I think the HR framing is not wrong, but I wanted to use Mr Kimmel's case as a jumping-off point to talk about the larger issue of how and why we (Arisia) must pay attention to behavior outside Arisia walls.
Are the pro-Kimmel people who criticize the decision to not put Kimmel on panels favoring him because he's a member of the old boy's club of SMOFdom?
I don't entirely know. I have heard two arguments in favor of Mr Kimmel's continued participation: one is that he is a major participant in several annual panels (e.g. Movie Year in Review) that are always SRO and highly rated by the audience. The argument goes that removing a panelist whose behavior on years of past panels has been well-received is an error in judgment.
I tend to disagree with that argument, but I can see why people make it.
The second, more prevalent argument I read, is the one I addressed - that it's none of Arisia's business what people say outside Arisia space. Our Code of Conduct talks about behavior in Arisia-run spaces and so it is unfair (the argument goes) to apply those rules elsewhere. I disagree very strongly with this second argument and wanted to elaborate my thinking.
Arisia should be trying to attract younger, more diverse consumers of cons. Of the many talented people who want to be panelists at Arisia, which ones will appeal to the people whom we want to be repeat customers?
I think that's similar to the point I made in my candidate position posting, where I talked about building the Arisia that we want to pass on to our kids. Yours, like mine, can inherit something you and I will be proud to pass on to them, and I'd like to be part of making that happen.
no subject
Are the pro-Kimmel people who criticize the decision to not put Kimmel on panels favoring him because he's a member of the old boy's club of SMOFdom?
I don't entirely know. I have heard two arguments in favor of Mr Kimmel's continued participation: one is that he is a major participant in several annual panels (e.g. Movie Year in Review) that are always SRO and highly rated by the audience. The argument goes that removing a panelist whose behavior on years of past panels has been well-received is an error in judgment.
I tend to disagree with that argument, but I can see why people make it.
The second, more prevalent argument I read, is the one I addressed - that it's none of Arisia's business what people say outside Arisia space. Our Code of Conduct talks about behavior in Arisia-run spaces and so it is unfair (the argument goes) to apply those rules elsewhere. I disagree very strongly with this second argument and wanted to elaborate my thinking.
Arisia should be trying to attract younger, more diverse consumers of cons. Of the many talented people who want to be panelists at Arisia, which ones will appeal to the people whom we want to be repeat customers?
I think that's similar to the point I made in my candidate position posting, where I talked about building the Arisia that we want to pass on to our kids. Yours, like mine, can inherit something you and I will be proud to pass on to them, and I'd like to be part of making that happen.