2025 Code of Conduct Transparency Report

Chasing Wonder maintains an independent Code of Conduct (CoC) Committee to respond to concerns and potential violations during the unconference. The Committee’s role is to help keep Chasing Wonder a welcoming, safe, and inclusive environment for everyone who attends.

This report summarizes the Code of Conduct reports received during the 2025 event, the actions taken by the Committee, and the improvements we are making going forward. Individual names and identifying details have been removed to protect the privacy of everyone involved.

Background

Chasing Wonder is committed to providing a welcoming, harassment-free environment for participants of all races, gender identities and trans statuses, sexual orientations, physical abilities, appearances, and beliefs. We do not expect bad behavior from our community, but we know that a clear code of conduct and a clear response process are necessary parts of a respectful space.
 

Chasing Wonder participants agree to:
 

• Be considerate in speech and actions, and to respect the boundaries of fellow attendees.

• Avoid demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior or speech. Harassment can include, among other things: intimidation; stalking; unwanted photography or recording; sustained disruption of talks or other events; inappropriate physical contact; use of sexual or discriminatory imagery, comments, or jokes; and unwelcome sexual attention.

• Speak up if they experience or witness harm. If you feel someone has harassed you or otherwise treated you inappropriately, you are asked to contact a member of the Code of Conduct team in person, via the team phone/text line, or via email. 

• Take care of each other. We ask attendees to alert the Code of Conduct team if they notice a dangerous situation, someone in distress, or a possible violation of the code, even if it seems minor.

​

If an attendee engages in behavior that violates our Code of Conduct, the Committee may take any lawful action it deems appropriate. Responses can include a verbal or written warning, removing an attendee from a particular space, or asking an attendee to leave the conference and/or not inviting them back in future years.

​

​

Visibility / Accessibility of Committee:

​

The Code of Conduct Chair was introduced during the plenary session, and contact information was shared in multiple ways to make it easy to reach the Committee at any time during the event:

​

• Via a dedicated phone/text line.

• Via a dedicated email address.

• Via a secure messaging number shared with attendees.

These channels were monitored during the event so that anyone who wanted to raise a concern could do so quickly and, if they preferred, privately.

2025 Reports

​

During the 2025 Chasing Wonder unconference, the Code of Conduct Committee received two reports of conduct that warranted formal review.

Incident 1: Disrespectful behavior and repeated interruptions in a session
 

Summary
During a session on AI and physical objects, there were several reports of a participant repeatedly interrupting and talking down to a woman who was trying to share her professional experience with AI. The reports described the behavior as dismissive, hostile in tone, and inconsistent with the norms of kindness and curiosity that Chasing Wonder emphasizes.

At the Committee’s request, a member of the organizing team followed up with the session host and other attendees who were present. While the host could not identify the interrupted attendee by name, multiple people corroborated that:

​

• Several participants were interrupted while trying to speak.

• One attendee attempting to moderate the situation was snapped at and left visibly upset.

• Another attendee stepped in to try to redirect the conversation in a calm, constructive way, but the interruptions and hostility continued.

The Committee discussed whether we needed to locate and hear directly from the woman who appeared to be the main target of the interruptions in order to determine if harm occurred. We concluded that we did not, as those reporting the incident were upset and were themselves harmed by what they observed. 

Assessment

Chasing Wonder invitations are explicitly conditioned on participants embodying kindness, openness, and respect for one another’s ideas. Repeatedly interrupting and talking down to another participant undermines those expectations, discourages people from contributing, and forces facilitators and bystanders into an uncomfortable policing role.

The Committee determined that this conduct violated our expectations for how attendees treat one another in sessions, even in heated or challenging conversations.

Outcome
The Committee agreed that the appropriate response is:

• The attendee whose behavior was reported will not be invited back to future Chasing Wonder events.

• In communicating this decision, organizers will make clear that it is based on their conduct at the session and on their failure to meet the event’s Code of Conduct and community values.

Related improvements
The Committee is also recommending two changes to the opening plenary:

• Clarifying the role of session leaders.

  • In the opening session, we will more explicitly state that session leaders are responsible for guiding the tone, pacing, and direction of their sessions. While many unconference participants understand this implicitly, saying it clearly helps reinforce that leaders are empowered to shape how conversation happens in their rooms.

• Extending “you can say no to an argument” to session leaders.

  • Chasing Wonder encourages attendees to say “no” and to decline conversations that don’t feel right for them. Going forward, we will explicitly add that session leaders can exercise that “no” on behalf of the entire room. If a participant introduces a contentious topic or persists in a way that harms the discussion, the leader can choose to move on or redirect, and doing so is part of their role.

We believe these changes will reduce the burden on individual attendees to self-advocate in the moment and will give session leaders clearer backing to protect the health of their conversations.

​

​

Incident 2: Misusing “consent” language to avoid a safety requirement

Summary
Late on Saturday night,  One of the conference organizers reported an interaction with an attendee who was not wearing their badge while socializing in a common area.

Badges are required to help ensure that only registered participants are using the space, and to support the security team, who have been instructed to escort out people who are present without badges. 

When the organizer noticed that the attendee was not wearing a badge, they calmly reminded them of the policy and asked them to retrieve it from the next room. The attendee refused, stating that they wanted to finish their conversation first. The organizer repeated that wearing a badge was a requirement and that security had been instructed to escort out anyone not wearing one.

The attendee again refused and responded by invoking the remarks at the opening plenary about consent, saying that they did not “consent” to retrieving their badge and that the organizer should respect that. The organizer reported feeling stunned and surprised. Others in the small group appeared visibly uncomfortable while this exchange unfolded.

After the attendee left the group, the organizer reported the incident to another organizer and a CoC Committee member.

Assessment
The Committee discussed this situation at length. We recognize that words like “consent” can be used in many contexts. In this event:

• The expectation that badges be worn at all times was clear, was communicated in advance, and had been agreed to by the attendee.

• The badge requirement exists to support safety, privacy, and the labor of the security team, not as a matter of personal preference.

• “Consent” in our Code of Conduct context is about bodily autonomy, personal boundaries, collective activity, and the ability to opt out of interactions. It is not about opting out of basic safety and access requirements that apply to everyone.

Deliberately misusing the language of consent to resist a reasonable, clearly-communicated safety requirement undermines the authority of organizers, creates confusion about our policies, and puts fellow attendees in an uncomfortable position. The Committee found that this behavior did not meet the expectations we set for participants’ cooperation with event rules and respect for organizers and staff.

Outcome
The Committee agreed that the appropriate response is:
The attendee whose behavior was reported will not be invited back to future Chasing Wonder events.

In communicating this decision, organizers will make clear that it is based on their refusal to follow a clear safety requirement and on their misuse of consent language in a way that undermined the event’s Code of Conduct and values.