@satanskrapfen@chaos.social Given the widespread ableist decisionmaking over the past few years, *including* in hacker and/or chaos circles, I unfortunately do not share that confidence. And my decision was made accordingly, and I still stand by that decision.

Had the orga communicated more clearly, see eg. https://social.pixie.town/@joepie91/109189426524963665, then this approach would not have been necessary.

But if there is no outward communication, and only evidence that vulnerable people are *yet again* being thrown under the bus by people, then this is the only remaining option, because the alternative is that "a decision is made" that is already a "compromise" and whose implementation then gets worn down even further by the usual noise from privileged people who oppose any sort of measures at all.

Yes, it sucks when your internal communications are leaked. But if the tradeoff is between that and vulnerable/disabled folks *once again* being excluded, I will always prioritize the latter.

If the orga does not want that to happen, then they should make a clear public commitment to safety and communicate to the public clearly about the decisionmaking process.