I removed the list of sanctions because it seemed unnecessarily
...punitive. Sometimes, the whole "incident" may consist only of
reminding someone that their language has inadvertently offended. I
wouldn't want it to sound like someone would get kicked out of a c4l
conference for an off-hand comment -- that is, something that some of us
would see as "non-PC" but still common in our world. So if we add a few
sanctions that we think would be necessary only in cases of overt
harassment, that's ok with me. But I see the best role of the policy to
allow a certain amount of "education" to take place, and that
"punishment" would only be used in extreme cases. We all make mistakes
-- and I wouldn't want to create an atmosphere where people are afraid
to speak up. Appropriately to this community, it's like coding: you get
a compiler error, and you learn. You only get kicked off the system if
you do real damage.
On 12/3/12 10:46 AM, Peter Murray wrote:
> I may have inadvertently logged a pull request when I made some minor edits to you changes:
> First off, kcoyle++. I like the rethinking of the focus of the document. I added a missing work and tweaked a few other words. The pull request has some other discussion about removing the list of potential sanctions; I don't know if that was intentional or not, but I think putting the list of sanctions at the end would be helpful.
> On Dec 2, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I did a somewhat radical edit of the policy. To me it sounded
>> heavy-handed, and I didn't think that we needed such in our community. I
>> also want to distinguish between "bloopers" that need correction and
>> active harassment. A lot of discriminatory language is unconscious but
>> still should be gently corrected. 
>> I also don't think that these are "rules" -- a policy is a policy, and I
>> think rules is too strong a term.
>> Because of the amount that I changed (and because I really wasn't sure
>> what would happen when I hit "save") these changes are still in my "fork":
>> Let me know if I should commit it (and I'm assuming that's just a matter
>> of hitting the "commit" button).
>>  It's from the 90's, but http://kcoyle.net/howhard.html has many examples
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net