<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi all,<br>
<br>
I just wanted to added a few comments to this discussion before
today's meeting.<br>
<br>
Grace is right when she says it's not a huge loss of revenue, but
it does mean that we won't be reimbursed for the cost of
purchasing the lanyards. However, the cost of purchasing lanyards
does go down quite a bit once we stop printing a sponsor's logos
on them (unless we decide to print the Evergreen logo on the
lanyards.) At the same time, I'm always concerned about tying the
hands of future conference planners.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">I don't mind recording preferences so long
as we have controls as to who sees it and we destroy the records
afterwards.</blockquote>
<br>
I don't know how easy it is to destroy the records. We use
Eventbrite for our registrations, and I don't see an easy way to
do it after a quick look, but I could be missing something.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>A minor tangent - But, with that said I actually think
being transparent about controls of attendance records would
be a good thing regardless of what we do about the photography
preferences. We had a snafu with the list of attendees being
emailed out and I don't recall but were folks asked if it was
OK to be put on that list? I assume we were but I don't
actually recall. It's easy for me to forget about the privacy
aspect of this as I attend representing an organization and
it's all very public but some might not be and we need to be
conscious of their privacy. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
We do let people know at registration time. There is a checkbox
that allows people to opt out of being included on the attendee
list. The language (approved by the SFC) is as follows:<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">We will produce an attendee list for the
conference. This list is not to be published on the web or to be
used for unsolicited commercial, marketing, or bulk email
purposes. If you do not wish to be part of this list, check the
box below to opt out.</blockquote>
<br>
That language is also included on a few conference pages and the
"this list is not to be published..." bit is included on the
footer of every page on the attendee list.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Could you perhaps have a generic,
anonymous survey that goes out to all conference goers, prior to
the event asking preference? This would give you a rough count
without collecting names. I was thinking a simple Google form
(or equivalent) with the text of the policy and the choices
following. There would be no record generated except a raw
count of the lanyard choices. Then you could order X% more of
each, just in case folks change their mind on location.
</blockquote>
<br>
That's a possibility too.<br>
<br>
I disagree that speakers should not be included in the
opt-in/opt-out policy for photographs. There could be some real
reasons why somebody does not want their photo posted, and I think
the lanyards offer a good way to communicate that information for
attendees and speakers alike. <br>
<br>
During this year's conference, we did send an e-mail to speakers
letting them know that they would be photographed, but also
telling them that they could opt out of being photographed. I've
seen examples from many other conferences that allow speakers to
opt out. Although there were many photos posted to social media
sites this year, a large percentage of them were posted by a
volunteer from the conference committee who was informed of the
speakers' photography preferences. There was one speaker who
preferred not to have photographs posted and there was another who
asked that we remove a photo after it had been posted. It's true
that another audience member could have take a photo and posted it
to social media, but there really was no way to communicate those
preferences to the attendees.<br>
<br>
With the lanyards, attendees who are posting to social media will
be able to clearly see what a speaker's photography preferences
are, so it would be less likely to happen. If the policy is
adopted, I think it would be important to disseminate this
information widely before and during the conference so that
attendees are aware that they are expected to honor those
preferences. <br>
<br>
Kathy<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:klussier@masslnc.org">klussier@masslnc.org</a>
Twitter: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier">http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier</a>
</pre>
On 5/7/2014 3:58 PM, Rogan Hamby wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMwaE4L4Qeecr1O8qpku+r3TWtocJWF5fiVaDdhUQqBfqQW9yg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Galen
Charlton <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gmc@esilibrary.com" target="_blank">gmc@esilibrary.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<div class=""><br>
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Rogan Hamby <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rogan.hamby@gmail.com">rogan.hamby@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
> This is in my mind in fact a more important point
than the photography<br>
> policy and that's the creation of a safe and
welcoming environment at the<br>
> conference. I would expand this point beyond the
issue of speakers being<br>
> photographed and say we should address this in the
harassment policy<br>
> regarding any attendees.<br>
<br>
</div>
I'm wondering if we're entering into violent agreement?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Perhaps, sometimes it takes a circuitous route to get
to the point. :)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(btw, if circuitous is spelled wrong blame Google, it
looks wrong to me but Google assures me I spelled it
correctly)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">It's
my view that the photography policy is part of an overall
policy<br>
for fostering an inclusive environment at Evergreen
events. I think<br>
the proposed policy can be viewed in part as an extension
of the code<br>
of conduct, which includes harassing photography and
recording as one<br>
of the examples of harassment. The proposal additionally
supplies a</blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">mechanism
for attendees to express their preferences and
accommodates<br>
those who prefer not to be photographed at all. Thus far,
I see no<br>
reason why speakers cannot be included under that policy
-- albeit, </blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">with
an understanding that additional steps (e.g., notes in the<br>
program) would be useful to counter the default
expectation that<br>
speakers are fair game to photograph while they are
presenting.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>My concern lies with the harassment not the
photography. To me the photography issue is one of
privacy and there are different aspects to privacy. One
aspect to privacy, that of anonymity, is voided when
someone chooses to speak. Part of this may come down to
do we see a conference as a public venue. I do and that
informs my opinion about the anonymity aspect. Still, I
understand that all of this is out of a desire to
protect attendees (and I consider speakers a sub class
of attendees) and I'm very pro protecting people. So,
if I'm outvoted on this aspect I won't be upset with it.
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Anonymity is of course part of the issue behind the
lanyard discussion for attendees and I think we should
be transparent about our measures and see if there is
anywhere we can do even better than we have in the past,
though I know every committee has tried to look out for
attendees at every conference.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>However (again), regardless of the outcome of that
discussion about anonymity what I do feel very strongly
about is that voiding anonymity in no way waives other
rights that are related to privacy such as the right to
not have one's image used in a derogatory and hostile
manner and that we need to do everything we can to
ensure people that if something does happen we won't
tolerate it and keep the conference welcoming to
everyone.</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">I
think you've outlined a good set of reasons for why bans
(either<br>
lifetime or of shorter duration) should be considered as
an option for<br>
sanctions under the harassment policy. I do think that
formally<br>
adding that as an option will take a little more
infrastructure for<br>
the EOB to discuss, as by its very nature, deciding to ban
an<br>
individual from future events would need to be done by an
entity that<br>
continues to stay in existence from conference to
conference. FWIW,<br>
though, I think that's an issue that need not be a blocker
for<br>
considering the proposed photography policy.<br>
<div class="">
<div class="h5"><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree. I want people to be aware of it as I think
the two issues to intersect both meaningfully and
significantly but I think the issue of anonymity can be
considered separately. You can consider it orthogonal if
you like. :)</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="">
<div class="h5">
Regards,<br>
<br>
Galen<br>
--<br>
Galen Charlton<br>
Manager of Implementation<br>
Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts<br>
email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gmc@esilibrary.com">gmc@esilibrary.com</a><br>
direct: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1%20770-709-5581" value="+17707095581">+1
770-709-5581</a><br>
cell: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1%20404-984-4366" value="+14049844366">+1
404-984-4366</a><br>
skype: gmcharlt<br>
web: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.esilibrary.com/" target="_blank">http://www.esilibrary.com/</a><br>
Supporting Koha and Evergreen: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://koha-community.org" target="_blank">http://koha-community.org</a>
&<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://evergreen-ils.org" target="_blank">http://evergreen-ils.org</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
eg-oversight-board mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:eg-oversight-board@list.evergreen-ils.org">eg-oversight-board@list.evergreen-ils.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board">http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>