(no subject)

[theweaselking]

Worldcon decides to make an "exception" to their code of conduct and safe spaces policy, and allow someone who attempted to SWAT a presenter to attend in person. (EDIT: Facebook link replaced with link to a real website.)

The same person selectively edited emails in order to send a campaign of harassment against a venue that rejected him, then blamed the venue. This week.

Comments

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

It was actually Gerrold that asked the decision to be set aside, since Antonelli is a Hugo nominee.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

And? Sasquan made it *his job* to say no, and if he'd said no, harassment of him would have intensified.

"Accept the apology and defend your attacker from punishment, OR ELSE" is a super-common failure mode of this that the convention has fallen into.

Leaving aside that, y'know, Antonelli also sent his pet rapegoblins after other people, and Sasquan made it *their* job to tell the world it was okay, too.

Antonelli tried to have cops kill David Gerrold, and maliciously (edited emails and all) sent his MRAsshole followers after a woman who declined to do business with him (paying the penalty fee in the backing-out clause of the contract!) because he tried to get Gerrold killed. And Sasquan thinks that's okay and he deserves an exception to their policies, because, after being threatened, they decline to be threatened further.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

This is from the official communication, bolded parts mine:

"We thoroughly reviewed all available data, including email from both involved parties, social media postings, discussions with key committee members, and so forth. The inescapable conclusion was that Mr. Antonelli had violated our Code of Conduct in this matter. The recommendation was to refund Mr. Antonelli's membership and prohibit his entry to any convention location or function. However, after the recommendation was made, Mr. Gerrold, as the aggrieved party, specifically requested that the Executive Committee set aside this recommendation on the grounds that Mr. Antonelli did apologize, is sending a retraction to the Spokane Police Department and because, as a Hugo Nominee, he deserves to attend the ceremony.

The Executive Committee has chosen to accept Mr. Gerrold's request, and considers the matter closed as of this time."

And Gerrold himself is saying he was the initiator of the request. While I don't think the Committee should have accepted the request (or that Gerrold should have made it), they are in their rights to do so.

[catlin.livejournal.com]

It really doesn't matter that one aggrieved has accepted his apology. There is Zero assurance he won't harass and injure some other attendee

[torrain.livejournal.com]

I looked at the official conversation, too.

They've since deleted the comments, but there was specifically one where they said that they were giving Mr. Gerrold's wishes extra weight because he was a GOH.

They're within their rights to do that. Hell, they're within their rights to say "Oh, whoops, just kidding, we're cancelling the Code of Conduct entirely."

But that doesn't mean it's not worth acknowledging that they openly (well. how open is it if you delete the comments after the fact?) said they decided to brush aside their own harassment policy because a dude with social clout asked them to.

[dionysus1999.livejournal.com]

That Lou, he's such a card. I don't know that I would have forgiven him, and he should be prosecuted for false report to the police.

[resonant.livejournal.com]

I wonder if he will be allowed into Canada.