Re: Results of the Antiharassment Team Survey
[Replying in a personal capacity here.]
Christian,
On 10/07/2019 06:45, Christian Kastner wrote:
> However, if there's one thing I've learned from reading -project and
> especially -private in the recent past, it's that where this line is
> drawn seems to be entirely unclear, and an unclear rule rarely (if ever)
> results in an improvement of things.
This is true, and makes things more difficult for everybody involved. It
is a direct consequence of how the CoC is written, but I am not sure
there is a reasonable way to have a line clearly drawn without
drastically weakening the usefulness of the CoC. I think there were long
discussions about this very question back in the day when the CoC was
being drafted.
> Hence, I not only personally like Sam's idea of mediation, I believe it
> is essential to actually drawing that line. I believe it is essential to
> leading to improvement.
How do you see mediation helping draw that line? (Not a rhetorical
question, I am honestly curious). Also, there are different ways to
interpret the word mediation, what is your interpretation in this context?
> On the other hand, a complete rejection of mediation can lead to cases
> such as the following, where I cannot see the positive effect of A-H
> enforcement at all. On the contrary, I find this utterly confusing, and
> mails like these lead me to actively question whether I should even
> publicly disagree with someone on a list, lest it be considered
> harassment (this is not hyperbole, I can give an example on -private
> where simple disagreement led to an A-H report).
Please note that the case referred there was not simply about a
disagreement on a mailing list, and A-H did not produce any report: as
far as I know (I was not part of the team back then), the team only
involvement was giving support to the people raising the complaint to DAM.
--
Martina Ferrari (Tina, the artist formerly known as Tincho)
Reply to: