plenty of people who have t-shirts they wear down Bourke
St. mall, that would be inappropriate for quoting here :) And there
are always proponents of any cause who are quite keen to raise it out
of any context. (And for all the "tech mailing list" comments, MXUG
has a fairly wide-ranging charter, so the actual context is somewhat
less clear than say on uk.rec.models.rail! )
Anyway, while I doubt we could produce (or would want to produce?) a
prescriptive set of rules, we could at least put together some
guidelines, and a hefty reading list :)
Or, as Steve suggested, we could see if we can steal^H^H^H^H^H
repurpose one from elsewhere.
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Duana Stanley <strongcof...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/10/27 Steve Hayes <steve.ha...@cogentconsulting.com.au>
>> On 27/10/2009, at 10:54 PM, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:04:18PM +1100, Tobias Sargeant wrote:
>> >> A good yardstick to my mind is: "don't say anything that you wouldn't
>> >> be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall.".
>> > Good one! I like that.
>> +1
> +1
> I assume we want this group's members to be diverse and for the content to
> have intellectual value.
> It can't be hard to classify something as possibly offensive, and to
> re-express it without losing intellectual content. Some kind of filter
> (neural networks?) and text modifier (markov chains?) would be ideal. But
> until someone creates that, let's just do what we do at work and uni and the
> Bourke st. mall.
-- Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com
kornys on twitter/fb/gtalk/gwave www.sietsma.com/korny "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part
that wonders what the part that isn't thinking
isn't thinking of"
In Melbourne CBD I seen lots of T-shirts
that were far more "graphical" than the infamous ASCII-art
not to mention the "slogans" they contain...
(not to say that I'd wear one myself though ;)
Also there is such thing as context
Placards (or t-shirts$ that some folks might have during a street
comedy festival or some "variety" festival or "parade" mighty not be
something they'd have during normal business...
cheers®ards,
Oleg Kiorsak
On 28/10/2009, at 7:38 AM, Korny Sietsma <ko...@sietsma.com> wrote:
> I'd still like something more concrete - without the context of this
> discussion, the meaning behind "don't say anything that you wouldn't
> be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall" could easily be
> lost. I know plenty of people who have t-shirts they wear down Bourke
> St. mall, that would be inappropriate for quoting here :) And there
> are always proponents of any cause who are quite keen to raise it out
> of any context. (And for all the "tech mailing list" comments, MXUG
> has a fairly wide-ranging charter, so the actual context is somewhat
> less clear than say on uk.rec.models.rail! )
> Anyway, while I doubt we could produce (or would want to produce?) a
> prescriptive set of rules, we could at least put together some
> guidelines, and a hefty reading list :)
> Or, as Steve suggested, we could see if we can steal^H^H^H^H^H
> repurpose one from elsewhere.
> - Korny
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Duana Stanley
> <strongcof...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2009/10/27 Steve Hayes <steve.ha...@cogentconsulting.com.au>
>>> On 27/10/2009, at 10:54 PM, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:04:18PM +1100, Tobias Sargeant wrote:
>>>>> A good yardstick to my mind is: "don't say anything that you
>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>> be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall.".
>>>> Good one! I like that.
>>> +1
>> +1
>> I assume we want this group's members to be diverse and for the
>> content to
>> have intellectual value.
>> It can't be hard to classify something as possibly offensive, and to
>> re-express it without losing intellectual content. Some kind of
>> filter
>> (neural networks?) and text modifier (markov chains?) would be
>> ideal. But
>> until someone creates that, let's just do what we do at work and
>> uni and the
>> Bourke st. mall.
> -- > Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com
> kornys on twitter/fb/gtalk/gwave www.sietsma.com/korny > "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part
> that wonders what the part that isn't thinking
> isn't thinking of"
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 09:42:13AM +1100, Oleg Kiorsak wrote:
> +1 Korny
> In Melbourne CBD I seen lots of T-shirts > that were far more "graphical" than the infamous ASCII-art > not to mention the "slogans" they contain... > (not to say that I'd wear one myself though ;)
True, but I suspect that someone who wears offensive t-shirts in public has no desire not to be offensive in public, so they would ignore any guidelines that were set anyway. I think the "don't say anything you wouldn't say in public" is a reasonable idea.
Kathryn Andersen -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <http://www.katspace.org> / \ | \_.--.*/ | GenFicCrit mailing list <http://www.katspace.org/gen_fic_crit/> v | ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 09:42:13AM +1100, Oleg Kiorsak wrote: > +1 Korny
> In Melbourne CBD I seen lots of T-shirts > that were far more "graphical" than the infamous ASCII-art
Ok from now on in an effort to kill this thread I am going to put increasingly disturbing ascii art in my sig until the thread dies. This may be educational for any Amish children on the list or people who did not follow Oleg's link.
Sam
(.|.) <-- barenaked titties (.|.) <-- for the ladies ) ( | |
> A good yardstick to my mind is: "don't say anything that you wouldn't > be prepared to wear on a placard in Bourke st. mall.".
I worked with a guy who happily wore a "MySpace / MyFace" t-shirt to the office (google it but some will find it quite offensive). Some people just have different sensibilities. That's why you need guidelines.
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 09:42:13AM +1100, Oleg Kiorsak wrote: >> +1 Korny
>> In Melbourne CBD I seen lots of T-shirts >> that were far more "graphical" than the infamous ASCII-art
> Ok from now on in an effort to kill this thread I am going to put > increasingly > disturbing ascii art in my sig until the thread dies. This may be > educational > for any Amish children on the list or people who did not follow > Oleg's link.
> Sam
> (.|.) <-- barenaked titties (.|.) <-- for the ladies > ) ( | |
Sam,
Was that meant to be funny or helpful? I found it provocative, as if you wanted to re-provoke the entire conversation, and entirely unhelpful.
* Actively promote the inclusion of diverse individuals on all teams
* Redress historic discrimination, including that of race, gender and
sexual orientation
So it might help to be explicit about our values as a MXUG community. I'd
like to see similar statements in our charter.
2009/10/28 Steve Hayes <steve.ha...@cogentconsulting.com.au>
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 09:42:13AM +1100, Oleg Kiorsak wrote:
> >> +1 Korny
> >> In Melbourne CBD I seen lots of T-shirts
> >> that were far more "graphical" than the infamous ASCII-art
> > Ok from now on in an effort to kill this thread I am going to put
> > increasingly
> > disturbing ascii art in my sig until the thread dies. This may be
> > educational
> > for any Amish children on the list or people who did not follow
> > Oleg's link.
> > Sam
> > (.|.) <-- barenaked titties (.|.) <-- for the ladies
> > ) ( | |
> Sam,
> Was that meant to be funny or helpful? I found it provocative, as if
> you wanted to re-provoke the entire conversation, and entirely
> unhelpful.
Hats off to Richard for posting another "offensive" link / reference.
I certainly wouldn't be ashamed to say / wear / sketch on a napkin what I posted in my sig a few minutes ago, nor the URL of an ascii-porn site, so the proposed rule is not good enough. How about just "no porn / *ism" that's pretty simple.
Maybe I should say something technical, in the hope of sidetracking away from this boring and ridiculously overblown topic.
I discovered the other day that a library I am writing compiles 8 times faster if I cat all the files together in the right way then compile it, compared to building it piece by piece with make.
> * Actively promote the inclusion of diverse individuals on all teams
+1 to that.
> * Redress historic discrimination, including that of race, gender and
> sexual orientation
What does _that_ mean, in practice? (I'm not sure if email can convey
the slightly suspicious voice tone, or the narrowing of eyes ... I've
seen similar phrases used in the past to excuse all manner of
practices like quotas and race-based incentives, esp. in education).
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Sam Watkins <s...@nipl.net> wrote:
> Hats off to Richard for posting another "offensive" link / reference.
> I certainly wouldn't be ashamed to say / wear / sketch on a napkin what I > posted in my sig a few minutes ago, nor the URL of an ascii-porn site, so the > proposed rule is not good enough.
Would you wear it on a t-shirt when going out with a girl you were trying to impress? Would you wear it to family christmas? Would you wear it when presenting at a conference? Would you wear it to a job interview? What if the interviewer was (gasp) female?
> How about just "no porn / *ism" that's > pretty simple.
> Maybe I should say something technical, in the hope of sidetracking away from > this boring and ridiculously overblown topic.
Just to address the "this is a technical group" comments -
(a) there is no real "just technical" world. We don't live in an asperger syndrome paradise, where purely technical interations exist in a complete void, unconnected to people and feelings and all that yucky stuff. We live in a real world of real people, and we need to care about how our behaviour affects them, and thus affects us.
(b) this isn't a pure technical group like (say) the rec.uk.model-trains. As the group page says, "The topics can be anything at all but usually are of a technical persuasion". And several talks have been about not-strictly-technical subjects like how to connect our values to our technical practices, or how to be an effective developer; some of these have been some of the better talks, imho.
MXUG's charter, as I understand it, *definitely* covers topics like "how do I control my children's internet access" or "how do I present at tech conferences without causing offense" or "how do I improve my professional reputation" or "why are there so few women in IT"... this discussion is hardly off-topic.
- Korny
-- Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com kornys on twitter/fb/gtalk/gwave www.sietsma.com/korny "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of"
|
