Sanctions, block in IRC? That would require mods or chanserv, right?
Temporary ban from mailing list?
I think it should be a rotating group of 10 people who vote on this, randomly picked (everyone gets a number and a program picks 10?) to eliminate politics of any sort, of course 10 is arbitrary.
I think an arbitrator should randomly be selected from the 10 on a case by case basis?
Just a few suggestions...

And what is harassment? It can only be defined to a point, it is really on an individual level, the person being harassed defines it.


Riley Childs
Student
Asst. Head of IT Services
Charlotte United Christian Academy
(704) 497-2086
RileyChilds.net
Sent from my Windows Phone, please excuse mistakes
________________________________
From: Andreas Orphanides<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Sent: ‎7/‎2/‎2014 9:34 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Community anti-harassment policy

In particular, we'd need to think about how to shape the sanctions section,
including things like:

   - What's an appropriate sanction in non-conference setting X?
   - Who is empowered to enact sanctions?
   - If a participant feels they have been harassed, who do they contact
   and how?
   - possibly other stuff?

I think the conflict resolution part is in better shape, though it would
need a little cleanup for more universal (i.e., not conference-specific)
language.


On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Andreas Orphanides <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> My cursory web search came up with the one that was developed for the most
> recent conference, but it's not clear to me what the breadth of the
> document is supposed to include. I think it was applied to the IRC channel
> during the conference, but if it was written specifically as a conference
> policy, it's probably worth revisiting to ensure that it covers everything
> needed community-wide outside of conference time as well.
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Coral Sheldon-Hess <[log in to unmask]
> > wrote:
>
>> I was under the impression that we had a code of conduct/anti-harassment
>> policy in place for IRC and the mailing lists. Was this an incorrect
>> impression?
>>
>> I am definitely in favor of adopting one, if there isn't one in place!
>>
>> Logistically, Geek Feminism is also not a formal organization--they were
>> recently described as an anarchist collective--so I think we could follow
>> their lead pretty easily. We could make a mail alias that goes to a
>> ROTATING team/committee (this is very important; people burn out, dealing
>> with these things for too long), for reporting purposes. IRC aliases are a
>> thing, too, right?
>>
>> -coral
>>
>
>