[wplug] new guideline for videos at gums and installfests

David Ostroske eksortso at linuxmail.org
Tue Nov 13 13:23:17 EST 2001

From: harrold at sage.che.pitt.edu
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:41:33 -0500 (EST)
> Sometime in November David Ostroske assaulted keyboard and produced...


> if beth is the responsible party who represents cmu, then i think she is the
> only one who can make such policies. i get the impression, which might be
> correct, that she provides access to the facilities. as a result we have to
> use them as she mandates. if she says it's a bambi marathon, then so be it. 

Beth did secure the room for us. She also provides the carts (though there are other WPLUG members who work for CMU who would be equally responsible).

She *is* a Board member, I believe. If we were to establish a Code of Conduct, the matter would have to agreed upon by the Board.

What I don't want to have happen is to set up a Code of Conduct when it isn't necessary. Someone goofed, they brought an inappropriate video. (Not me, I didn't bring the video, which you seemed to suggest.) It would be wiser, IMO, for the guilty party to take a tongue-lashing for showing a movie with nudity and sex, and to let the matter simmer down, than to immediately impose a new set of rules. We've been considerate in the past. This is just a first offense.

> different people have different standards. the person who brought the movie
> probably thought it would be ok for the intended audience. since she realizes
> that different people are going to think differently, she provided a set of
> guidelines which i would guess is an attempt not to offend anyone, and project
> a positive image.

I guess what ticked me off is that she worded it as a policy, and not as a suggestion. Heck, we could've stopped the video from playing that day, if someone would have stood up. Are we too tolerent (myself included) that we couldn't say, "Hey, turn that off, that's too crude"?

I'd rather meet face to face with someone who offended me than to have all potential offenses repressed from above. The essence of liberty is faith in individual responsibility.

> she is not censoring you. she is trying to provide an environment which will
> make everyone feel comfortable, and not get her in trouble (where i guess she
> works?).

If it were codified, the procedure would be censorship. Who would decide if an R-rated film is appropriate? I'd rather talk these things out than make a hard, fast rule, arbitrated without consideration of others.

> -- 
> john
> (On going to war over religion) "You're basically killing 
> each other to see who's got the better imaginary friend
> --Yassir Arafat

Is your .sig offensive? Who would decide?

> _______________________________________________
> wplug mailing list
> wplug at wplug.org
> http://www.wplug.org/mailman/listinfo/wplug

--- David Ostroske
    eksortso at linuxmail.org


Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org 

Powered by Outblaze

More information about the wplug mailing list