RSA: Ban On Booth Babes Has Been No Big Deal (networkworld.com) 233
netbuzz quotes a report from Network World: In March 2015, RSA Conference organizers made news by contractually insisting that vendors pitch their security wares without the help of "booth babes," a first such ban for the technology industry. Next week's event will be third under the new rules. With the use of "booth babes" long a source of contention -- and some would say embarrassment -- implementation of the ban has gone smoothly, according to RSA. "Overall I would say this has been received well by our exhibitors," says Sandra Toms, vice president and curator of the conference. "Several have thanked us for having a policy." If you compare the policy's contract language in 2015 with the language now used by Toms, you'll notice how much it has evolved and how it has been accepted by various stake-holders. Here's an excerpt from the "short Q&A" between Paul McNamara, news editor for Network World, and Toms: Has there been any need to enforce the code or have all exhibitors complied? "Enforce" always makes it sound like armed guards have come into play and dragged someone off the show floor. We share these guidelines with our exhibitors and we're clear that this is a policy that is expected to be acknowledged and complied with. We take our attendee experience seriously and expect our exhibitors to do the same. If we receive a complaint about a particular exhibitor, we will send someone over to the booth and examine the situation. If the attire matches our dress code, then they can proceed and we can explain to the attendee why that form of dress is allowed. If they are clearly in violation, we will ask them to change. This policy is equally applied to both men and women -- from Sumo wrestlers to scantily clad models.
Makes especial sense given studies (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Won't someone PLEASE think of the poor booth babes now out of work???
Seriously....so, this is now a war on the good looking females that model and made some good side money, perhaps even a living for events like this?
I guess if you're in shape, attractive...no one cares if you lose your job, eh?
Political correctness takes its toll again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, lessee....I'd dare say *most* of the audience and attendees are male.
Males generally like looking at pretty women.
This will attract them to your booth....and there you go.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"Enforce makes it sound like an armed guards have come into play"
right after
"if we receive a complaint we'll send someone over and if they are in violation we'll ask them to change or leave"
So.. yes... ENFORCED.
How long do you think this round of tedious moral busy-bodying and policing is going to last?
.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's security focused.
I would think that sex is one of many ways that are being used to circumvent security. It can be an effective means of social engineering.
In my opinion, it may be relevant to have a Mata Hari at your booth, if what you have is focused on awareness or at thwarting or discovering seductive attacks.
Or, hand all the attendants a username and password on day one, to be used on the last day. And hire a few escorts, and at the last day of the conference, disclose how many attendant pas
aww, Republic of South Africa had some great... (Score:2)
Alternative to ban (Score:2, Insightful)
Just have booth babes of both genders. Equal Opportunity Oogling.
Re: (Score:2)
Really this is taking away women's rights not enhancing them. Now they can't wear whatever they want.
Not just rights, this is just more misogynistic basement-nerds taking jobs away from women!
Re: Alternative to ban (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Alternative to ban (Score:4, Insightful)
Really this is taking away women's rights not enhancing them. Now they can't wear whatever they want.
Not just rights, this is just more misogynistic basement-nerds taking jobs away from women!
In a strange way - it is taking away jobs. While I don't see much of a purpose for them, yeah, some women are losing their jobs. Here's an interesting question. Let us take someone like my favorite pretty lady - Sophia Vergara. Say she worked for one of these companies, and was a perfectly competent employee. She could wear a horse blanket, and still look good enough to make most men stupid. Will we soon be banning attractive women because they are attractive?? Or strictly enforcing a dress code? Or we in the name of whatever the hell we are calling what we are doing, make women cover their heads in order to not use attractiveness in any way because then we can't see her face, and she will not be inciting lust in males?
tl;dr version. What a sexist move.
Re: Alternative to ban (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact that she was absolutely gorgeous meant that she was employed for a lot longer than she should have been by my boss, (a man who should have known better).
I saw her a couple of years ago, she's in her early forties now (I think) and did the smart thing when she was fired from designing. She worked as a booth babe for just long enough to catch a rich fellow at some event, marry him and have a child.
She is now happily divorced with no need to ever work again.
Re: (Score:2)
In a strange way - it is taking away jobs.
The purpose of employment is the production of goods and services, not "keeping people busy". Elimination of unproductive jobs is a GOOD THING, since it allows those people to be employed elsewhere doing something that actually makes sense.
Will we soon be banning attractive women because they are attractive?? Or strictly enforcing a dress code?
RTFA. It is a dress code.
Re: Alternative to ban (Score:4, Insightful)
They do serve a purpose - the same purpose served by putting attractive people in all other advertising contexts. A booth exists for the same reasons as a TV ad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Advertising is advertising. Sex and death.
Re: (Score:2)
So when you retire, are you going to demand to be euthanized because of your lack of productivity
Is that really the same idea? I don't see that. Just because you want to maximize the total usefulness of existing people may not mean you'll optimize the average by removing the bottom outliers.
Re: (Score:2)
It's this whole neo-Victorian era. We'll be back to putting skirts on table legs soon enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Now that's just being ridiculous (Score:2)
Obviously not, it's just a sign that these conferences are "growing up" and getting more like the conferences of other industries.
There's a bit of a difference between having salesfolk who are dressed appropriately and look good or blatantly hiring a bunch of strippers that don't even strip.
I don't have anything against strippers but spending company money or taxpayers money to send people to see strippers that don't even strip instead of
Re: (Score:3)
It's not about requiring women to wear certain clothes. There is no problem with athletes wearing skin tight clothing because it's appropriate for what they are doing. It's designed to help them perform. If they happen to look really sexy doing that, it's fine because they aren't dressing that way to be sexy, it's just a side effect.
Similarly, it's fine for experts and salespeople to be good looking, if they are otherwise dressed appropriately. A company wouldn't be allowed to plaster their booth with playb
Re: (Score:2)
Funny you should mention that, because TFA says:
I don't think they wear those hernia truss pants because people like to look at their butts, do they?
Re: (Score:3)
Really this is taking away women's rights not enhancing them. Now they can't wear whatever they want
You afre implying that both babes can "wear what they want" at the present time. That is intirely false. They have to wear precisely what is specified by their employer.
Here's an interesting question.
This is not likely to be an interesting question.
Let us take someone like my favorite pretty lady - Sophia Vergara.
Okey dokey
Say she worked for one of these companies, and was a perfectly competent employee.
OK
You first (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It does appear to have made a whole group of women unemployed. I expect they voted for Trump as a result. I thought being progressive was about making things better, not attacking minority groups like this, effing SJW really are toxic sometimes.
Re: Alternative to ban (Score:4, Insightful)
How so? A booth can still hire promo girls, they just need to dress them appropriately.
At a security conference where there are vendors presenting countermeasures to social engineering, I would think that women dressed to pique male interest can be very appropriately dressed.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Really this is taking away women's rights not enhancing them. Now they can't wear whatever they want.
Nonsense. Setting and enforcing a dress code for an event is not an infringement of anyone's rights. It's just part of the rules of entry.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep... when there's an advertised product and a no-ad equal replacement, you should know the difference. See the difference between Vonage and other VoIP solutions.
Really? (Score:2)
That's the breast... I mean best they can do?
B's win (Score:2)
Assonance also admired, as well (Score:2)
nm
#FIRST! (Score:2)
"a first such ban for the technology industry"
PAX has had such a ban since at least 2012. Unless video and computer games no longer count as technology!?
Re: (Score:2)
No. Because it's a general gaming/geek culture convention. And not just for computers or focusing on the actual, underlying technology products in said games.
Booth Nazi (Score:3)
"No babes for you"
For the script kiddies its a Seinfeld reference
Geeks repellant! (Score:4, Interesting)
So, at the more hardcore geek conference (Supercomputing comes to mind), there has never really been an issue with booth babes for a simple reason: geeks are scared to talk to them. Every now and then a company will hire one, only to see a nice exclusion zone form around their booth. Sure, sales guys from other booths will stop by, but none of the intended audience will risk talking with an attractive female.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends.
Up until a few years ago, gaming cons were like that too. But as these things grow, that sort of thing falls away and the audience gets more diverse.
Now we have creepy stalker-types coming in too as they think it's a target-rich environment.
One of our demo agents (who could definitely fit the description of "babe") has had an especially annoying stalker pestering her at several conventions. As a result, we generally have several large and/or burly security types hanging out to offer assistance
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure it's not a case of geeks being scared of a company that resorts to tactics like booth babes?
I find it interesting that while many people here are discussing the shallow nature of "babes" who may not have any knowledge of the company product, you're upholding the stereotype that geeks are too timid and antisocial to talk to women.
Re: (Score:2)
As a hypothetical attendee, the booth babe is paid to talk to me. I am aware of this. She doesn't care about me. Talking to an attractive woman is of no interest to me. There's no way I'm charming enough for her to be interested in me. I may have a wife/gf that I'm loyal to. So from a personal level, there's nothing in it for me.
Professionally, I may be interested in the product. The product I want is dull and worthy Trying to make it "fun" makes it le
Re: (Score:3)
I've seen the occasional guy summon up the courage to talk to the booth babes, and it's usually pretty creepy. Asking for photos is the worst... I can just imagine them back in the hotel room with a laptop, pants around their ankles... ugh.
This doesn't sound like a ban on booth babes (Score:5, Interesting)
The Weather Indoors... (Score:5, Funny)
If there's a booth babe wearing little compared to man wearing a suit and tie a few feet away... what temperature do you set the thermostat to? This resembles a problem found on most dance floors including high school proms...
Re: (Score:2)
If there's a booth babe wearing little compared to man wearing a suit and tie a few feet away.
[scans booth babe] "Hmm. Cold in here, isn't it? :-)"
Probably not the problem that you think, albeit not so pleasant for the booth babe. 'Ever stumble on one of those "out take" segments from swimsuit modelling? Complaining about the cold seems to be a common thing.
Re: (Score:3)
Set it to a temperature that's comfortable to her. He's going to sweat either way, anyway.
Freedom to be stylish? (Score:2)
Fichu with a brand on it to cover shoulders?
A policy on berthas and bolero styles? On that lappet or more guidance on the use of a modesty piece?
Everyone gets the same color of Zhongshan suit?
Or just go full bee keep suit?
Re: (Score:2)
Of course segregated booths. The blacks don't feel comfortable under barrage of technical questions by whites.
They are doing this with dorms already. Black-only dorm, on request of black students.
As an old fart ready to retire (Score:2)
Then again, times change, my daughter is past the booth babe age but I would have hated for her to do that.
/ went to telemetry conferences in the 80s, the booth babes were awesome (I was in my 20s)
Re: (Score:2)
Excuse me (Score:2)
I don't often comment to or about how my co-workers look or don't look. I will break this rule now.
I work with some ladies that are simply DROP DEAD GORGEOUS. Off hand, there are easily two dozen. Of course, all of my co-workers are beautiful people, just not with movie star looks.
And all of them, every last one, is as at least as smart as I am and I think smarter. I'm no slouch but I know a quality mind when I meet one, and everyone, man, woman, or wookie, are top flight minds. Not to say there aren't a fe
Has anybody asked the Boot Babes what they think? (Score:2)
After all, they are now out of a job and probably have do some worse job instead. A great win indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Why? They are used to being exploited for an agenda, it's not like you have to ask them.
Re: (Score:2)
So they go from being exploited and paid to now being exploited and unpaid? An even greater win...
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody said that it has to improve anyone's life, only that we have to feel good about ourselves.
And the only thing achieved... (Score:2)
And the only thing achieved was removing some jobs for women in the IT.
Re: (Score:2)
I think what happens is the number of customers for the agency's services drops, and the agency reduces employment accordingly.
Compromised crypto trying to stay in the news (Score:2)
Let them appeal to the Tumblr/Twitter crowd, I'm sure they all license RSA crypto.
PGP forever!
I Dislike (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I'm paying for someone's product I really don't want the price bumped up because they forked out on sending people to a conference where all those people did was stare at strippers that don't strip. It's unprofessional as hell and nothing to do with prudishness or whatever.
strange new old world (Score:2)
Wait....what about women's jobs? (Score:2)
...I thought the goal was to have "more women in tech"?
I'm going to guess that whereas the humanity within conventions was 80/20 male/female, it's probably dropped to 90/10 or further.
Love the duality of criteria. (Score:2)
> If the attire matches our dress code, then they can proceed and we can explain to the attendee why that form of dress is allowed. If they are clearly in violation, we will ask them to change.
Basic message: you are not allowed to dress whatever you want in the West, unless you belong to a very particular religious group. In that case, heavens forbid if anyone tells you how to dress or you will feel the wrath of the SJWs.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hiring a model to wear very little clothing in front of an IT stand doesn't mean she's included in IT...
Re: (Score:3)
IT is her employer, or at least subcontracts her, and IT pays her salary. To me, that's pretty much working for IT.
Sure she's not going to be a programmer or network admin, because she lacks the essential education in these domains. But it isn't like removing her current workplace will change that.
Nor will that make the actual IT jobs (as opposed to jobs profiting from IT) more accessible to women. These, who claim "they can't work in IT due to the male-oriented environment, lack of respect to women, and ge
Re: (Score:2)
On the one hand you complain that women are over sensitive about there being booth babes and that's their fault, but on the other you complain that men are the victims of nitpicking misandry. In other words, women should just shut up and deal with it, while men should be protected from criticism and complaints because it makes them miserable.
Oh, and of course most women are unqualified and lack the "mental fortitude" to do an office job anyway.
Wow.
Re: (Score:2)
Situations like Donglegate really don't help.
The woman, whose job was to unite the IT, and instead got two guys fired over some silly remarks (and don't tell me she was hurt or threatened; she played Cards Against Humanity a couple hours earlier) - still doesn't see any wrong in what she did.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a big difference between a babe who works a day job in the office and somebody who just looks good on the trade floor. Reading back script she doesn't understand is too-effective and therefore banned play.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh, so we're now valuing women based on the work they do rather than considering her valuable for just being a woman, yes? Let the MAN tell her what work she can do and what she cannot?
(Trust me, I can twist your words around better than you could ever straighten them, I've learned from the best)
Re: (Score:2)
Trust me, I can twist your words around better than you could ever straighten them, I've learned from the best
So... You're proud of the fact that you argue more effectively with empty rhetoric than with substance?
Good to know...
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, so we're now valuing women based on the work they do rather than considering her valuable for just being a woman, yes?
Yes, that's kind of the point. We should be making judgements of people based on the actual person, not on what gender they happen to be. It's astonishing to me that you seem to be criticising that idea.
Let the MAN
In what sense are the organisers of the conference "the man"? You seem to be a bit of a rebel without a clue, randomly striking out at anything you perceive as "authority". Th
Re: (Score:2)
I watched a lot of SJWs videos lately. I ran out of Christian bozos spouting bullshit and thought "why not, cult is cult".
Re: (Score:2)
Wait ... Didn't you just brag about your incredible ability to spout bullshit?
What do you hope to accomplish? Just cause needless conflict while contributing nothing?
Re: (Score:2)
Dammit, I must have watched too many videos, it starts to rub off.
Re: (Score:2)
A model is not a salesperson.
Re: (Score:2)
Models at these events are sales people, and generally perform the function very well. They are the ones providing a sense of trust and enticing people to look and ask about products. If you bothered to read any of the articles at all you would see that people have an automatic trust for someone attractive, and an automatic distrust of someone not attractive. Sexuality has been a method of selling for as long as we have been selling. I'll add that it's not restricted to women, but the audience at an eve
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You may not like that fact, but human nature (that fact) does not care how you feel. (Plenty more citations for you to find if you are interested in those pesky things called studies.
It's the very cultural propensities you cite in those studies which recommends the adoption of dress codes at events like these. Given that sex sells, exhibitors will, absent of any rules of restraint, be forced into an arms race of pornofication of IT events. Applying to all exhibitors equally this sets the floor and relie
Re: (Score:2)
Given that sex sells, exhibitors will, absent of any rules of restraint, be forced into an arms race of pornofication of IT events.
Donuts sell too, yet you don't see an arms race with exhibitors drowning in donuts. There's a limit for how much of anything you can add of any attractor before it either becomes cost ineffective or drives away customers by not giving room enough for what you want to sell them on.
In countries with far more liberal advertising rules, ads and booths have not turned into never-ending orgies. Yes, you may see more skin, but only as a purpose for attracting you, and there is no arms (or breasts) race.
Re: (Score:2)
You may not like that fact, but human nature (that fact) does not care how you feel. (Plenty more citations for you to find if you are interested in those pesky things called studies.
It's the very cultural propensities you cite in those studies which recommends the adoption of dress codes at events like these. Given that sex sells, exhibitors will, absent of any rules of restraint, be forced into an arms race of pornofication of IT events. Applying to all exhibitors equally this sets the floor and relieves any of them of the necessity of engaging in the race to the bottom. I very much doubt the personnel at these events which institute dress codes will cease to be attractive, just a bit less slutty.
Um, no! People at these events still have moral standards of varying levels. If "booth babes" of either sex were walking around naked and committing sexual acts as your "pornification" attempts to suggest, people would not attend the event. There may be some people who enjoy watching a sex show, but the majority of people would be turned off. There may be some people that prefer men in tuxedos and women in Amish style dress, but the majority of people would be against such a strict dress code.
Marketing
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If the woman is knowledgeable in the area, and is not required to dress like a stripper to do the job, she can still do the job. It really isn't complicated.
Are you denying a woman the right to dress as she likes? Define dressing like a stripper in a manner that will accommodate all cultures.
Fascinating that the people who are demanding this are ending up acting exactly like cultures that demand that women dress in a specific and asexual manner for their religious values.
Re: (Score:2)
They are only setting limits for the event they are running. The reason is to avoid having women being required to dress in a certain manner in order to get paid. They are running the event, they can set the rules for the event.
If I showed up and set up a stand to sell popcorn and they said no, does that mean that they're denying people the right to earn a living?
If a man showed up wearing only a Tarzan loincloth and was told that was not appropriate would it be fair to say that now they're denying men t
Re: (Score:2)
They are only setting limits for the event they are running. The reason is to avoid having women being required to dress in a certain manner in order to get paid. They are running the event, they can set the rules for the event.
If I showed up and set up a stand to sell popcorn and they said no, does that mean that they're denying people the right to earn a living?
If a man showed up wearing only a Tarzan loincloth and was told that was not appropriate would it be fair to say that now they're denying men the right to dress as they like?
Wow, these things have changed a lot. I had no idea that the booth babes were wearing only loincloth and nothing else.
Re: (Score:2)
> If I showed up and set up a stand to sell popcorn and they said no, does that mean that they're denying people the right to earn a living?
Yes. They are in their absolute right to do so, but that doesn't change the fact you were denied the right to earn your living at their conference. Their conference, their rules, doesn't have to mean the rules don't suck for someone.
Re: (Score:2)
I think I can help you:
and is not required to dress like a stripper to do the job
See that word? It's VERY important. How do you think that word changes the meaning of the AC's sentence from your interpretation?
There's a host of other issues with booth-babe style exploitation, naturally, but you might not be ready for those just yet...
Explain how they are exploited. Are they kidnapped and forced to do this job? Forced at gunpoint? To me, booth babes are silly. But they are getting paid to do a legitimate job, not forced to do it, they pay taxes, and are not a burden to society. They are the victims of this, and just because for some warped reason, these women losing their jobs makes you feel good, perhaps some day, some one will celebrate when you lose your job . But hey, some folks become screaming angry at halloween costumes . Petty
Re: (Score:2)
Like I said, and you've just demonstrated, you're not ready for that just yet.
Do some reading on your own, if you think you can handle it.
Thank you for admitting that you have no argument, you merely disagree. Good luck with that. I challenge you to put forth a good argument. I am perhaps more ready than you could ever imagine. So far, you have provided nothing, is that all you have?
Logic fail (Score:2, Interesting)
If you would get fired for wearing certain attire at your job, a woman would similarly get fired for wearing similar attire. Companies would be sued out of existence if they did not have measurably similar standards for their dress code. Your claim is a complete fabrication.
There are plenty of women who want to model and make a very good living doing just that. In fact women make on average over 10 times more than men for modeling work. Face it: You wish to deny women the right to work in a job of their
Re:Logic fail (Score:5, Informative)
If you would get fired for wearing certain attire at your job, a woman would similarly get fired for wearing similar attire. Companies would be sued out of existence if they did not have measurably similar standards for their dress code. Your claim is a complete fabrication.
There are plenty of women who want to model and make a very good living doing just that. In fact women make on average over 10 times more than men for modeling work. Face it: You wish to deny women the right to work in a job of their choosing and force them into STEM jobs. You are a misogynist who does not believe in a woman's liberty. Shame on you!
Allow me to express this in a non-sexual obsessed context. It is the matter of dressing appropriately for the occasion. It is pretty obvious in a corporate, or educational system, that there are various mores that people use. That is why with the semi-random nature of what I was called on to do, I kept both a suit white shirt and tie in my office, and a pair of jeans and a work shirt. Some times I would get a call to come and do a meeting that was going on at the moment.
So I suited up and did it. I might get a call to crawl around in a dirty or otherwise nasty space later in the day, so on went the Jeans and T-Shirt. I dressed the way one dressed for the job.
Now where it gets interesting is a co-worker was the blue jeans and t-shirt type. She didn't present, but was sometimes asked to hang out at a meeting for a while. So she went up in her jeans and t-shirt. Which was not appropriate dress. One time it was mentioned to her about that, and she complained to me. I told her what I did, which was bring different clothes to change into, and she said "No way will I do that!" So when times got lean, her non-professional dress got her terminated. We need to dress for the occasion.
Now while I have always maintained that booth babes are silly, it's obvious that they serve some purpose. and that is to attract the attention of people at trade shows, and to keep them occupied until a sales rep could relieve them. To schmooze, so to speak. So they dress a certain way.
So to relate this back to the regular workplace, there really isn't a function in the workplace for women to dress like Hooter's girls (except at Hooter's)
So it's pretty simple. The maintenance staff dress in sturdy work cloths, the machinists dress in sturdy work clothes with short sleeves and no ties - a big danger. Staff Assistants and HR people dress in more dressy Professional, The suits dressed in conservative professional fashion, and the semi-professionals tended to blue jeans and T's or cotton shirts. The only thing I ever strayed from the suits norm as needed was that I wear black New Balance sneakies because of a fasciitis issue. But they were black and almost no one noticed. Booth babe is not a normal work dress standard.
Re: (Score:3)
Let me simplify your statements: You work in an environment which does not attempt to attract strangers to your product in a bazaar type atmosphere. Your first anecdote fails because the environment and circumstances are completely different between you and a "booth babe".
Your complaint in this recent post is that you and a woman both dressed in long pants and shirts of a different cut and style. Yours was a suit and hers was jeans. After a whole lot of rambling, you did eventually admit that in your job
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny you should mention that right after a discussion about looking professional, suit and tie etc. They dress that way because, to be blunt, the tech industry is often so fucking unprofessional that strippers who don't strip are a fixture unlike most other types
Re: (Score:3)
So MEN are now dictating what a woman can or cannot wear?
Re: (Score:2)
And if she isn't knowledgeable? What jobs are there for her in the IT? The man will still get a job in (physical) security, due to good physical fitness. One woman will maybe occupy the one front desk vacancy in a 1000+ people unit, and the rest may get the job as cleaning staff. Certainly a step up from booth babes, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Trade floors are supposed to resemble a meritocracy... bringing in a booth babe just distracts from the next booth over. Better sales = worse product.
Re: (Score:3)
*sputter* Sales .... meritocracy?
Next you're going to try to tell us that the better product should make the sale. That's crazy talk.
Re: (Score:2)
A good example is Vonage vs the other VoIP players... Vonage charges nearly twice as much for the same service because of their ad campaign.
Re: (Score:2)
Make American boobs great again!
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and that's what we need them for. Have you tried getting a sensible word spoken with managers and markedroids buzzing about and yelling over your head at the only technical person on the booth?
Besides, booth babes made it so much easier to identify the people worth talking to. If they leered at the girls from afar but didn't dare going closer than 10 feet - bingo.
Re: (Score:2)
The one that always got me was the RSA booth at Blackhat - I mean, Blackhat is in VEGAS. If you want that sort of thing, you can get it with fewer lines any number of places. But one year they had people lining up to pose with women dressed in biker costumes at the RSA booth.
Seemed a little bit like bringing icecubes to Alaska.
Min
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't get why anyone cares at all...
Booth babes are an annoyance to me because most are not actually beautiful, they merely have some proportions that are generally considered desirable. Furthermore, they get in the way of finding information.
On the other side of that coin, they are pleasant to look at and they do not outright prevent finding out information... There is no harm being done.
So why the outrage? Booth babes are not a big deal. Let marketers try to use booth babes if they want. This reall
Re: (Score:2)
That is very sad to hear about LibreBoot, although it does seem a bit non sequitur. What does "not getting nookie" have to do with that?