* Theodore Ts'o wrote:
What about a slide presentation in a wg discussion in perpass which
included the following image?
http://blog.chron.com/nickanderson/tag/nsa/
Bjoern Hoehrmann has already asserted he believes it would be
considered harassment.
I think that people can legitimately feel personally threatened and
disturbed, to the point where they require protection, by imagery.
An example would be decorating the perpass meeting room with graphic
posters of extrajudicially killed surveillance victims which might
induce fear in some participants and effectively censor them. It is
fair to regulate that to ensure proper debates are possible, though
I do not think it is necessary or useful to specifically call out
imagery in this sense, and the image above obviously doesn't qualify.
The problem is that the proposed policy does not call out violence,
disease, death, poisonous animals or other things that are harmful
to people, it only mentions "sexual imagery". For the United States
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/08-1448.pdf#page=76 that
may be normal and I can live with including it in such a policy, but
certainly not in a way that suggests sexual imagery deserves special
mention.
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern(_at_)hoehrmann(_dot_)de ·
http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/