But where is the line? Because we absolutely need to define it. 1/
But is that perhaps too subjective? Shouldn't we have some definition that's more concrete? 4/
Barring someone from an infosec con isn't like refusing them service at a Denny's. The former may heavily impact their career. 5/
Separately, they'll have to deal with the stigma of being barred from the conference, something that may create liability for the con itself (if not handled appropriately). 6/
I don't have a particular standard in mind for "what constitutes banning behavior" or "how long should a ban last." 7/
Does being banned from one conference imply a ban at others?
How should conferences share ban information?
I'm sure there are others that I'm yet to consider as well. 8/
Is transparent
Protects victims
Is resistant to abuse
Not everyone will adopt it, and that's okay. But it's a heck of a lot easier (and legally safer) to say "we comply with X" or "we do X except Y" than to continue with the status quo. /FIN