Idea: how to ensure awareness of Codes of Conduct

[major_clanger]

Loncon 3 seemed to do quite well with its Code of Conduct; it was available on the website and reprinted in the front of the convention pocket guide. As far as I'm aware, there were only a handful of incidents reported to the convention staff that required it to be applied.

However, I've seen discussion about the convention that suggests that some attendees still did not understand what the CoC was meant to set out in terms of appropriate and inappropriate behaviour. I've been giving some thought to how we might ensure that everyone at a convention is clearly and unambiguously aware of the CoC, and more importantly, can be proven to be aware of it.

At Loncon 3, registration involved being handed your badge. How about if instead we handed over a sealed envelope containing the badge, printed up as below. (The box with my name in is an indication that there would be a sticker identifying whose badge was inside).



For this to work, you have to plan this from the outset, and ensure that:

- for online memberships, anyone joining has to click on a 'I agree with the Code of Conduct' tick-box in order to join;

- for direct sales, there is a 'sign to agree our Code of Conduct' box on the membership form.

This makes it absolutely clear both when you join the convention and when you pick up your badge that the Code of Conduct applies to you.

I've put in the refund option because I think this strengthens the convention's position: it allows someone a final chance to say 'no, I don't want to be bound by this'. Of course, as it excludes what we lawyers call consequential expenses (e.g. travel and hotel) I doubt that many people will exercise it, but the fact that it's there helps avoid arguments about the validity of the 'open the envelope and you're agreeing' notice.

(For those interested in the legality: this isn't a shrink-wrap licence situation, as the notice on the envelope is just confirming what members have expressly signed up to when they joined. Rather, it's actually adding an exit clause to the membership contract.)

Comments

[watervole]

I think people will treat it like they do all other terms and conditions -namely, sign without actually reading them.

[major_clanger]

Probably so, but it would remove the excuse of "Oh, I didn't realise there was a Code of Conduct".

Which is a thin excuse anyway, as there's nothing in there that isn't a more specific version of "Don't be a dick".

[legionseagle]

And?

That is a choice they made and a very fine choice it is, too.

They can't turn round and complain that they never made the choice later, though.

[mishalak]

I think this is a good legal document, but given human perception I think it will not manage to solve the "I missed this important rule" factor. People tend to only pay half attention to instructions if they think they have seen it all before. Like the last few days using my local bus system for the first time in years. I kept screwing up over and over until I had seen where/when the routes were actually going because no amount of studying the map/instructions caused it to actually stick in my head. And I did go to the website first and try to find the right instructions and I still got it wrong the first two days because of a combination of thinking I understood it and confusion by similarity. (OH, both westbound and eastbound bus 16 pick up at the same stop! Etc.)

[andrewducker]

I think it's a great idea.

And the reason is that I've seen multiple reports of studies where making people agree to behave before they did things actually improved their behaviour.

It won't affect everyone, but it makes it _very_ clear that you're serious about it. And that's worth it by itself.

[bugshaw]

The other half of it is making clear to people who have experienced bad behaviour that the con does not tolerate it, and is keen to deal with it (rather than want the recipient to keep quiet so as not to poison the con atmosphere).

[cmcmck.livejournal.com]

Well, you're the lawyer so you should know! :o)

What puzzles me though is constantly reading about this stuff going on at literary/fandom cons (which I don't attend, although I know a lot of folks who do both on here and in the 'real world').

It just doesn't occur in the kind of academic historical conference that I attend.

Just why this constant lack of respect of others' boundaries?

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

Well, bear in mind that Loncon 3 had something like 7,000 people in attendance over five days, with a handful of reported incidents. By and large litfandom is quite good for this, certainly as compared with gaming and comic conventions where there appears to be a serious problem with sexual harassment.

That being said, you do encounter it and (as happened at Readercon and Wiscon in the USA) it can involved very unpleasant conduct such as groping. It tends, in litfandom, to be older men (again, a contrast with gaming/comics events) and my theory is that to at least some extent this is a misplaced idea that somehow the more liberal approach to sexual mores in fandom meant that nobody was going to object to a friendly fondle. In other words, It's the Middle-Aged Male Fan Irregular Verb:

"I am comfortable in my enlightened tactile sexuality"
"You are a bit prone to wandering hands"
"He was prosecuted under Section 3 of the Sexual Offences Act"

[ms-cataclysm.livejournal.com]

Professional conferences are different because the fear of ending up in a disciplinary hearing at work on Monday morning sometimes (but not always) exercises a restraining influence.

If you pour enough free alcohol down even the stuffiest professionals, eventually this ceases to apply . However, my experience suggests that the window of opportunity between inhibitions dissolving and stomachs requiring pumping exists but is comparatively small.

Fandom is in playtime, so you don't have the same controls. I don't think that fandom is exactly Sodom and Gomorrah, but even a fairly low level of problems is still a problem for organisers.

[cmcmck.livejournal.com]

Although academic history is also full of middle aged men.

I love that definition- a DoM by any other name...........

Although I wasn't involved, I did get to meet Gill Polack for the first time which was fun. :o)

[vicarage.livejournal.com]

I hate this idea, it suggests that bad behaviour is likely, when it really isn't. Very offputting to new members of fandom.

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

Frankly, the sort of man who would be put off by this isn't the kind of attendee any decent convention would want.

As for the idea that women would be put off attending, I have it on good authority that many anime/cosplay/furry conventions have very extensive and firm codes of conduct, with explicit warnings about compliance, and that this doesn't deter women at all - quite the opposite, in fact.

[ms-cataclysm.livejournal.com]

I think the sort of behaviour I experienced at and immediately after my first con is far more off-putting than a notice on an envelope.

I think it's a good idea .

[penguineggs.livejournal.com]

I don't know how many times you've been sexually harassed (and please don't think I'm asking you to share any information you don't feel comfortable with sharing) but actually in a group of 7000-8000 (as there was at the last Worldcon), with a bar open from 10.00am and a lot of people having the sort of "I'm on holiday, so what the Hell?" vibe and some people having the "I'm massively locally famous, so what the Hell?" vibe, I'd say that bad behaviour was inevitable and criminal behaviour highly likely. Think the average small town/large village on a boozy weekend, extended to five days.

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

Like.
Just to note I am a single woman and at age 17 when I first went to a con, on my own, I would have found it so worrying I would prob have gone away rather than any potential harassers.
Also imagine what happens when the Daily Mail finds out.

[davidwake.livejournal.com]

I think it needs to finish on a positive sentence.

"If you do agree, then open the bag, put on your badge and come and enjoy a safe and fun convention."

[uitlander]

in the same spirit I'd add the opening line "To make this a safe and fun space for everyone we have developed the following Code of Conduct."

[alexmc.livejournal.com]

Totally failing to come up with anything positive to say.

I seem to have fallen between the cracks. I want to chat to the Loncon3 chairs but doubt they have the time or can help - even if it is a solution for the future.

[bohemiancoast.livejournal.com]

I'm also old enough to be skeptical of Codes of Conduct, but ours seemed to work fairly well.

I'm only fairly morose when I consider the intersection between Codes of Conduct and convention newsletters. I'm doing Dysprosium's; but I suspect it will be my last. I might do a fanzine afterwards with all the jokes I'm no longer allowed to print.

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

Id love to see that fanzine. In fact. Id love to help :-)

[teaparty.net (from livejournal.com)]

I don't have a dog in this fight, so my opinion probably isn't important. That said, I can see merit in this proposal; but I think vicarage above makes valid points, too, which aren't entirely assuaged by davidwake and uitlander's excellent suggestions.

My first question is whether or not you're solving a non-problem. Were there any instances of people at LonCon claiming that the CoC didn't apply to them, and if so, how many and (if you know) on what grounds?

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

Yes. That.

[inamac.livejournal.com]

I'd probably turn around and walk away if faced with that - it smacks too much of computer licence agreements and 'tick the box' to relinquish all your rights - the object of which is to protect the vendor not the purchaser.

If anyone did end up at Loncon with no understanding of the Code of Conduct they were not the sort who would baulk at opening an envelope of this type (or even read it).

I can understand that ConCom needing the extra power to intervene that this would give them, but at what may be a disproportionate loss of goodwill.

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

You may want to consider how much goodwill a convention can lose by not being seen to do its utmost to deal with harassment issues; just look at the ongoing PR disaster that is Wiscon.

[ci5rod.livejournal.com]

I have two problems with this. The first is practical and relatively easily solved; you've asked me to confirm something without including the text of what I'm confirming. I don't care if I have agreed to it already, if you're asking me to repeat myself for the avoidance of doubt, I expect you to repeat yourself too. Having a copy of the CoC at Registration would solve that, but exacerbate the second problem.

The second problem is social; the more you thrust things like a Code of Conduct in people's faces, the more they will kick back against them. I had an example of this with a former employer over the Acceptable Use policy. Every company has one, every employee agrees to it on joining, and then it's shoved on the shelf and ignored because all that's actually necessary is for people to behave sensibly. When we were required to confirm before logging in that we would abide by the AUP, we re-read it wearing our International Standards Writers' hat and effectively tore it to shreds, actually rendering it less effective.

Presenting the membership packet like this squanders a lot of goodwill right at the start of the convention. I would seriously consider turning round a leaving, because the presence of that notice strongly suggests that I'm going to be pressured about this throughout the con, which is not going to be fun at all. I'm certainly not going to volunteer to help an organisation that has just in effect told me that it doesn't trust me to behave myself.

I do approve of having clear, simple codes of conduct; no problem with that at all. However I doubt any of the offenders at Loncon would have paid any more attention to a message on their membership pack than they did to the original statement when they joined up.

[doubtingmichael.livejournal.com]

Sorry for the late post, but I think I more-or-less agree with ci5rod: this is so heavyweight a statement as to be offputting, and set a bad tone for the convention. Putting a positive sentence at the beginning and end is a help, but not enough to offset this.

I think you've gone for something with the appearance of a legal meaning. Something containing only a sentence or two might be better, and could still fulfil the goal of giving the code of conduct more visibility. So I'd go for something like this:

"We hope you enjoy XxxCon. Please remember that we have a code of conduct that we expect all our members to observe. Please ask at Registration if the information in the programme guide doesn't tell you what you need to know."

(So having said all that: I think this is an interesting idea. In practice, it's a good proposal to have for a convention committee, who can then thrash it out further.)