On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 8:57 PM Federico Leva (Nemo) <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Lilli Iliev, 29/07/2018 20:04:
> > One reliable way to silence people when they experience harassment as
> > well as keeping others from speaking out, is to have them experience how
> > other, non-involved people, would immediately have an opinion on what
> > happened and judge the case or the person in question.
>
> I'll note that this is valid both ways. So, to be consistent, you
> shouldn't jump at the conclusion that the outcome of the case was
> correct, just as you are asking not to jump to the conclusion it was wrong.
>
True. But for privacy and other reasons, it is impractical to make
friendly-space violations a matter of public debate, so we cannot resolve
this the wiki way. Instead, we *have* to trust the people entrusted with
enforcing the policy that they are careful, sensible, and competent.
It is still possible, of course, that they would make an occasional
mistake. But we *still* can't turn a given action (or inaction) into a
matter of public debate. We still have to trust the team.
What we can do as a community is debate *principles*, i.e. the policy
itself. If a significant opinion forms in favor of adding, changing, or
removing some elements from the policy, that could be input for the team(s)
enforcing the policy.
A.
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
