Maybe I’m a minority, but as a cis man I’d find a big public wall of porn in a conference disgusting. I’m definitely not against porn, but there’s a time and place for everything.
A 'wall of porn' is unprofessional and unacceptable at just about any conference other than a porn conference. The goal of the network team should be control of the network, including the WoS. If they weren't able to do that, I probably wouldn't find much value in attending. All that is irrespective of whatever gonads I possess.
On the other hand, it doesn't take much empathy to understand why a woman might be put off by these statements that imply she is so delicate that the visage of porn 'hurts' her in some way. Nor would I be surprised if she were to find their actual sexism offputting and decided not to attend.
I can take that tangent…
Even at a porn conference[1, SFW], it looks like a "wall of porn" would still be unacceptable. (Also from searching "XBIZ show" on Google images — NSFW.)
Many of the attendees are payment processors or dating websites, others are LGBT, and anyway everyone is "at work". From the pictures, something like 20-40% of attendees are women (not counting models, but also not counting the male models).
The reason it's a gender issue is because our culture often treats women as purely sex objects rather than having their own merits as people, so the introduction of porn into a professional context isn't just a professionalism issue; it also invokes that template in a detrimental way.
Probably something related to stereotype threat in here as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat
You solve such things to create a welcoming environment, not because woman you think don't like to see boobies.
To think that women (or men for that matter) can't understand that the WoS display is just that - a WoS display? That's just insulting condescension.
The solution I ended up with was to use Yahoo's trained machine-learning algorithm to attempt to detect, score, and ignore images on an unbounded scan (generally from 0-100). In most cases the threshold was set to 70, however was something folks could independently sat if they ever wanted to open the front-end on their own machines. There was also a mechanism to blacklist images from the screen if one happened to pass through. I've run it at BSidesLV, BSidesChicago, Thotcon, CircleCityCon, BSidesDetroit over the years and I can tell you, monitoring and trying to block porn from hitting the board was generally what I ended up doing while running this.
Sure, but would you initiate a hostile work environment claim or try to get someone fired using Twitter because of it?
I most definitely would. And if that didn’t work, I might post to Twitter about it.
So which one is it?
It wasn't about the point in the first place, rather the "I am not against X, but <statement which contradicts X>" formulation.
Why would the number of consenting adults have any impact?