Avoidance criteria for ethical sponsorship policy

We are carrying out a consultation and members vote on avoidance criteria areas for SocRSE’s draft ethical sponsorship policy. Our aim is to represent the wishes of our membership into account for sponsorship, partnerships and receiving gifts. Please join the slack discussion in #ethical-sponsorship-policy.

Consultation

We had a quorate vote from 21% (166/764) of our members at the final stage of the consultation.

62.7% voted “Yes” to only include legally required areas of exclusion. Empowering the trustees to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, not having a pre-defined list. The subsequent votes for each suggested area did not reach the 50% threshold.

We will outline our responses to this in our feedback event at 12:00 UTC on Tuesday the 10th of March

Stages of consultation and votes

Dates (2025-2026)StageStatus
31st October – 25th NovemberCommunity survey for how to define a passing vote, and suggested areas for avoidance criteriaThe survey is now closed, thank you for your input
25th November – 8th DecemberTrustees summarise exclusion criteria and publish on this pageMoved to proposed areas for exclusion from community as originally posted to this page
8th December – 29th DecemberCommunity survey for arguments against avoidance criteriaThe survey is now closed, thank you for your input.
29th December – 19th January now 26th JanuaryTrustees summarise arguments against and publish on this pageHigh level summaries moved here, more detailed summaries of responses are available here.
19th January – 9th February 28th January – 18th FebruaryMembership votes on exclusion criteriaThe vote is now closed, thank you for your input

Frequently asked questions

Where can I find out more information about the process 

We have created an interview with our trustees, Twin Karmakharm and Stef Piatek, that outlines the process, you can watch this on youtube. This covers many areas in this FAQ, we will update this page as more questions come in. 

Please email [email protected] and see the next question on where you can discuss this. 

Where can we discuss this?

Please join the discussion at #ethical-sponsorship-policy on our slack instance if you have any questions or feedback.

We are also encouraging regional RSE groups to host discussions after we have summarised the proposed avoidance criteria. The trustees will create talking points to help with this.

We expect everyone to follow our Code of Conduct as usual, and respect each other, even if you disagree. 

Why can’t I fill out a survey without giving an email address?

We want to be able to contact respondents to make sure that when we summarise all of the responses, that we are not misrepresenting their wishes. For this to work we’ll need to follow up in the week after the survey closes before publishing them on this page. 

Why are the trustees summarising responses rather than reporting them as-is?

We expect people will respond with similar areas, and we will group and summarise them where we can. We need to know if this matches the intention of the proposer, or if they want their area to be voted on specifically.

Who can take part in each of the stages for this process?

For the two surveys, anyone in the RSE community can contribute. Only SocRSE members will be able to take part in the final vote.

Why is sponsorship so important?

Sponsorship at RSECon accounts for roughly half of the cost of the conference. We simply wouldn’t be able to run the conference without our sponsors. 

What happens if I miss the deadline for one of the surveys or membership vote?

So that the RSECon26 organising committee can be sure of sponsors, we’ll have to stick to the timelines above. You can send an email to [email protected] to see what options you have. 

After the policy has been voted in by the trustees of the Society, the ethical sponsorship avoidance criteria can be altered. More information is in the draft ethical sponsorship policy, members can bring requests for changes to an annual general meeting or extraordinary general meeting vote.