![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
That Readercon thing 2012 edition
Jul. 30th, 2012 07:17 pmNo, not that thing. No, not that other thing either.
This thing.
Before we start, let me state my biases up front: I'm casually acquainted with both Genevieve Valentine and Rene Walling. I've never socialized with either of them outside of a convention setting, though Genevieve is very close friends with some close friends of mine. I will say that I have enjoyed the company (in a vehemently non-euphemistic sense of the word) of both individuals, and have found them both to be pleasant and intelligent. Further, I've interacted with Rene in a running-events-at-the-convention capacity, and I found him competent and easy to work with. Also he once gave me a gift of a two-liter bottle of sodaand has thereby bought my fierce personal loyalty to him forever.
Right, so as ought to surprise nobody, my opinion on this topic is a little bit more moderate than that of the collective Fandom Internet Outrage Machine. What might surprise somebody is that my opinion on the topic is a little bit more moderate than the Fandom Internet Outrage Machine -- in general, I've found the majority of the responses of the collective fan community to be pretty solidly on-point. Nobody is more startled than I, I assure you. Also, I'm super-glad that nobody has tagged this donnybrook with a -fail suffix, at least not yet.*
To state it as bluntly as possible, Readercon screwed the pooch**. Then the pooch died mid-coitus and Readercon guiltily buried the pooch in its backyard. Then, seized with a strange and uncontrollable passion incomprehensible to all but the most depraved and fevered brains, Readercon dug the pooch up, and with the dulcet sounds of early-era Frank Sinatra singing sad love songs on the phonograph and the moonlight shining bright, screwed the dead pooch.
I am in full agreement with the many and sundry that believe that Rene Walling ought to have been banned (and still ought to be banned) from Readercon.
To elaborate: While I believe that justice should always be tempered with mercy, the entire point of a stated zero-tolerance policy is that mercy is removed entirely from the equation. No mercy! Tempering is verboten! No matter how sorry Rene is, no matter how much the Readercon board may have wished that they hadn't instituted the policy of zero-tolerance in the first place, no matter how much personal loyalty they may feel to an old friend and ally, violating their stated policy on this topic in this situation was colossally stupid, not to mention seriously questionable on an ethical level, for a wide variety of reasons -- a variety so wide that I am actually gape-jawed and dumbfounded that the board made the decision that they did.
How four presumably rational people and one colossal blackmailing douchebag with excellent GRE scores managed to ignore the staggering implications of their actions is a little beyond me. Even ignoring the ethical issues of not providing Genevieve the redress which she had been expecting according to the stated policies of the convention, how could they not have anticipated the fallout from such a boneheaded move on a realpolitik level? I positively boggle.
OK, that aside: The people saying that they will never attend another convention again as long as they live as long as Rene Walling isn't banned from those other conventions as well? If it's their true and earnest belief that the presence of such a horrible villain makes them unsafe them I would encourage them to do so.
If, however, those people are threatening to boycott those conventions as some kind of statement of protest, or because they feel angry at their perceived powerlessness in the face of Readercon's craven actions and they want to do something strident and active to support the cause, I would urge you all to remember the lesson of Hester Prynne -- no, not the deathcore band, the literary character -- and to further recall that Rene is a human being***. He certainly did a bad thing, but that is not the sum total of who and what he is. While it may feel good to lash out and punish him because Readercon failed to do so, does that justify attempting to engineer the social and professional destruction of a person? If your answer to those questions is yes, and you firmly believe that his actions deserve total ostracism, then by all means grease up the pitchforks and spark the torches. The castle's thataway! Personally, while I can understand and respect the decision of those that disagree with me, I believe that such drastic action is unnecessarily cruel -- see again my opinions of justice vis-a-vis mercy.
* Wallingfail does sound a bit like a Napoleonic-era battlefield though, doesn't it?
** In my mind's eye the pooch is a French poodle.
*** and to head off the inevitable choruses of asinine responses, yes, Genevieve is a human being as well and Rene totally should have thought about that. The facts of their respective humanity are not mutually exclusive.
This thing.
Before we start, let me state my biases up front: I'm casually acquainted with both Genevieve Valentine and Rene Walling. I've never socialized with either of them outside of a convention setting, though Genevieve is very close friends with some close friends of mine. I will say that I have enjoyed the company (in a vehemently non-euphemistic sense of the word) of both individuals, and have found them both to be pleasant and intelligent. Further, I've interacted with Rene in a running-events-at-the-convention capacity, and I found him competent and easy to work with. Also he once gave me a gift of a two-liter bottle of soda
Right, so as ought to surprise nobody, my opinion on this topic is a little bit more moderate than that of the collective Fandom Internet Outrage Machine. What might surprise somebody is that my opinion on the topic is a little bit more moderate than the Fandom Internet Outrage Machine -- in general, I've found the majority of the responses of the collective fan community to be pretty solidly on-point. Nobody is more startled than I, I assure you. Also, I'm super-glad that nobody has tagged this donnybrook with a -fail suffix, at least not yet.*
To state it as bluntly as possible, Readercon screwed the pooch**. Then the pooch died mid-coitus and Readercon guiltily buried the pooch in its backyard. Then, seized with a strange and uncontrollable passion incomprehensible to all but the most depraved and fevered brains, Readercon dug the pooch up, and with the dulcet sounds of early-era Frank Sinatra singing sad love songs on the phonograph and the moonlight shining bright, screwed the dead pooch.
I am in full agreement with the many and sundry that believe that Rene Walling ought to have been banned (and still ought to be banned) from Readercon.
To elaborate: While I believe that justice should always be tempered with mercy, the entire point of a stated zero-tolerance policy is that mercy is removed entirely from the equation. No mercy! Tempering is verboten! No matter how sorry Rene is, no matter how much the Readercon board may have wished that they hadn't instituted the policy of zero-tolerance in the first place, no matter how much personal loyalty they may feel to an old friend and ally, violating their stated policy on this topic in this situation was colossally stupid, not to mention seriously questionable on an ethical level, for a wide variety of reasons -- a variety so wide that I am actually gape-jawed and dumbfounded that the board made the decision that they did.
How four presumably rational people and one colossal blackmailing douchebag with excellent GRE scores managed to ignore the staggering implications of their actions is a little beyond me. Even ignoring the ethical issues of not providing Genevieve the redress which she had been expecting according to the stated policies of the convention, how could they not have anticipated the fallout from such a boneheaded move on a realpolitik level? I positively boggle.
OK, that aside: The people saying that they will never attend another convention again as long as they live as long as Rene Walling isn't banned from those other conventions as well? If it's their true and earnest belief that the presence of such a horrible villain makes them unsafe them I would encourage them to do so.
If, however, those people are threatening to boycott those conventions as some kind of statement of protest, or because they feel angry at their perceived powerlessness in the face of Readercon's craven actions and they want to do something strident and active to support the cause, I would urge you all to remember the lesson of Hester Prynne -- no, not the deathcore band, the literary character -- and to further recall that Rene is a human being***. He certainly did a bad thing, but that is not the sum total of who and what he is. While it may feel good to lash out and punish him because Readercon failed to do so, does that justify attempting to engineer the social and professional destruction of a person? If your answer to those questions is yes, and you firmly believe that his actions deserve total ostracism, then by all means grease up the pitchforks and spark the torches. The castle's thataway! Personally, while I can understand and respect the decision of those that disagree with me, I believe that such drastic action is unnecessarily cruel -- see again my opinions of justice vis-a-vis mercy.
* Wallingfail does sound a bit like a Napoleonic-era battlefield though, doesn't it?
** In my mind's eye the pooch is a French poodle.
*** and to head off the inevitable choruses of asinine responses, yes, Genevieve is a human being as well and Rene totally should have thought about that. The facts of their respective humanity are not mutually exclusive.
