It’s not about wanting to harass, they say. Of course harassment is bad, to the extent it exists, they say. Our stake in this is objective and civil minded, they say. We object to your authoritarian attitudes, they say. It’s definitely not about protecting our ability to harass, they say.
Then you follow Skepticon news on Twitter and this comes up.
Had a lot of nice CoC this year, 10/10 @CoralineAda
— uberfeminist (@uberfeminist) November 22, 2015
You should have a look at Skepticon’s CoC, it was super effective this year @CoralineAda
— uberfeminist (@uberfeminist) November 22, 2015
My one criticism is that CoCs need to be longer in 2016 @CoralineAda
— uberfeminist (@uberfeminist) November 22, 2015
But it’s not about the ability to harass, they say.
And that seems like some of the tame stuff, or certainly only a small taste.
I suppose one has to dig to get to one of the major hangups – very different definitions of ‘harassment’ (and ‘criticism’, and ‘censorship’, and various other relevant terms).
I’m having a lot of trouble figuring out what these tweets show.
I finally figured out that “CoC” is Code of Conduct.
I don’t know who the tweeters are, nor do I understand how this is evidence that “it’s” “about the ability to harrass.”
On the face of it, it seems to be women (?) tweeting about liking CoCs, although the wording is a little odd (“lot of nice CoC”)
Uberfeminist is not a woman. He’s a British conservative man who uses Twitter to stalk and occasionally harass people pushing for political progress.
…and one of the first people I’ve ever blocked after an attempt at conversation waaaaay back during the first SkepTech.
He’s just…ugh. And the harassers seem to dislike the very concept of a CoC, because heaven forbid we codify what is acceptable behavior at an event we’re running or anything. That’s just irrational SJWing.
*adorns tin hat*
But if you can tell me how it is acceptable to act, then you can also tell me how it is acceptable to THINK! My thinker muscles are mine!!
*hangs tin hat*
I see Uberfeminist all over YouTube trolling comment sections, or at least I used to until I finally blocked him. I had no idea he was so prolific on Twitter too. He’s nothing if not dedicated, I guess.
I’m confused. There must be a lot of missing context/history here. I don’t see how this is harassment.
There are years of history here, but I have a great deal of difficulty understanding how responding to “Tell me about your experience with codes of conduct for my job” with “I will tell you about cocks” wouldn’t at least give people a clue on where to start.
Stephanie: I got it, but it took me a few minutes–figuring out CoC as an acronym for Code of Conduct took a bit, then I had to work backwards to get the lame, misogynistic ‘pun’ uberfeminist was going for. (Not knowing who uberfeminist is also added some time to the process. If I’d known he was one of the harassers right from the start, it would’ve been clearer.) Like I said, I did put it together eventually, but there was a fair bit of unfolding to do, first.
Maybe we need also data on how things go around the outside, directed at the conferences, which has clearly been avoided due to the codes. 1 data point up for grabs.