• Chessiecon Hotel Reminder

    From Keith F. Lynch@21:1/5 to All on Sat Oct 1 03:52:59 2022
    Don't forget to reserve a room at the Delta Hunt Valley hotel. We
    negotiated a special rate, but it expires October 24. Use the special reservation link found on our website: https://chessiecon.org/hotel.html
    --
    Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
    Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gary McGath@21:1/5 to Keith F. Lynch on Sat Oct 1 07:13:16 2022
    On 9/30/22 11:52 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
    Don't forget to reserve a room at the Delta Hunt Valley hotel. We
    negotiated a special rate, but it expires October 24. Use the special reservation link found on our website: https://chessiecon.org/hotel.html

    A short note on Chessiecon's code of conduct:

    https://www.chessiecon.org/code.html

    I'm not planning to attend; this is just part of my habit of reviewing
    con policies.

    There are worse ones than Chessiecon's. Just one item seriously concerns me:

    Discrimination against any convention member based on
    irrelevant characteristics will not be tolerated and
    is a violation of the code of conduct. Such irrelevant
    characteristics include but are not limited to: gender,
    race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender
    identity, or physical/mental disability.

    On a personal, social level, it's generally assumed that people can discriminate for any reasons they consider relevant. A lot of people
    like to hang around with "their own kind," whether that's based on
    physical appearance, ethnicity, sex, religion, or whatever.

    To discriminate is to differentiate, and often is used to indicate
    preference for one category over another. There are many cases where
    most people agree it's wrong. Some are marginal; can a dealer at the con legitimately refuse to sell sacred items to someone who doesn't respect
    their religion?

    But on the personal level, everyone discriminates, and it's considered acceptable. We prefer the company of one person to another for reasons
    that are purely our own. Just by going to the con, attendees are
    discriminating in favor of science fiction fans.

    I don't expect the Con Police to expel the entire membership, including themselves, for doing what people always do, but such badly-worded rules
    can be used as an excuse to harass or expel someone whom someone on a
    con committee doesn't like.

    --
    Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ninapenda Jibini@21:1/5 to Gary McGath on Sat Oct 1 17:26:59 2022
    Gary McGath <garym@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in news:th97ce$1anvf$1@dont-email.me:

    I don't expect the Con Police to expel the entire membership,
    including themselves, for doing what people always do, but such
    badly-worded rules can be used as an excuse to harass or expel
    someone whom someone on a con committee doesn't like.

    That is often the entire point of such vague policies.

    --
    Terry Austin

    Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
    Lynn:
    https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


    "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
    -- David Bilek

    Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bernard Peek@21:1/5 to Gary McGath on Tue Oct 4 20:18:44 2022
    On 2022-10-01, Gary McGath <garym@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
    On 9/30/22 11:52 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
    Don't forget to reserve a room at the Delta Hunt Valley hotel. We
    negotiated a special rate, but it expires October 24. Use the special
    reservation link found on our website: https://chessiecon.org/hotel.html

    A short note on Chessiecon's code of conduct:

    https://www.chessiecon.org/code.html

    I'm not planning to attend; this is just part of my habit of reviewing
    con policies.

    There are worse ones than Chessiecon's. Just one item seriously concerns me:

    Discrimination against any convention member based on
    irrelevant characteristics will not be tolerated and
    is a violation of the code of conduct. Such irrelevant
    characteristics include but are not limited to: gender,
    race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender
    identity, or physical/mental disability.

    On a personal, social level, it's generally assumed that people can discriminate for any reasons they consider relevant.

    No, it's not 'generally assumed' and in many places it could be illegal.

    The catch-all 'not limited to' is there to cover other sorts of assholery.
    Yes it could be used to exclude anyone the concom doesn't like. There is
    quite possibly another rule that makes that more explicit.

    A lot of people
    like to hang around with "their own kind," whether that's based on
    physical appearance, ethnicity, sex, religion, or whatever.

    To discriminate is to differentiate, and often is used to indicate
    preference for one category over another. There are many cases where
    most people agree it's wrong. Some are marginal; can a dealer at the con legitimately refuse to sell sacred items to someone who doesn't respect
    their religion?

    But on the personal level, everyone discriminates, and it's considered acceptable.

    Sometimes. The law defines protected characteristics and discrimination on
    any of those grounds is considered unacceptable. This rule just makes it explicit. I don't see an issue here.



    --
    Bernard Peek
    bap@shrdlu.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Keith F. Lynch@21:1/5 to Bernard Peek on Tue Oct 4 23:53:26 2022
    Bernard Peek <bap@gamma.shrdlu.com> wrote:
    Sometimes. The law defines protected characteristics and
    discrimination on any of those grounds is considered unacceptable.
    This rule just makes it explicit. I don't see an issue here.

    Discrimination on any of those grounds is illegal in public
    accomodations. For instance if you're running a store (ObUK: a shop),
    and don't allow people of the "wrong" race in. But in other contexts
    it's perfectly okay. For instance for a woman staying in the con
    hotel to offer crash space, but only to another women, not to a man.
    I don't think any con should object to this discrimination.
    --
    Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
    Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gary McGath@21:1/5 to Bernard Peek on Wed Oct 5 05:57:25 2022
    On 10/4/22 4:18 PM, Bernard Peek wrote:
    On 2022-10-01, Gary McGath <garym@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:

    There are worse ones than Chessiecon's. Just one item seriously concerns me: >>
    Discrimination against any convention member based on
    irrelevant characteristics will not be tolerated and
    is a violation of the code of conduct. Such irrelevant
    characteristics include but are not limited to: gender,
    race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender
    identity, or physical/mental disability.

    On a personal, social level, it's generally assumed that people can
    discriminate for any reasons they consider relevant.

    No, it's not 'generally assumed' and in many places it could be illegal.

    Could you give an example of a person being prosecuted for personal,
    social choices, or at least a law on the books that would plausibly
    allow such prosecution?

    The catch-all 'not limited to' is there to cover other sorts of assholery. Yes it could be used to exclude anyone the concom doesn't like. There is quite possibly another rule that makes that more explicit.

    I gave a link to the page. If there's another rule that clarifies what
    commonly practiced behavior, which you call "assholery," is or isn't prohibited, you should be able to find it rather than speculating.


    But on the personal level, everyone discriminates, and it's considered
    acceptable.

    Sometimes. The law defines protected characteristics and discrimination on any of those grounds is considered unacceptable. This rule just makes it explicit. I don't see an issue here.

    Considered unacceptable by you, perhaps, but you're in a very small
    minority. Women, Hindus, gays, Chinese, etc., all often like to hang
    around with others who share those characteristics with them. It isn't
    uncommon for them to enjoy books and movies that feature people like themselves.

    It's possible that some countries have laws prohibiting this. Some
    countries have extremely draconian laws. I'd still want to see an
    example. But in the US, Canada, and most of Europe (to cite only
    countries with which I have experience), it's routine and legal for
    people to socially discriminate in favor of people similar to themselves.

    Just by participating in this newsgroup, you're discriminating in favor
    of science fiction fans. Fandom isn't on the list of "irrelevant" characteristics, so perhaps you consider that OK, but it could be
    "assholery" under the "not limited to" phrase.

    In the world I'm familiar with, people routinely exercise social
    preference based on many characteristics, including the ones on the "irrelevant" list, and no one except you objects, and no one is prosecuted.


    --
    Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Trei@21:1/5 to Keith F. Lynch on Wed Oct 5 07:02:04 2022
    On Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 7:53:28 PM UTC-4, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
    Bernard Peek <b...@gamma.shrdlu.com> wrote:
    Sometimes. The law defines protected characteristics and
    discrimination on any of those grounds is considered unacceptable.
    This rule just makes it explicit. I don't see an issue here.
    Discrimination on any of those grounds is illegal in public
    accomodations. For instance if you're running a store (ObUK: a shop),
    and don't allow people of the "wrong" race in. But in other contexts
    it's perfectly okay. For instance for a woman staying in the con
    hotel to offer crash space, but only to another women, not to a man.
    I don't think any con should object to this discrimination.

    "Public accommodation" is the key point. Private clubs and societies *can* discriminate. Cons have memberships, and a con *could* presumably limit
    who it sold memberships to. The only SF related case I can think of is the
    1988 Boskone. This was immediately after the 'Boskone from Hell', and
    NESFA decided to scale back. They moved it from Boston to Springfield,
    and granted memberships only to people who'd been to multiple earlier
    Boskones. The goal was to get rid of the large number of college students
    who came to the Hynes for room parties and booze. It worked, and Arisia appeared in 1990 as a direct reaction.

    I'm not sure what separates 'Public accommodation' from 'private club'.
    Selling memberships at the door seems pretty close to public, though
    cons do have blacklists of people not to be admitted. At the other end,
    a joining process that takes interviews, balloting, and months of time to complete is pretty private.

    pt

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha@21:1/5 to Peter Trei on Wed Oct 5 13:25:35 2022
    Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote in news:cb08e867-5f06-43ef-94a4-22daf69377adn@googlegroups.com:

    On Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 7:53:28 PM UTC-4, Keith F. Lynch
    wrote:
    Bernard Peek <b...@gamma.shrdlu.com> wrote:
    Sometimes. The law defines protected characteristics and
    discrimination on any of those grounds is considered
    unacceptable. This rule just makes it explicit. I don't see
    an issue here.
    Discrimination on any of those grounds is illegal in public
    accomodations. For instance if you're running a store (ObUK: a
    shop), and don't allow people of the "wrong" race in. But in
    other contexts it's perfectly okay. For instance for a woman
    staying in the con hotel to offer crash space, but only to
    another women, not to a man. I don't think any con should
    object to this discrimination.

    "Public accommodation" is the key point. Private clubs and
    societies *can* discriminate. Cons have memberships, and a con
    *could* presumably limit who it sold memberships to. The only SF
    related case I can think of is the 1988 Boskone. This was
    immediately after the 'Boskone from Hell', and NESFA decided to
    scale back. They moved it from Boston to Springfield, and
    granted memberships only to people who'd been to multiple
    earlier Boskones. The goal was to get rid of the large number of
    college students who came to the Hynes for room parties and
    booze. It worked, and Arisia appeared in 1990 as a direct
    reaction.

    I'm not sure what separates 'Public accommodation' from 'private
    club'. Selling memberships at the door seems pretty close to
    public, though cons do have blacklists of people not to be
    admitted. At the other end, a joining process that takes
    interviews, balloting, and months of time to complete is pretty
    private.

    If a convention announced that they wouldn't be allowing black
    people or Jews to attend, they'd cease to exist so fast it would c
    create a black hole. The hotel that hosts them is most certainly
    public accomodation, and the actual criteria for membership is
    "give us money and don't be on a blacklist," and that is
    unquestionably a public accomodation.

    Discrimination is not illegal, ever. Only discrimination on the
    basis of a protected class. The difference is *important*. They
    could, for example, ban Star Trek fans, but not Star Wars. They
    could ban people who wear white socks. They could, and do, ban
    assholes who disrupt things. None of those are protected classes.

    Privte organizations can, to some extent, engage in discrimination
    against protected classes, but that is *much* more limited than you
    seem to believe.

    --
    Terry Austin

    "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
    -- David Bilek

    Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dorothy J Heydt@21:1/5 to petertrei@gmail.com on Thu Oct 6 00:54:31 2022
    In article <cb08e867-5f06-43ef-94a4-22daf69377adn@googlegroups.com>,
    Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
    Selling memberships at the door seems pretty close to public, though
    cons do have blacklists of people not to be admitted.

    (Hal Heydt)
    I can't speak for other cons, but DunDraCon not only has a (very
    short) blacklist of people not to be sold memberships, but the
    list resides in a database table that gets checked when a
    membership is entered. That way, the volunteers at conreg don't
    have to know who is on the list. It's not a perfect check (I can
    think of ways around it), but it does exist.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)