[hackerspaces] Sex Offenders at a 'Space
Randall Arnold
randall.arnold at texrat.net
Wed Feb 18 20:13:36 CET 2015
Thanks, I agree with everything you just said there.
> On February 18, 2015 at 12:13 PM Edward L Platt <ed at elplatt.com> wrote:
>
> Randall, sorry, that wasn't meant to be directed at you specifically. And
> if you think excluding registered sex offenders is a necessary step to make
> your space safer, by all means do it. But, apply it evenly. If the problem is
> that they're on the registry, it doesn't make sense to allow some people on
> the registry and not others. If the problem is the specifics of their offense,
> spaces need to do more to address people who aren't on the registry.
>
> I just want to see us as a community doing a better job of informing
> ourselves and standing by our principles, even when that's inconvenient.
>
> -Ed
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Randall Arnold <
> randall.arnold at texrat.net <mailto:randall.arnold at texrat.net> > wrote:
>
> > >
> > Not sure why you addressed that overwrought bit to me, Ed. I simply
> > expressed my feelings on the subject. I stand by what I said and take
> > offense at it being labeled "security theater".
> >
> >
> > As for the ACLU article, something tells me that won't be the final
> > word on the subject.
> >
> > > > > On February 18, 2015 at 10:35 AM Edward L Platt <
> > > > > ed at elplatt.com <mailto:ed at elplatt.com> > wrote:
> > >
> > > If, like me, you care about protecting minor members in your
> > > space, you should be focusing on making sure minors are supervised. The
> > > unknown sexual predators are far more of a risk than the know ones.
> > >
> > > If you care about avoiding litigation, make sure to apply your
> > > decisions evenly. If you ban some people and not others, you are
> > > effectively endorsing everyone you don't ban, and again, registered sex
> > > offenders are not the most likely people to commit abuse and assaults.
> > > Also, as I mentioned before, if you receive any public funds, banning sex
> > > offenders is a civil rights violation:
> > > https://www.aclu-nm.org/10th-circuit-upholds-aclu-challenge-to-albuquerque-sex-offender-ban/2012/01/
> > >
> > > If you're putting more effort into this email thread and
> > > addressing specific registered sex offenders than you are into
> > > implementing and evaluating safe space policies for minors, you're doing
> > > little more than puffing your own sense of moral superiority. It's sad,
> > > but hilarious to see so many hackers reinventing and fervently supporting
> > > security theater.
> > >
> > > -Ed
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Randall Arnold <
> > > randall.arnold at texrat.net <mailto:randall.arnold at texrat.net> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > The point's been made though: hackerspaces are not
> > > > equipped to solve problems of mental illness. Who among the leadership
> > > > is going to judge whether or not the offender will repeat, and accept
> > > > the liability? How do you tell if he's "still a creeper"? Is the
> > > > determining factor for "kicking his ass out" another molestation, this
> > > > time in your hackerspace?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for risking What If recursion.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, like Matt said, there are mistakes and then
> > > > there are 'mistakes'. One has to draw a line somewhere, and I go with
> > > > the thread consensus on this one.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Randy
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > On February 18, 2015
> > > > > > > > > at 1:48 AM Derek H < dh405okc at gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:dh405okc at gmail.com> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm really happy for you and I. We're lucky, Matt.
> > > > > We aren't afflicted with a mental illness that causes inappropriate
> > > > > sexual attraction to those who are incapable of forming consent.
> > > > > That's fantastic for us, but I recognize that some are not as lucky as
> > > > > I in that matter. Perhaps, Matt, the only reason you haven't molested
> > > > > a child is because you're not mentally ill in that particular way?
> > > > > None of us can know for certain how we would behave if we were in
> > > > > someone else's shoes.
> > > > >
> > > > > At any rate, my only point is that the guy may
> > > > > well have gotten his life together and his mental state under control.
> > > > > As we are all just collections of flaws in a roughly bipedal shape,
> > > > > maybe we can be human even to those who have screwed up?
> > > > >
> > > > > That said, if he's still a creeper, kick his ass
> > > > > out. Nobody has time for that kind of disruption and risk.
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Discuss mailing list
> > > > > Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > > > > <mailto:Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Discuss mailing list
> > > > Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > > > <mailto:Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> > > > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Edward L. Platt
> > > http://elplatt.com
> > > http://civic.mit.edu/users/elplatt
> > > http://i3detroit.com
> > > @elplatt <http://twitter.com/elplatt>
> > >
> > > This electronic mail message was sent from my desktop personal
> > > computer. Please forgive any long-winded, overly-prosaic ramblings.
> > >
> > > > >
> >
> > >
>
>
> --
> Edward L. Platt
> http://elplatt.com
> http://civic.mit.edu/users/elplatt
> http://i3detroit.com
> @elplatt <http://twitter.com/elplatt>
>
> This electronic mail message was sent from my desktop personal computer.
> Please forgive any long-winded, overly-prosaic ramblings.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20150218/b0bb8e95/attachment.html>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list