1 |
On Sunday 26 April 2015 22:30:52 Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
2 |
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 07:39:37AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
3 |
> > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@g.o> |
4 |
wrote: |
5 |
> > > Gentoo should ALSO care if it comes to light that individuals with past |
6 |
> > > history of incidents are participating in the community. Eg: [1a][1b] |
7 |
> > > [1a] |
8 |
> > > http://www.eventbrite.com/e/ignite-bridgetown-part-of-portland-startup-> > > week-tickets-15491321961 [1b] |
9 |
> > > http://crystalbeasley.com/2015/02/04/I-stand-against-kveton/ |
10 |
> > > How it should deal with any such individuals I don't have a good answer |
11 |
> > > to, but should be considered in CoC changes. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> As noted here already: I don't have good answers, just more questions |
14 |
> |
15 |
> :-(. |
16 |
|
17 |
Mmmh. Somehow I get the feeling that this is an example of the twitter outrage |
18 |
engine running at full throttle. |
19 |
|
20 |
So there's *allegations* of misconduct, and thus someone is not allowed to go |
21 |
there. Those that _feel_ uncomfortable get to dictate the terms. (Independent |
22 |
of actual guilt, but no one has time for the legal system anymore) |
23 |
|
24 |
Let me try a reducito ad absurdum: |
25 |
|
26 |
I claim that $gentoo_dev has been harassing me (without proof) |
27 |
Thus this person should not be allowed to go to FOSDEM because I want to go |
28 |
there, and I might *feel* uncomfortable going there. |
29 |
|
30 |
I would expect people to demand either proof, or ignore my unsubstantiated |
31 |
whining. I hope Gentoo doesn't turn into a Safe Space full of Trigger Warnings |
32 |
where we can't communicate clearly because someone feels that it discriminates |
33 |
their feelings or something ... |
34 |
|
35 |
|
36 |
> : |
37 |
> > Looking at your example, how do we find a balance between: |
38 |
> > |
39 |
> > 1. Safety (err on the side of caution) vs justice (innocent until |
40 |
> > proven guilty)? |
41 |
> > 2. Safety (once a criminal, always a criminal) vs redemption (why |
42 |
> > wouldn't we want somebody trying to turn their life around to |
43 |
> > contribute to FOSS) vs punishment (here is our chance to show |
44 |
> > solidarity and throw a few more stones)? |
45 |
> |
46 |
> Further to these, should comrel/recruiters actively research past |
47 |
> behavior? If they don't, how should they react when negative past |
48 |
> behavior comes to light? |
49 |
|
50 |
Actively? No. If someone has committed a crime and been handled in the legal |
51 |
system (i.e. fines, prison time, ...) it's definitely not our job to punish |
52 |
them again. |
53 |
|
54 |
Do we really need to discuss this ?! |
55 |
|
56 |
> |
57 |
> In that example, turn down the speaker or have the effects of having |
58 |
> them as a speaker? Damned if you do, damned if you don't. |
59 |
> |
60 |
> > The posts you cited concern somebody who was actually exonerated of |
61 |
> > the crime in a court of law. |
62 |
> |
63 |
> For those that weren't up on the further proceedings of it, see "Grand |
64 |
> Jury declines to indict" [1]. |
65 |
|
66 |
In other words, he had enough damage from people harassing him, had to step |
67 |
down from his job, while most everyone involved forgot basic things like |
68 |
"innocent until proven guilty" ... maybe we should not aim to emulate that. |