Geek Feminism Wiki

2012 / December / 29C3

Moved from Talk:Timeline of incidents Thayvian (talk) 04:19, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

Please add this because the page is edit-protected

  • Hacker Jeopady is a quiz game that has been organized by the moderators for about a decade.
    • The moderators have been criticized in 2012 for their history of encouraging women to participate. It was argued that this behaviour is discrimination because of its over representation of women on stage compared to the low percentage of women in the audience.
    • Consequently one of the moderators over-emphasized the anti-discrimination debate in a number of (more or less) humourers statements.
    • This prompted one woman from the audience to come to the stage and hand over a red card. In her statement she used a reference to female reproduction organs instead of the term “women”.
    • In an attempt to deal with the public diss, the moderator stated (in a more or less humourers way) that he considers the cards not helpful.
    • This resulted in further escalation of the situation.
    • The full name of the other moderator, who tried to calm down the situation, was mentioned wrongly in comments on popular press websites as the trolling moderator.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Redmaike (talkcontribs)

Added. Thayvian (talk) 04:23, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

ul>the translations from the hacker jeopardy is missleading. i was in the audience, i never heard them state that they are sad that they "have to" include women. 14:59, January 2, 2013 (UTC)crazcat

Regarding "... repeatedly sexually propositioned ... while physically touching her.", I read her tweets and cannot find any mention of physical touching. Is there another reference for this? She did tweet that "He didn t let go until i left", but I believe she meant that he did't let it go, as in didn't give up. She used the prase "didn't let it go" later. BTW: English is not her native language. 17:59, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be only fair to also document the conference organizer's reaction, represented in these issues by the A-Team (where A stands for awareness, anti-harassment, or whatever you want it to mean).

Parts stroked out are simply untrue.

In December 2012, several sexist incidents happen at Chaos Communications Congress 29 and are documented on a private web site. A few:

  • Creation of an image of a woman's nude body (minus head, arms, and lower legs) with the red Creeper Move cards. A-Team located the creator, explained to her why the picture would be considered offensive, and it was subsequently removed.
  • Creation of an image of a penis with green Creeper Move cards. A-Team located the creator, explained to him why the picture would be considered offensive, and it was subsequently removed.
  • A game created on the CCC wiki using the Creeper Move cards to sexually proposition others, with bonus points for offending their partner. A-Team removed the text, replaced it by an explanation written by the team distributing the Creeper Move cards, and made sure the Wiki page was protected.
  • A drawing of a man peeing on a woman. The woman is saying "Let me be your human toilet." Drawing was almost immediately removed by an unknown attendee.
  • A public Etherpad with the message "Verpisst euch von unserem Kongress, ihr Idioten und Femi-Nazis" (translates roughly to "Bugger off our conference, you idiots and feminazis"). A-Team removed the statement from the Wiki.
  • The Hacker Jeopardy game featured many sexist comments, including around ten by the moderator. A member of the conference anti-harassment policy team was present and did not stop the sexist comments, but did criticize an audience member who protested the comments. Several people walked out of the room in protest. A-Team took aside the moderators after the show to explain them why people felt their comments were sexist. A rough English translation of some of the comments includes:
    • "For reasons of gender-equality, we'll sadly have to pick a woman now."
    • "No prompting, even if you want to help the woman on gender-inequality grounds."
    • "I think we'll have to strike the minus [in front of the points?] on gender-equality grounds."
    • "Is that okay, one guy against two women? Can't have him feeling like he's being mobbed."
  • A woman attendee was repeatedly sexually propositioned by a male attendee who persisted after being told no and while physically touching her. A-Team wasn't aware of that event until afterwards. Attendee didn't know about the existence of the team, more information of the attendees about escalation procedures seems to be needed. Behaviour would have been reason for a warning, and if it persisted, eviction.

Not the person who approximately two days ago contributed directly above (and forgot to sign?), but strongly agree. Speaking as an attendee and as someone who followed the debate very closely I would really appreciate integration of these addenda and corrrections into the main page. 29c3 generally speaking was a very friendly, welcoming and safe place to be. It is rather disparaging to anybody who contributed to that experience to encounter persistent criticism on issues already solved or disproved. Thank you! 16:37, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Would you please be so kind as to explain your editing policy? According to the above mentionend additions were made by Andreas Bogk (speaking for the 29c3 awareness team) at 01:58, January 3, 2013. At 02:19, January 3, 2013 geekfeminism-editor Valerietai edited respectively removed Andreas allegedly "contested description of conference policy team actions". I am an independent (female) geek, feminist of long standing, neither affiliated with CCC nor with the awareness team of 29c3. But, as far as I see, Andreas remarks about 29c3 were at the same time quite balanced and comprehensive. I'd therefore strongly appreciate clarification upon which points were contested, by whom, and especially: Which data convinced you to reject his account. I hope that, while trying to advocate gender equality, does not take recourse to a curtailed respectively biased description of events. For  that would, as you certainly agree, hardly contribute to change in a sustainable way. Thank you! 02:29, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Broken link backups

Hello, Google's cache allowed me to get most (all?) of the broken links, if you think it's a good idea to make backups. See images Google cache content and Screenshot of the cache. Cheers qubodup (talk) 17:20, January 6, 2013 (UTC)