Re: discussion style and respect

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

> We have rules.  They are mostly vague and subjective, but

They are not markedly more vague or subjective than is typical for this
topic.  The problem is with enforcement, not with the rules.


> We almost never try to enforce
> them when they appear to be violated, at least beyond private or
> low-key requests/ advice that someone shape up.

It's worse than even that.  We never enforce them, unless the offender
is a recidivist we do not like.

For recidivists we do like, we give them the mild warning and never go
further, pretending each offense does not sufficiently cross the line or
is new and they only warrants another quiet, useless warning.

To add to this egregious model, we consider it justified to engage in
offensive behavior if the community does not like the target.  After
all, they were asking for it...


>     We also have a recall
> mechanism for removing people from leadership position who have
> gotten out of hand, a mechanism that has never been used to the
> point of actually removing someone from office. 

Somewhat ironically, Nomcom regularly returns to office people who
regularly engage in offensive behavior.


> FWIW, I also believe that we are far more often victim to
> consensus by attrition than to direct interference with the
> system or overt bad behavior.   

Possibly a worthy topic, but it's quite separate from the continuing
tolerance and even encouragement of grossly unprofessional conduct.



Again:


   We have rules concerning acceptable behavior.  We do not enforce
them.  Perhaps they need strengthening, but we aren't even using the
ones we have.

   A generic, public call for better behavior is always useless.  It
might make the speaker feel that they've done something useful, but they
never have.  Never.

   A quiet, private chastisement to an individual is always useless with
a recidivist.  We have quite a few of those.

   At a minimum, a first step in taking corrective action needs to be to
require the offender to initiate a public apology.  The community needs
to see that unacceptable behavior is not acceptable.  (The issue is not
that the community see that this is the result of disciplinary action;
it needs to see acknowledgement that the behavior was not acceptable.)

   For recidivists and anyone engaging in particularly extreme behavior,
we need to start taking more severe actions.[*] There needs to be an
plan of escalating consequences.  It needs to be applied.

   Nomcom needs to pay attention to candidates' persistent, offensive
behaviors.


d/

[*]  This includes for offenses we class as harassment, taken to the
Ombud.  To date, this has been an entirely ineffective channel.


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net