Hi Abdussalam,
At 13:31 22-02-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
IMHO, Target is suitable term with responder and reporter, we never
no who is the real victim sometimes if no witnesses. After
investigation we get to know if target is victim. If you assume
witnesses available then "victim" is the right word replacing
"target" but still we need to change the other two terms.
The archive of this mailing list is publicly accessible. It is
possible to verify whether this message, which is addressed to you,
could be considered as offensive. It is assumed that the mailing
list moderator will see that message and any other message which
could be considered as offensive.
The mailing list moderator can intervene if he or she thinks that the
email exchange is reaching a point where it might be considered as
abusive or harassment. An Area Director can assess whether the
mailing list moderator took an appropriate decision, e.g. by reading
the mail archive.
There aren't any witnesses or mail archive for a private exchange
between two persons. The mailing list moderator will not see those messages.
Person A might send an abusive message to person B if:
(a) Person A can do that anonymously.
(b) There isn't anyone to witness that.
(c) The people witnessing that will remain quiet about it.
(d) Person B will not complain about it.
(e) Person B can complain about it but nobody will take any action
against Person A.
The word "target" depersonalizes the matter. The need for
objectivity doesn't prevent one from showing some consideration for Person B.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy