* Theodore Ts'o wrote: >What about a slide presentation in a wg discussion in perpass which >included the following image? > > http://blog.chron.com/nickanderson/tag/nsa/ > >Bjoern Hoehrmann has already asserted he believes it would be >considered harassment. I think that people can legitimately feel personally threatened and disturbed, to the point where they require protection, by imagery. An example would be decorating the perpass meeting room with graphic posters of extrajudicially killed surveillance victims which might induce fear in some participants and effectively censor them. It is fair to regulate that to ensure proper debates are possible, though I do not think it is necessary or useful to specifically call out imagery in this sense, and the image above obviously doesn't qualify. The problem is that the proposed policy does not call out violence, disease, death, poisonous animals or other things that are harmful to people, it only mentions "sexual imagery". For the United States http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/08-1448.pdf#page=76 that may be normal and I can live with including it in such a policy, but certainly not in a way that suggests sexual imagery deserves special mention. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@xxxxxxxxxxxx · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/