*sigh*
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 10:59:03PM +0100, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> Adrian: I prefer to force mandatory awareness of policy.
> Everything else just favours one point of view over another.
>
> Append to note well process/acknowledgment. Do not preset any of
> the choices but only allow proceeding after selection. Include
> both selection/acknowledgments for policies taking policies as
^^^^^^^^ photographs
> well as acknowledging/making choices how one wants to be treated.
>
> Maybe not even limit this to the photography question. Maybe also
> add acknowledging a statement about inclusion/harrassment/etc.
> How many newcomers for example know about the ombutsteam ?
>
> [ ] I understand i can contact <ombutsteam-email> confidentially
> raise issues including intimidation, harressment etc. pp
>
>
> Cheers
> Toerless
>
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 07:13:19PM -0000, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > Let me say this again since it may have been buried under the snow...
> >
> > If you must have such a policy, please make it opt in, not opt out.
> >
> > That is, if you are willing to have your photo taken (other than by the IETF for the IETF's purposes), then you must choose to display something that says so.
> >
> > An opt out policy puts the onus on people to know the policy exists, makes them responsible for wearing their badge right-side out at all times, means the photographer can always claim not to have been able to see the badge, and so forth. Worse, it stigmatises the person who does not want to be photographed by making them where a token of that fact (the reverse is easily masked by "Oh, I forgot to opt in."
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian
--
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
