Re: Code of Conduct at events

* Adrian Bunk <bunk(at)stusta(dot)de> [101112 21:36]:
> > > And in the case of an unproven sexual assault you know that one of the
> > > two persons is lying, but you don't know which.
> > > Which person do you want to kick out?
> >
> > This is the important question. What you seem to forget, though, is that
> > you will force someone out. There is no way all of them will be able to
> > come together the same way before. You have to make some decision and no
> > decision is a decision, too.
>
> In my opinion, the only sane option is to call the police.

As you will notice if you read what you replied to at the beginning
of this subthread, calling the police and making sure to collect all
the information needed for them is the first thing I want to see happen
in this situation.

But that still means you have to make a decision who is allowed to be
on the event. And as I said, even if you claim you are making no
decision, you are making one.

> > > Both the alleged offender and the alleged victim?
> >
> > That can in some situations be the best solution, too.
> >
> > Note that allowing an alleged offender in whom most attendents
> > consider guilty (for example by having been witnesses or believing
> > the witnesses against the alleged more), will not only exclude the
> > victim but also all people fearing they could be next victim and
> > people not wanting to get into such a situation again (or the first
> > time).
>
> That actually goes both ways:
>
> Note that allowing an alleged victim whom many participants consider
> guilty of lying to stay will exclude all people fearing to be the
> next victim of a wrong accusation of this person.

Yes. It's the same situation and you are forced to make a decision just
the same way.

> And if I'm very cynical I'd go even further and say that there are
> usually far less female people at a conference who would fear a sexual
> assault by a man than male people who would fear a wrong accusation of
> a woman.

Sorry, this is not cynical, this is bizarre. I as man would fear the
unpleasentness of having to witness any assault much more than fearing
any false accusation. So please do not try to speak in the name of men
here.

> German law says "acquittal at court is a proof that an accusation is
> false" for defamation cases in criminal law.

Note the "for defamation case" here. If there is not enough to convict
people and a court decided that way, they have a right to not be accused
publically. But that only means organisers should not make the needed
discussions in the public and nothing else.

> Sexual assault and rape cases are often hard to decide, and I see no
> fairer way than following whatever the court decides.

Then if someone is not admitted because of something like that, let them
sue before a court so the judge has a good laugh, too.

Bernhard R. Link