Re: Questions around Justice and Our Current CoC procedures
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:06 AM Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:
>
> That is precisely the opposite of what I meant.
Thank you for clarifying.
> What I'm trying to express is that the warning *entirely reasonably* made
> you feel shamed and attacked for a number of reasons, including the fact
> that it was public, and that making you feel that way was unnecessary and
> probably counterproductive.
Your statement is the opposite of what I felt. In fact, I asked for
the circumstances to be published on debian-private. It was calming to
me, so your interpretation is not correct.
Among the two hundred or so messages about my warning, there were at
least some people in the crowd who expressed empathy. By contrast, DAM
expressed no sympathy whatsoever.
The ensuing discussion on debian-private helped me to understand that
I had indeed tripped on a sensitive subject. I was especially
comforted by the first reaction to the announcement, which included a
reference to a TV series. To this day, I would personally not fault
anyone for calling someone a "freak" but I recognize that our
community's standards are different. I abide by them.
The discussion was anything but counterproductive. It exposed that
other people doing very similar things got off without a DAM warning.
No one ever explained that to me.
Most significantly, the discussion established that justice is a
social good and not the domain of a select few who act as they see
fit. Personally, I believe all disciplinary measures should be public.
Only then can the group truly reach a consensus as to which behavior
warrants punishment, and which does not.
> Exactly. This is why I do not like the way that we are currently doing
> warnings. The first step by a team that is serious enough to not be
> ignored already feels like a threat of expulsion. I think we're starting
> with too large of a hammer because we don't have the right tools to try to
> course-correct earlier in a way that doesn't make people feel publicly
> attacked.
Just so you know, I felt publicly attacked by Enrico's message just
now. Please note that he presumably had a hand in issuing my warning.
It is therefore reasonable to assume that he might be bothered by an
examination of the same.
> and the announcement of the warning to the project (an entirely
> well-intentioned process that grew out of trying to solve a different
> problem) makes people quite reasonably feel like they're being publicly
> shamed.
Again, as I explained above, this is the exact opposite of how I felt.
A public examination of DAM's actions is the only way to ensure their
proportionality.
Finally to my original point, I believe that your conclusions
contradict mine so frequently because you overlaid your opinion onto
mine, i.e projected your perception onto mine.
Kind regards
Felix Lechner
Reply to: