Re: [IETF] Re: Proposed IETF Anti-Harassment Policy

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

 



On Oct 21, 2013, at 9:02 AM, Scott Brim <scott.brim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> While I'm completely in favor of the goals, I don't like this sentence: "Participants asked to stop any harassing behavior are expected to comply
> immediately." The problem is that this sentence assumes a clear agreed-on definition of harassment, while it should be based on subjective experience. If I say "Randy, that's harassment and I want you to stop," he may respond "No it isn't."  I propose something like: "Participants asked to stop a behavior that is being experienced as harassment are expected to comply immediately."

Issue:  "I find all emails containing the word "comply" to be harassing[0], and I'd like you to stop"

Now what do you do? 

W

[0]: 
Mr Smoke-Too-Much: Yes, that's right. It's all due to a trauma I suffered when I was a sbool boy. I was attacked by a bat.
Bounder: A cat?
Mr Smoke-Too-Much: No, a bat.

> 
> Scott
> 

--
"I think perhaps the most important problem is that we are trying to understand the fundamental workings of the universe via a language devised for telling one another when the best fruit is." --Terry Prachett 







[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]