Re: Dealing with ITS abuse
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Saturday, April 13, 2013 13:34:23, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > > Are you saying that if someone communicates abusively in the BTS
> > > publicly, they _shouldn't_ be publicly confronted about that at all?
> > The goal of any communication from owner@ regarding abuse isn't
> > confrontation, but correction and resumption of communication.
> > > Two particular bug reports I was invovled in recently had repeated
> > > abusive communication in them with no consequences that I could see
> > > for the one communicating abusively.
I should note that owner@ still hasn't been contacted about this
communication, so if it's still a problem, please do that.
> > Why should there be consequences that you can see?
> A man you work with is treating you badly [...] -- the behavior
> continues in the same way it did before.
> Now the question: why would you need to know what consequences there
The only consequence I should be concerned about is whether the
behavior stops or continues. In a job, you're never informed about the
consequences to another employee, because that abridges their rights.
> People need feedback.
That's why owner@ responds to the reporters to indicate that we have
received their communication and addressed the issue. [And in cases
where we do not respond, it's because we've missed or have not
received the communication.]
> If from the point of view of the reporter the feedback isn't
> working, then it begs the question of what the feedback was.
If the behavior doesn't change or improve, reporting it again is the
appropriate action. You can also always escalate problems to leader@.
Personally, I think my choice in the mostest-superlative-computer wars
has to be the HP-48 series of calculators. They'll run almost
anything. And if they can't, while I'll just plug a Linux box into
the serial port and load up the HP-48 VT-100 emulator.
-- Jeff Dege, firstname.lastname@example.org