Rita SingerAug 29, 2023

It is the year 2023, and I'm getting booted off a conference programme because "presentations have been planned as an in-person event" and the facilities don't have the required technical set-up.

Wow!

The only way this argument flies at all is that on campus presenters will not have access to the internet and their PPT slides have to be transformed into actual dia-positive slides for use on a manually handled projector? (I know the campus, BTW. Neither is the case.)

In danger of sounding like an entitled whatever, this is a plain lazy and, frankly, privileged and exclusionary excuse! in 2013, when I organised my first ever own conference, we managed to have two remote presenters from two different time zones present remotely and it worked.

@academicchatter

Show threadRita SingerAug 29, 2023

I'm mostly angry about the complete cognitive disconnect between the academic discipline behind the conference series and the real-life implications the organisers' attitude has for (potential) participants.

Scenario 1: I'm a single parent and can't get childcare.
Conference: Too bad. We're in-person.

Scenario 2: I have a (in/visable) disability that makes in-person difficult/impossible.
Conference: Too bad. We're in-person.

Scenario 3: I can't afford to travel.
Conference: Too bad. We're in-person.

Scenario 4: I've seen the name of a presenter on a programme who makes me unsafe.
Conference: Too bad. We're in-person.

Scenario 5: I have lived experience to share, but have to remain anonymous for several reasons.
Conference: Too bad. We're in-person.

Show threadIzzyAug 30, 2023
@_bydbach_ Scenario 6: It is functionally illegal for me to exist in the polity where the conference is being held.
Conference: Too bad. We're in-person.
Show threadRita Singer
@ijk Exactly!
Aug 30, 2023 at 5:43amWeb