Readercon
(ETA: confused the Concom and the Board. Thanks to
sovay
and
shadesong
for pointing me in the right direction) Just got back from camping, getting my feet under me, bone weary from the nephews and N. K. Jemisin keeping me up until 4 Saturday Morning (and making my cry. Por Sieh!).
It's my understanding that someone sexually harassed someone else during Readercon (I am aware of more than that, but I won't rehash here), and that the written policies on hand state that sexual harassment is grounds for a lifetime ban from the convention (is this correct? If I am mistaken, please let me know), but that the Board Concom has voted to not apply the policies as written in this case.
Says
sovay
:
The board of directors voted for the two-year suspension. The board is not the concom, although there is a small overlap of members; I believe everyone who wasn't on the board found out after the fact. I certainly did. Rose has called for the concom to override the board, which is what I want: it is the only way Readercon will retain any credibility or integrity. I feel strongly about this subject for a number of reasons.
If this is all correct, then they have left me with a decision that is easy to make and difficult to live with. This is their doing. This is the doing of the harasser, who shall go nameless here. I know that
rosefox
has called for a vote (ETA) for the concom to override the board's decision to reverse the decision. I appreciate her efforts, and I hope they are successful. If they are not, I will be forced by the board concom, by the harasser, to choose between parting ways with a con that has been of incalculable value to me as an author, a reader, and given me a whole circle of friends, who are, right now, dealing with this issue, or I will have to show my support for a harasser, for harassment, or, that I at least condone it, by returning.
It is a choice that is no choice. If the original decision stands, I will be writing to the concom and asking them not to consider me for panels and to take me off all their mailing lists, and I will go to Connecticon for that weekend instead. My contributions to the con are minimal bordering on negligible, but it's importance to me is great. I will miss it, if I must miss it. But if I must miss it, I will.


It's my understanding that someone sexually harassed someone else during Readercon (I am aware of more than that, but I won't rehash here), and that the written policies on hand state that sexual harassment is grounds for a lifetime ban from the convention (is this correct? If I am mistaken, please let me know), but that the Board Concom has voted to not apply the policies as written in this case.
Says

The board of directors voted for the two-year suspension. The board is not the concom, although there is a small overlap of members; I believe everyone who wasn't on the board found out after the fact. I certainly did. Rose has called for the concom to override the board, which is what I want: it is the only way Readercon will retain any credibility or integrity. I feel strongly about this subject for a number of reasons.
If this is all correct, then they have left me with a decision that is easy to make and difficult to live with. This is their doing. This is the doing of the harasser, who shall go nameless here. I know that

It is a choice that is no choice. If the original decision stands, I will be writing to the concom and asking them not to consider me for panels and to take me off all their mailing lists, and I will go to Connecticon for that weekend instead. My contributions to the con are minimal bordering on negligible, but it's importance to me is great. I will miss it, if I must miss it. But if I must miss it, I will.
Published on July 30, 2012 08:16
No comments have been added yet.
Erik Amundsen's Blog
- Erik Amundsen's profile
- 3 followers
Erik Amundsen isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
