A terminology quibble from the Readercon fiasco

[womzilla]

A "zero tolerance" policy and a "lifetime ban" are completely separate things.

"Zero tolerance" is a type of enforcement--true "zero tolerance" means that if you break the rule, you will receive the punishment, no exceptions. "Lifetime ban" is a definition of a type punishment that is available for those who punish those who violate the policy.

A zero-tolerance policy can have many levels of punishment, based on elements such as specific offense (a "zero-tolerance" rule against possessing weapons could still have different levels of punishment for carrying a knife vs. carrying a suitcase packed with explosives) or repeat offenses. "Zero tolerance" and "lifetime ban" aren't synonyms.

Comments

[barondave.livejournal.com]

"you're not seeing a link between actual safety and expectations of safety"

Expectations... when? The offense was dealt with at the time. The offender won't be back for several years. Sounds like a culture of safety to me.

That the offender was well-connected means that his reputation is soiled amongst his close friends, and most of his social circle will be watching him like a hawk. While I think it was stupid of the con to change policy on the fly in the way they did, it's not like he was given a time out and a cookie. I would say that expelling a well-connected fan would make a con safer than expelling someone not as tied to the community. Sounds like a culture of safety to me.

[avram]

What part of "Granting exceptions for the well-connected [...] signals that you're the kind of person who grants exceptions for the well-connected" are you having trouble with?

Also, what about the first half of my comment? Do you concede that smofbabe disagrees that what Walling did to Valentine constitutes sexual harassment?

[barondave.livejournal.com]

What part of "zero tolerance for an action is different than zero tolerance for a person" are you having trouble with.?

And, no, you should read what she said again. She doesn't actually say.... oh god, never mind. Frankly, I think this whole discussion has descended even farther from "this is what actually happened" into the utterly useless "people who weren't there and didn't have anything to do with it are being quoted as key witnesses".

People I respect are behaving like idiots and I'm leaving before I descend to that level.

My work here is done.