Bit of a thread here:
About a year ago I gave an @ Night talk which was attended by about 70 people and it went really well (IMHO). Over 50 people filled in feedback forms and all were 4s & 5s. This was really good because I was planning to use the talk again, several times.
About a year ago I gave an @ Night talk which was attended by about 70 people and it went really well (IMHO). Over 50 people filled in feedback forms and all were 4s & 5s. This was really good because I was planning to use the talk again, several times.
After the talk, I got lots of very positive feedback from lots of people. It was a wonderful ego boost and I was pleased I'd managed to portray the work my team and I had carried out on a big incident.
There is always a however.
However, ONE person came up to me afterwards, said they liked the talk but felt that one (of 70) slides with a picture of a zombie's face was a bit off-putting and had slightly soured the experience for them.
Now I have a choice here. I can ignore them because they are "obviously just an easily offended snowflake" - clearly true because no one else complained and it's only a picture of someone in makeup, zombies arent real.
Or, I can consider the situation. One person spoke up which means there is probably >1 person who didn't like it. I am not there to massage my ego but to provide an enjoyable, educational, experience for the attendees. I am fully aware you can't please everyone.
But you can try. And, importantly, when the change is trivial, what is the reason for not doing it? I could say "how dare this person take offence at something which was an in-context joke" or I can say "ok, I can change the image and make ONE MORE PERSON happy.
This isn't saying every possible request is automatically actioned.
It is saying that if someone raises a concern, and you can address it, you need a good reason not to. Dismissing it as "pandering" is NOT a good reason.
It is saying that if someone raises a concern, and you can address it, you need a good reason not to. Dismissing it as "pandering" is NOT a good reason.
The point of this ramble is about inclusivity. Until recently I hadn't realised how strongly people want to avoid any changes where it might impact on their own ego. I hadn't realised that swapping one word for another to improve inclusivity was such a big deal.
Realistically it shouldn't be. We change the language we use all the time. Some of us are privileged enough to not be offended by terms but that doesn't justify us dismissing those who are offended. We need to do better. (end)
