I would be more sympathetic to the original poster if their petition actually petitioned for something. Unfortunately, the "petition" on that website is simply a half dozen sentences basically saying "someone should pay attention to this" without actually suggesting what should happen, who should do it, who is sponsoring the petition, or what would happen to the petition once completed. It looked suspiciously like an attempt to get names and email addresses.
[log in to unmask]
From: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Chris Hoffman
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 12:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Note [administratativia]
Thanks, Eric, I can appreciate your thinking. I also think there’s a fair likelihood that the poster may have felt they could not post with their full information due to the sensitive nature of the content. It’s unfortunately the case that there is still a lot of discrimination that victims of sexual harassment face, and I can imagine dozens of reasons someone would be nervous about trying to surface these issues. Hopefully there are other venues and mailing lists where S B can get the word out and gather information to help bring light to a very serious problem.
Thanks for listening,
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 8:58 AM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 11:52 AM, Chris Hoffman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Eric, can I ask something? Was your concern about the posting from “S B” about the content of the message or the anonymous nature of the person posting? I think it would be good for this to be transparent.
>> Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.
>> Associate Director, Research IT
>> Program Director, Research Data Management
>> <http://researchdata.berkeley.edu/> & Informatics Services UC
>> Berkeley [log in to unmask]
> Chris, the short answer is, "Both".
> First of all, I was suspicious when the posting was not really signed. I can over look signatures if the sender's email address is understandable. In this case, there was no signature nor was the email address understandable. Then, the content looked suspicious as well, with a link to yet another understandable thing.
> Eric Morgan