[PakG1]

Let's look at the flip side. Someone who does go around making life miserable for others by falsely accusing them of things. In a case where nobody knows both parties well, what are you supposed to do? I'm not saying what happened was OK. I'm saying the flip side is something we need to beware of also.

[neilk]

I think the OP is arguing that there should be a procedure in place, so you're not improvising, or making arbitrary rules that aren't fairly applied.

If nobody saw it happen and nobody knows either party well, I would say, record it and move on. If you have multiple reports, have a planned way to escalate, involving friendly warnings, going all the way up to removing the person and/or banning them.

Where it gets really bad - and I think everyone has seen this situation before - is when the guy is some sort of alpha geek, and may even be the kind of person that draws attendees. Everyone is inclined to bend the rules. I think that's why a standard procedure would be important.

[Avenger42]

That doesn't seem to be the case here, though. The organizer's sigh and admission that "he never should have allowed this guy to come to the conference" sounds like he had prior warning that this could happen.

[supernooneo]

I can't reply to Avenger42 as this thread has got too deep, but in response to him or her, you are supporting one unproven claim, by citing her, citing him, making another unproven claim. He could be lying. She could be lying. And if I didn't have access to the same blog post and you were telling me about it, you could by lying.

Moreover, she could be _mistaken_. Perhaps about the guy's name. He could also be _mistaken_, thinking she's talking about another guy, or getting names and faces mixed up.