On Mar 2, 2018, at 1:44 PM, Mary B <mary.h.barnes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Not knowing the detailed history here, let me just walk you through how this would go hypothetically: IESG person: please stop doing this Person doing it: there's no policy, so I will keep doing it. IESG person: here's a policy. please adhere to the policy Person doing it: [...] Having a formal policy matters. It prevents claims of being singled out. It provides clear guidelines rather than case-by-case admonitions that need not be taken seriously. It allows the IESG to be the person complaining, rather than the person who is being harassed. As for why the policy goes far beyond this, it does so because once you have a policy about this particular kind of photography, you have to explain how it's different from other, permitted types of photography. If you don't, again you get accused of inconsistency, or you get ignored, because the person imagines that there are exceptions to the policy into which the behavior that is intended to be controlled is allowed. If you can think of a different way to address this problem, please feel free to propose it. But please do not propose that the problem go unaddressed. I can speak from personal experience in saying that it genuinely does need to be addressed, and that this is not just the IESG tilting at windmills. |
