[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: contact address for anti-harassment policies

On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 15:18 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 02:00:25PM +0300, Erinn Clark wrote:
> > > From other replies it seems to me that something like
> > > "antiharassment@d.o" will be more acceptable. I'll wait for some more
> > > feedback and then proceed requesting its creation as an alias initially
> > > pointing to Amaya and Patty.
> > 
> > I'm in favor of minimizing the scope for the reasons Zack mentioned
> > and when there's some level of consensus I can setup the alias.
> According to what I can see in this thread, there is consensus to create
> a central contact point and also the volunteers to be behind it.
> Nevertheless, while the proposal was about a @women.d.o address (which
> Erinn is ready to set up), there has also been the proposal of using a
> @d.o address (in which case it should be me requesting the alias setup
> to DSA).
> I see advantages and disadvantages (all minor) with both @women.d.o and
> @d.o addresses.
> It would be nice if people can comment further in which among the two
> they prefer.

Hello Stefano, all,

I give a +1 for the activation of two addresses, the specific and the
generic one.
I think that providing the generic one will help in identifying other
forms of harassment that we are not yet considering.

Let me know how I can help!


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: