Zum Inhalt springen

Y.our department: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

← Zum vorherigen VersionsunterschiedZum nächsten Versionsunterschied →
VisuellWikitext
Emi (Diskussion | Beiträge)
90 Bearbeitungen
Keine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung
Emi (Diskussion | Beiträge)
90 Bearbeitungen
Zeile 152: Zeile 152:


== preceding metalab discussion ==
== preceding metalab discussion ==
Metalab Genderdebatte Protokolle - 03/01/2013
- * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * -
Genderissues and 29C3
Beginn: 18:17
Ende: 21:34
Teilnehmer: ca. 20-30 Leute
Adam aus Australien bittet darum, auf englisch zu diskutieren.
Wir einigen uns darauf, dass wir mischen können. Wer auf deutsch reden
will, kann das machen, aber idealerweise sollten wir auf englisch reden.
Bernhard asks if people are familiar with using hand signs. He
explains signs for agreement, I want to say something, I disagree,
fundamental concerns, I want to answer ad hoc.
Msch wants to know, if that means we won't be able to interrupt? And
have a moderator.
Mihi asks, why the moderator should be a male person.
Jasmin volunteers for moderation.
Kay wants to know who takes minutes? Gabi does. Kay was asked by
someone of CCC if we were going to take minutes so we can share them
with them.
Jasmin makes an introduction. There have been some incidents, that
provoced discussions about the issue of sexism. On the interne there
was a very long discussion about the whole topic. Emi wanted to write
a message about it to CCC.
Grenz wants to know who is against writing this message and why. Why
shouldn't we do this?
Isis thinks we shouldn't do it, because we don't have it in our
statuten (bylaws). There's nothing about harassment in it. We as
metalab don't exactly have this point of view.
Grenz asks, if there's anyone who says, that sexism is a cool thing?
He wonders, why there's a discussion at all.
Georg agrees with Isis and overflo. Metalab is a diverse place with
different opinions. He thinks every single member would have to sign
it, elsewise it wouldn't be the metalab.
Isis thinks we need a policy for the metalab. There should be
consequences if people harass others. First there should be a policy,
then we should make a statment. On the mailinglist, there was about
20-30 % about 29C3, the rest was about "There's no problem."
M. is not against sending a statment, but he has a problem with the
discussion. He was at hacker jepoardy. He didn't exactly hear, what
was said, but he saw the moderator being given the red card. He thinks
the story wasn't that big. "Sexismus-Keule". Maybe it could be
overpowered to send this statement.
Msch says there has already been a message from metalab about
hackerspace-related stuff. The issue isn't about CCC in special, but
in general.
Helmuth wants to have an introduction bevor speaking, so one can
relate to each other.
Grenz has heard the argument, we are a diverse culture, so we can't
agree on points. He doesn't understand, why the argument of diversity
is the one where bullshit happens. People are killing discussions by
saying "We're so diverse, we can't say even that." He's pissed off by
that.
tKolar wants to relate to msch, talking about the statement that has
already been sent. He doesn't necessarily agree with the way it was
decided to send that message. He thinks, we shouldn't have an official
statement without voting on it.
Mihi is the real issue that we don't have a procedure for sending
statements?
m68k: political, yes.
msch thinks the metalab had a general assembly where the metalab can
send statements if it was about hackerspaces, but not if it was
general political content.
pepi didn't get the handsign-introduction. So did some others.
Bernhard goes over it again.
msch wants to go back to the diversity-question. There's a dimension
to it, where people are excluded. We should ask ourselves, whom we
want: the excluding or the excluded? He's pro the excluded.
Georg thinks that minor incidents get mixed up with major ones. Dumme
Sprüche sind nicht auf dem gleichen Niveau, wie andere Sachen. Dort wo
Sexismus stattfindet, muss man was machen. Aber das sollte kein
Vorwand sein, um herumzutrollen.
Emi answers direct. The discussion started with serious incidents. It
got derailed into hackerjeopardy.
Stefanie wasn't at congress, but they had a general discussion about a
year ago, that we would pick up big signs about sexism to make more
awareness. There should have been persons to talk to if something
happens to not have to escalate stuff yourself.
Isis glaubt, dass das, was der Georg gesagt hat der Knackpunkt ist.
Sie widerspricht. Einzelne Incidents sagen Leute ja eh gleich "Das
darf nicht sein". Dafür gibt es Gesetze. Das wahre Problem sind viele
Kleinigkeiten, wo man immer wieder gesagt oder zu spüren bekommt, dass
man dumm ist, putzen soll oder Frauentätigkeiten blöd sind… Es ist
wichtig, genau da eine Policy zu finden, weil Leute genau da nicht
wissen, wie man sich verhalten soll. Die gleichen Personen in
unterschiedlichen Stimmungen verhalten sich anders. Die Person, die
belästigt wird, kommt in Erklärungsnotstand, warum die Sache schlimm
ist. Man muss die Seximsus-Sachen immer wieder neu aufrollen. Es geht
auch um sexuelle Orientierungen.
m68k sagt die Policy gibts schon, man könne Personen dazu auffordern,
das Metalab zu verlassen. Es gibt ein Hausrecht und man kann Leute zum
Gehen auffordern.
meta sagt, das stimmt so nicht. Wir haben nur gesagt, man kann Leute
verweisen, aber es gibt keine Regeln außer Common Sense.
grenz says, this is exactly the problem. Common sense doesn't always
work. The perspective is most of the time male. "I didn't really do
something wrong." Some guy was standing on the aisle and petted a
girl's hair. He said: "I didn't do something wrong! I was just being
nice to her…" The common ground is, that we are nice to each other and
all and that's something we like, that grenz likes, but suddenly
people defend the hacker community just for the sake of defending it.
Adam thinks not everybody has the confidence to go up to somebody to
say that they think their behaviour is not acceptable. Adam himself
does that. He thinks the cards are a way of doing it though.
Maria is not sure if we should send an open letter to CCC in the sense
of "You did something wrong", but we should write a letter in genereal
on this topic.
Emi has two things: One is related to throwing poeple out. That's much
harsher than giving someone a card. To ask somebody to leave on one
comment is very harsh.
Bernhard thinks it's not always an appropriate way because then
there's no way to apologize or reflect. You won't necessarily learn
something from that.
Adam wants to make a note on apologies. Not everybody wants to be
apologized to. That might be wanted sometimes but it's not always the
case. If they want an apology they should get one if not then not.
Msch wants to know why we should teach people minimum standards of
behaviour.
grenz because it is happening all the time everywhere. He doesn't want
to generalize, but there are members in hacker community that have
problems with basic social skills.
Adam: If you send them away, where else are they going to learn?
Bernhard: We would have been expelled already. We wouldn't learn
anything. We should be able to learn from each other.
Grenz: Why?
Bernhard: Because he has a very different worldview…
Mzeltner: It's derailing right now… Go back to discussion. Metalab is
not a safe space. It considers itself to be open, to certain degrees.
There's going to be tons of battlegrounds. He hopes we can settle this
in the future, he hopes we're going to have the opportunity…
Emi's second point is related to something jasmin said. Statements
said by official persons, like thos of Congress have a certain weight.
c3o sees several topics:
Are we against sexism?
Was there sexism at Congress?
Do we want to send a statement?
How should we handle such situations in the future?
What can we improve here at metalab?
Does everyone agree to have a show of hands to on what are we going to
discuss?
Jasmin: Everyone has one vote?
c3o thinks everyone should have as many votes as they want.
Grenz thinks we don't need to discuss whether we are against sexism.
He hopes we sure are…
c3o proceeds in the voting. The three last ones are the most popular ones.
Adam thinks the question is, how the statment should be sent. Should
it be put on a blog? Sending a message to CCC about the congress?
Jasmin wants to finish the speakers list we had, before going over to
what c3o suggested.
grenz has a direct question: Sending out a message as metalab opposed
to sending a message as a group of about 40 people? Like a petition,
people can sign as opposed to "We are the metalab?"
Msch thinks this is part of "Do we want to send a statement?"
Mzeltner wants to react to m68k: Asking somebody to leave is a huge
empowerement. It's hard to take this. It has been so annoying to him,
it takes much energy, everybody hates you for doing it. Speaking out
about something is wrong is incredibly hard. Asking somebody out
should not be the only option, but just the heavily escalated one.
Stefanie would like to focus on what we can do here now? It's precious
time for there are many people here. She doesn't really know what the
card did. Maybe sometimes people just want to say "Stop talking to me,
I want to work." Most harassment happens between people who know each
other very well. It's hard to defend yourself or speak up. We should
have a way of dealing with it in a formal way. Maybe the cards are
stupid, but they are a way.
Grenz: Which cards did exist? Was it the same as defcon?
[Some]: Yes.
Bernhard: part of what was written on them was pretty offensive.
Kay: Green card: Thanks for speaking up and Zivilcourage.
- * - * - * -
c3o lists the topics again. How to handle such things at metalab in
the future should be the shortest, we should do this one first, maybe.
Isis thinks we should first discuss on what we want to improve in
metalab first. Das hat ja einen Einfluss darauf, was in so einem
Statement drinstehn könnte
Pepi thinks it's not important if at all we send a message to CCC. He
thinks we should focus on what we can improve here and now and CCC has
a year to change things.
c3o how can we come up with rules for sending a statement in general?
Not about congress in special.
Adam thinks that's bikeshedding. People want to have a discussion
about how to have a safe space.
L. thought we'd have a decision from a General Assembly.
meta says there was just a consensus on one statement. We would only
make statements that directly to hackerspace-relevant stuff.
Andy Congress is not a hackerspace.
Grenz it's about hacker-culture. He thinks there should be a message
sent. He doesn't care if it's "We are the metalab" or "I sign this,
and I am part of metalab". It's a statement for the whole world.
Mihi thinks we don't have to discuss anymore whether or not to send a
message. We want to send a message.
Amir thinks the one statement we sent out wasn't political. It was a
support statement. He agrees on sending a petition, but he disagrees
doing it in the name of metalab.
Bernhard agrees with sending a petition. Almost everybody agrees with
it. If the petition solves this issue and serves the goal, then it's
okay if it is a petition. It does the same. That could be a shortcut
to the discussion. Wenn wir jetzt den Petition-Vorschlag machen und
niemand ist dagegen, dann brauchen wir nicht über "Senden wir das als
Metalab" diskutieren.
Grenz hat den Vorschlag gebracht, damit wir nicht Zeit verlieren.
Msch es ist 19:04 und wir sollten Macht an die Moderatorin geben,
damits schneller geht.
Isis wants to go back to the topics. Maybe the petition-thing changes
something.
Pepi is in favor of the petition-thing. Everybody can decide if they
are pro or not.
Mzeltner argued pro metalab as a group. Metalab is made up of people.
If enough people sign it, it is basically the same.
c3o the thing about sending a statement or not is not being discussed.
How to handle statments in future is not being discussed that way.
Gabi wants to have a vote between sending a petition or as an institution.
Emi thinks these options are not excluding each other.
Grenz: Two questions petition or metalab and then if metalab should
sign that petition.
Mihi thinks the question is: petition yes or no.
There's a conensus on having a petition.
Amir wants to know if we are going to meet again to consent on the
content of the petition.
Grenz wants to do this in a wiki.
Mihi: etherpad.
Adam so what about signing the petition as metalab?
meta thinks we should stop dicsussing about signing the petition as
metalab as long as there is no petition.
Jasmin the question now is: What are possible improvements at metalab?
Mihi thinks we should use this possibility to have our own policy
against harassment. The events at Congress could inspire us to do this
right now.
Andy thinks we need arguments so you could explain to people why this
is bad. He wants some kind of coaching for people what to say.
Amir wants to do a workshop tomorrow to have lazzzored cards for the
opposite thing of creeper cards. Promoting different behaviour by leap
cards. Tomorrow at 6 pm.
L. says there's a positive card.
Amir thinks there should be more positive cards. You can choose what's
on the card, but it should be positive in the name of advancement of
the human race.
Pepi wants to say about the creeper cards that they caused more
problems than they solved, because they were not explained to anyone.
He disagrees with the very negative wording of the red cards. He wants
positive cards and gamification.
Grenz: Fuck gamification!
meta thinks leap cards are adressing a different problem.
stefanie says this is absolutely not about a game. It's about persons
to get help and a safe place. She wants to know, what she can do in a
certain situation.
tKolar wants a sexistische kackscheiße button.
Gabi: smells like gamification.
Amir says that cards ware not able to adress that issue. He thinks
they were designed for another purpose.
Grenz of course you can hack that system. people hit on girls to get
cards. The signal of red cards for people to see me holding a red card
up is a group-situation. People around her should see what's
happening. It's a community-statement. He doesn't care what's written
on it. It can be a red card without any content.
Asta: Assholes are going to be assholes no matter if cards are
explained or not. We all recognize that it went really wrong. She
thinks there must be a different solution than cards. Es geht nicht
darum, wie wer ausschaut, welches Geschlecht jemand hat, sie versteht
auch nicht, was falsch gelaufen ist.
Stefanie wants to hit in the same point. If somebody gives you a card
and it becomes a game, than it's not making any sense. If the card
brings out the courage in the community, it does make sense. Elsewhise
not.
Bernhard: The cards didn't work because people didn't understand them.
We are sitting here to discuss why they didn't work. Why did this
intervention fail.
Anna thinks the cards don't work because that's not how people
communicate. She doesn't want to feel like a nerd by holding up a card.
Adam they partially worked, because you have a big group of people
discussing them.
Grenz thinks the cards work because … he skips.
Mzeltner: To Anna – it's great she feels empowered, but it's not a
solution for people who feel empowered. The thing worked in terms of
people starting to discuss them. They weren't advertised or "allowed"…
all the stuff that has to do with sexism at congress is a failure of
communication.
wizard thinks the cards worked, but they weren't communicated to
people. Finally he understood them and they might work, but without
explanation they won't work.
Anna but how do you want to put it in practice here? You always have
to carry them with you?
Gabi wants to have a break of 15 minutes. Broad consensus.
=== 15 minute break ===
Jasmin says we'll make some changes. Instant comments are not possible
anymore. There'll just be a speaker's list.
meta wants to keep it for one short sentence.
Jasmin argues against that.
Adam if she's strong enough she should cut off people after one sentence.
Jasmin does moderation for her first time so she wants to skip instant
comments. We're now discussing what to do to improve the situation at
metalab.
Mihi wanted to do exactly that. He suggests to stick to what we
decided at earlier meetings. Come up with a way to handle this as a
community. How can someone who feels threatened handle that?
Adam wanted to make this as a first point, move the discussion to the
ideas people have about improvement. There was also a discussion about
the petition, people should get on the speakers list, if they have
suggestions about how and when this is going to happen.
Bernhard thinks that doesn't go far enough. He wants to talk about
culture and what we want to be. There's an oppurtunity that shows
itself now. Sexism is a subtle and latent thing. It's something that
we need to deal with and confront ourselves with. He used to say he's
not affected by this. It's a non-issue. That's simply not true. That's
especially not true, if there are rules. If people feel violated by
what you say you can say: You're not allowed to make jokes about
women. We should teach people to be sensible. "Be excellent to each
other" was the key sentence on the mailing list.
Isis thinks it's very important that the policy should be written
down. The last gender issue meeting was just about people interested
in it. We should make it binding for other people. Isis sees a huge
consensus. It should be written down "Don't make jokes about women".
Sometimes it's okay to make such jokes. But there's so few people who
have the empathy to know when it's okay to do that. Also there should
be a clearly written policy. Throwing somebody out should be on the
list, but not as the first step.
Grenz final word to the creeper card thing. It doesn't work in
hackerspaces. It's for congress, for that's not a safe space. Here
should be a safe space. Whenever something happens, write an immediate
protocoll onto the mailing list. That gives a little dimension to
what's happening and to and by whom. To a certain extent that has to
be discussed beyond in here.
Meep feminism might be the wrong word for this context, but the
problem is not open sexism. It's really rare for women to be
physically assaulted or get really bad comments. She doesn't get
offend by everything that contains latent sexism in it. It just
accumulates. It creates an uncomfortable atmosphere. She doesn't like
the idea of writing an e-mail. There are two possible bad responses.
"Why in the world are you making an issue of this small thing?!" or a
negative response for the offender. If everything is written on the
list it may happen that it is seen as intentional, even if it is not.
Georg wants to know about the harassments who did them. Wenn Leute neu
herkommen, dann lesen sie auch die Policy nicht. Insofern macht das
wenig Sinn.
Pepi wants adding something to Isis demand of writing down a policy.
It's about discrimination in general. We should not target this as a
certain form of discrimination.
Steinbrenner thinks sexism is a subproblem. The real problem is how
you interact with people who have different beliefs and everything. If
you say "Don't make jokes about women?" it's going to provoke many
questions like "What about blacks" asf. We should decide if we want
more diversity here and then enforce it.  We should take active steps
for diversity.
Isis wants to answer Georg's question. It's both. There are less jokes
when they're friends. But it's still both and what really gets her is,
that when the discussion about sexism pops up, also some of the
regulars show that they don't know about it and that they don't think
it's an important problem. That's just as big a problem as harassment
itself. It's like those subtle comments that make women uncomfortable.
There has not to be a distinction in regulars or newcomers.
Stefanie agrees on this, that it is an underlying atmosphere. It's not
always conscience, we are socialized to behave in certain ways. This
discussion is important exactly because of this. She doesn't want to
educate everyone who's harassing her. She wants to know how this can
be a safe space. She knows there are many marginalized groups, but
right now it should be about women.
Amir thinks tracking of incidents is important, then having particular
rules on how to behave. Those two ideas don't make sense themselves,
but if you combine them, they do. Reporting incidents is hard to do.
Together this could end up in tracking examples of behaviour that are
shown to be inaproppriate. Maybe we could do this in a wiki to track
what's inaproppriate.
Grenz about mailing list… he's a huge fan of Noisebridge. What they
are doing there, with a high-traffic-mailing list like our interne. If
something is not excellent, it is posted on the mailing list. If it is
not excellent to let the lazzzor turned on, then they would write it.
Why shouldn't there be discussions on our mailinglist about topics
like sexism? At noisebridge they did that for a long time. It get's
less and less frequent because people start to be getting the point.
There is a certain factual "Hey, that works!"
Msch wants to answer to Gregor: Wenn jemand reinkommt und er kennt
sich nicht aus und wird rausgeworfen. Wenn jemand neu ist, wird ihm
erklärt, worums geht und erst beim zweiten Mal wird er rausgeworfen,
wenn er nicht belehrbar ist. He wants active steps to have more
diverese people here. Have somebody anonymized enter stuff into a log.
He would like metalab to be a safe space.
S. says most of the time it is not a direct jokes. At least for him
he's most of the time not noticing he's doing something wrong. Finding
a rule-set to write that down is hard. Having things on the mailing
list is like finger pointing to resolve on a personal basis. That's
not going to help give a nice climate in the space. He'd be really
careful with naming people directly.
Bernhard: First about grenz: It's a good idea on the surface. But only
for things that are easily punishable. You should be educated about
your deviation. He was guilty about this in the past and is trying to
be improving about this to see what others' reactions to his words
are. We as men are told to not give a damn about what other people
think. It's about putting other people down. That's what feminism says
and it's part of the game. What we are trying to change is, how can we
achieve excellence with each other? He's not going to randomly kick
people out. We need to establish a culture that enables people to feel
safe. Certain kind of respect for other people, that's a hard thing to
educate to people. Establishing a rule-set is not going to do this,
even though it is necessary. The punishments should be social. and not
physical. If somebody harasses you physically, you should be able to
throw them out.
Emi thinks the discussion is not ready for his point right now.
Steinbrenner thinks its important to have a culture of being able to
make errors. It's also important that we … harrassment and jokes
aren't always done on purpose. When somebody damages a tool or hurts
sombody's feelings… is it their fault? Is it our fault? It would be
very good if we had a code of conduct, everybody could sign.
Stefanie appreciates the thoughts of Steinbrenner, but she doesn't
agree. It's not something technical like turning off a lazzzor. It's a
social problem. Every person who is hurt, is right. You can't tell
them to not feel hurt, because they do. If somebody feels offended,
they need to be listened to and taken serious. She wouldn't always
want everybody to know what happened to her, for she might be shy
about it.
Isis thinks it's right to say it's not about writing down "No jokes
about women". A wiki for incidents might be good. She has only become
a feminist at metalab. Before she thought there'd be no problem, for
if she acted like she was equal, she'd be. Most people don't know
there's a problem. There shouldn't be punishment at first. At first
there should be a discussion and the social skills as a community
should work, not necessarily the person that feels offended.
Grenz agrees with Stefanie. The person that gets hurt has… different
people have different ways to deal with things. In Noisebridge it
worked very well. But things happened like: This happened to me.
People were also reacting like "Why are you posting this at all?" If
we can't define rules, for it is hard, we could find another way to
have more awareness. Something like the mailinglist-discussion
yesterday: If there was someone saying in person "There are
anthropological-biological constant!" … well, there's a certain end to
a discussion. Of course you can make mistakes. But it's not
necessarily the same thing as being punished.
Msch wants to have anonymized msgs. Inclusion means exclusion. We can
include people that don't know how to behave, or those who are
harrassed. He suggests Stefanie could help make a safe space out of
metalab. He wants to invite somebody who's into the whole gender-stuff
to hold a workshop at metalab.
meta doesn't thinkg that the tools we use is important. What about
people that feel in danger right now, like Stefanie said. Should we
protect the offended or educate the offender?
Adam talks about White Ribbon day. Police Force, asf. There's a
wristband saying "I will stand up against inappropriate behaviour
against women" (look that one up). It's helping him. Maybe there
should be repeated meetings to talk about the problems that there are,
to help each other build confidence to talk about it.
Meep thinks it's really hard to call someone up. If anything happens
and the person gets offended. If the person doesn't want to call the
person out, somebody else schould do it. One important thing in doing
that is knowing, that the community is behind you. Writing out some
general rules would help with that. So it would be a good idea to
write down stuff like "Be excellent to each other" or "If somebody
feels offended, he or she has the right to be offended and the right
to be listened to." If I feel comfortable somwhere it is easier to
call out on someone. It would be a good idea to make the tracking
anonymous, but if somebody is a repeated offender, then there should
be more than talking to the person.
Pepi is in favor of anonymously collecting things that happen here
without blaming certain persons, so people won't say "There's no
problem". Also it's not about punishing people, but helping them see
it and behave in another way. He's unsure how good the
Noisebridge-appear would be working at metalab. The issue-tracker is
helping, so heÄs all for trying this.
Emi thinks there are 2 things we could do. First find some workshops
that promote women in the hacker culture. This might take a long time,
but it might be very helpful. Second he would be willing to run a
monthly meetup on this topic. This might be interesting to keep track
on the topic. Maybe also for new people to gently send to.
tKolar wants to say something about exclusion. About "Whenever you're
offended you're right because you are offended" – but being offended
does not imply the right to get support by people, because… for
example if you say "The way you breathe offended me, get away" …
that's not right. There needs to be some kind of thing to say this is
not a personal conflict. "I am offended" is a very subjective
statement. Tying that into a official statement seems to be not the
right thing. Second he'd like to discuss the culture-thing where it
isn't tolerated by metalab as a community… Repression in the sense of
not doing something about the actual problem… We should collectively
say ""I'm going to try to stand up for other people if I think that
something is offensive to someone, even if it doesn't offend me."
Steinbrenner if somebody is offended by "you kissed a black person"
that would be a problem. That is why we are going to agree on… He
didn't want to say that breaking a tool is the same like hurting a
person, but those are problems that are connected. If I hurt
somebody's feelings I don't care about their feelings. The same goes
for tools, that they don't care about the tools. There could be
anonymous statistics to show that there is a problem. He would like to
say that we are about which mailing list it should be and which way…
He has mixed feelings about this. We demand a lot of transperancy of
other people. But if something breaks here, we keep it to ourselves on
the internal mailing list. Maybe being transparent would be more
authentic and would encourage people.
Helmuth wants to react to S.. In the organisation he's working at,
there's an Ombudsmann to help both parties their positions. There's
another person to say anonymously that there was a certain problem.
Amir: thinks it's a good idea to not make it about punishment asf.
Most of the time it is not malicious intention, but lack of
understanding or misunderstanding. Make victims as well as offenders
to give them a kind of timeout to talk about everything.
Isis is now for the Mailinglist thing, for we all have a problem with
making mistakes. If it comes to the point of talking about "That bad
person!" But we make mistakes all the time. Maybe if we post it that
people get used to problems so that there can be a more productive
environment. So by tracking sexist incidents people could get used to
the fact, there really is a problem with harassment and sexism. Maybe
all that "Oh come on, that's nothing" would stop then.
Andi thinks there is an argument from the organisation from 29C3 like
"Oh there are some feminazis who don't know the culture and are
destroying everythin" Maybe just for procotoll we should say how many
people feel like the hacker culture is "our home". Something for the
protocoll like "We are the people, that are in this culture."
Gabi had some questions to this, but we were derailing.
S. thinks we don't need a written down guideline. There should be
people to talk to. We shouldn't have mails like "You did something
terribly wrong." He wants some kind of trusted persons to talk to like
"Will help, will guide". Based on what happened there should be an
according action.
Stefanie thinks her comments might sound fuzzy for there's so much she
wants to say. She explains Miss Baltazars. They were meeting at
Metalab in the past. There was a lot of gazing and watching and people
were kind, but they were eavesdropping and helping at every
opportunity – without being asked for it. They moved to MQ then to
escape that. This helped in the beginning. She suggests that men who
are uncertain how to act towards women should have a group of men only
to talk about this topic. Maybe there should be talks about topics
like "Non-violent communications". She thinks we replicate forms of
violence like gazing, watching asf. Only if there's constant attention
on certain topics, then we would be able to handle such stuff. She had
a point in her life (Sweden, NYC) where she realized what it's like to
be treated like a person instead of being treated like a woman. At the
beginnin when she came to metalab she felt like she was not part of
the group. "Why is she working with Arduinos" asf. At some point she
started to feel comfortable. "patronizing" does not exist in german
that way. "social cloning" if you can identify with a group you'll
feel like you're part of it. If there's noone in the group you can
identify with, you won't be able to be part of it. At some point in
metalab there was a point where a woman was harassed and it was said
that it happened for she was drunk.
Pepi wants to get back to tKolar. You can not argue about feelings.
There's no arguing about it. You can not argue about proven fact. You
can only argue about opinions. He's very much in favor of workshops.
Maybe in the frame of the metaday.
Grenz is in favor of having more workshops on that kind of stuff. We
can keep talking about inclusionism on and an, but there's so many
males. There was a study between male and female … which is their
greates fear. males: feeling alienated. femals: being killed. That's a
perspective that we grow up in. Having the mindset of fearing to be
killed is a very different perspective than feeling alienated. People
see things in a different way. To realize that helps a lot.
Msch likes "Stand up for other people". He personally always finds
long talks like metalab boring, but the person he already mentioned
might as well talk at the metaday.
Jasmin collected some suggestions how we can go on:
* Tracking incidents, anonymously or mailinglist
* Monthly meetup
* Lectures about Gender
* Non-Violent Communication
* This should not be only about women but all minority groups
Isis demands a break before discussing about what is most important.
=== 15 minute break ===
Jasmin fasst nochmal zusammen: Wir machen eine Petition, die jeder
unterzeichnen kann.
Clemens meint, wir sollten das nicht direkt an den CCC schicken.
Mzeltner würde den Congress als Trigger nennen.
c3o: Nicht "Lieber CCC", meinst du?
Maria: Vielleicht schadets nicht, dass sich alle Leute vorher nochmal
treffen. Vielleicht zuerst im Wiki sammeln?
Clemens: Hackathon als Kickoff?
Mzeltner ist dabei.
Anna: Wer darf unterschreiben?
Mehrstimmig: Alle.
Anna: Dann muss es auch verbreitet werden.
Emi: Jetzt ein wiki aufmachen wär vielleicht nicht sinnvoll.
Kickoff-Meeting für einen grundlegenden Text wäre sinnvoll. Emi wird
eine Mail an die Liste schreiben. Wenn wir eine Petition formulieren,
wie machen wir das dann?
Jasmin: Das können wir beim Treffen besprechen, oder?
Emi: Wie machen wir das dann konkret? Machen wir das intern,
unterschreibens und dann öffentlich ohne weitere Unterschriften oder
öffentlich unterschreibbar?
Maria denkt, es sollte auch nach der Veröffentlichung noch
unterschreibbar bleiben.
Clemens schlägt auch vor, dass in einem Wiki das zu entwickeln nicht
so sinnvoll ist. Aber im Wiki könne man Unterschriften sammeln.
Emi: Hat jemand Erfahrungen mit Petitionen?
Jasmin will wissen, ob Adam Erfahrung hat.
Emi: Does anybody know somebody who does?
Gabi: Was is mim Andi?
Andi: Das was sie gemacht haben, ist eine ganz andre Thematik und ganz
andres Thema.
Gabi meint, wir formulieren zuerst und dann was unterschreibbares.
Mzeltner meint, es gab mal von vibe! was mit "Von einem adäquaten
Urheberrecht erwarte ich mir…" Man könnte da eine Duallösung machen.
Amir says we did something similar in the past, that worked very well.
Maybe we could be doing that again.
Maria thinks we were discussing meeting on one day, a few people
writing the text. Giving other people a chance to add some stuff would
be good. Maybe there's a way to include additions to the final
petition too.
Mzeltner erklärt nochmal genauer was es mit dem Zeug von vibe! damals
auf sich hatte.
Ysi: If you want to make a place safe, there's a question of safety.
This needs to be happening right when there's an incident. First thing
would be to be sure, that when something happens, we get support from
people who are there. Instint recognition would be important. Also
there should be a team to talk to afterwards. One of the best ways to
handle incidents is mediation. There should be two things: The
petition and a mediation-team. Maybe not rules, but create a feeling
of responsibility. Guidelines might come at a later point. Anonymous
comments would be a good thing, if guidelines are broken several
times, then there should be the possibility to act upon this.
Clemens is pro crowd-sourcing. What we want to achieve until the next
event is to get our opinion out. It might be better on a smaller scale
first.
Mzeltner the mediation thing has come up before. We need people for
that. It's voluntary and he's been talking about that to several
people before. He doesn't know anyone who does that.
Msch mentioned before a guy to do a workshop, probably for free.
c3o this person is studying gender studies in London.
Emi: What is the topic right now?
Jamsin: What needs to be done right now?
Emi is focussed on the petition right now. What about a timeframe?
Mzeltner thinks 10 days max. Because right now we have momentum for this.
Amir wants an incremental list for the petition.
1. Mzeltner: Draft for the petition
2. Meetup tomorrow
Emi wants to know if people have time tomorrow at 6 pm?
Stefan: Writing the petition or first meetup?
Emi both. Tomorrow 8 pm?
Kay enters the meetup into the calendar.
Stefan thinks the minutes are something different. Either we publish
them for there are the actionable items in it or we say again what the
points are that are important for us here at the metalab. Man könnte
das aber auch auf die gender issue meetups verlegen.
Jasmin beschließt damit die Runde. Morgen gibt es ein Meetup, für alle
die an der Petition mitschreiben wollen.
Abgerufen von „https://metalab.at/alpakaparty/Y.our_department“