Earlier I passed on a letter about people moving APA Presentations to USF rather than having them in the boycotted Westin hotel. At the time I was passing that on because it seemed like a good idea. Having been prompted to think about this more carefully by Alva Noe, I now think it would be a bad idea. Basically I think for these relocations to be a good idea, one of two conditions would have to be met.

# It is logistically feasible for people who want to attend some sessions at the Westin and others at USF to move easily between them; or
# The interests of people who want to attend sessions at both locations don’t all-things-considered matter.

I don’t really see how 1 can be true. It’s 2 miles between Union Square and USF, which would be too far to walk even if it were safe. (And from experience I can attest to the not particularly secret fact that it isn’t perfectly safe.) So people would have to be getting taxis between the two, at no small expense. And they’d probably still be leaving early or arriving late or both. And all these problems are magnified for anyone in a wheelchair.

This is all assuming that people know where the sessions will be, which in many cases they won’t. (Alva pointed out that the best way to distribute information about where sessions have moved to is via noticeboards in the Westin, which won’t help much those who on principle won’t go in.) If there are many sessions moved I’ll use this site to try and distribute as accurate a picture as possible about where things are – and hopefully we can use other blogs and the APA site to reach even more people than I could – but there will be gaps in the coverage. I don’t think this is a viable situation.

None of this would matter if 2 were true. If, that is, it were true that the interests people have in attending sessions at both places are outweighed by the interests of not setting foot in the Westin Hotel. But I can’t really see that’s true. Philosophers have a legitimate interest in attending the APA. Young philosophers have an interest in having their sessions attended. And the organisers of the APA Pacific (who, recall, routinely put on the best large philosophy conference in the northern hemisphere) have an interest in their conference going ahead as smoothly as possible. I don’t see that the difference it makes to the union’s action between philosophers merely setting foot in the hotel and not doing so overrides those interests.

So my current position is yay on moving hotels (especially to the Drake!), yay on not giving cash to the Westin, yay on not attending things at the hotel other than papers (receptions etc) and nay on moving sessions to USF. I assume I won’t have huge numbers of supporters in this, so there’ll still be plenty happening at USF. In that case I’ll do what I can to pass on information about moved sessions as they arise. (Much thanks to Alva for some e-discussion which helped mt think more clearly about this. That’s not to say _he_ should be blamed for mistakes etc in my reasoning.)