Write our new anti harassment-policy!

[Kellis Amberlee]

Hi folks!

This hasn't really generated much discussion, huh? Well, we said we'd give you a week, but we're going to extend it because it's really important to us that this is a community-led plan. We don't want to be the ones dictating what will happen if you get hurt - we want you to tell us what you want to happen.

So, we're throwing out some questions to get you started. This is not prescriptive! Please feel free to go in any direction you want, whether or not we've mentioned anything about your idea.

• Who should enforce the policy? (some ideas from us: One person or a team? A team made of admods or of users, or of a mixture of the two?)
• How should we choose the person/people in the team?
• What happens if someone in the anti-harassment team is the perpetrator of harassment?
• What happens if Captain Awkward or carbonated wit is the perpetrator?
• Does this policy only include what happens on the forum, or does it also apply to meetups? If to meetups, does it only apply to those advertised here, or all Captain Awkward-affiliated events?
• What do the team do if they hear about a user who has harassed people in non-Awkward spaces but not broken any rules in our forums/meetups?
• How strict/lenient will we be when it comes to looking for proof?
• What are the consequences for harassment? What if it's a second or further offence?
• Are we accepting the linked policy/Rose Fox's policy wholesale or are we editing it/them to match our community needs?
• Where do unwanted Jedi Hugs fall on the spectrum of harassment? How does that fit with our community vibe?

These are just ideas to get you started. We hope to have much more input this week!

Unfortunately, we also want to have a policy in place as soon as we can. So, if we still don't get much help from you, we'll just implement the linked policy wholesale with the entire admod team doubling as the anti-harassment team. This is almost certainly not the best way to go, but it's the only way we can go without input from you. If you have worries about this, now is the time to give us your concerns and ideas!

[gracesonnet]

Sorry, KellisAmberlee! I personally am fine with the policy that RoseFox linked to. I don't know what to do regarding the meet-ups or when someone's harassed in non-Awkward spaces but hasn't broken any forum/meetup rules, etc. I'm also okay with the admin team doubling as the anti-harrassment team but I totally understand if that's not fun for you.

Sorry!

[kathlynn]

Hi folks!

This hasn't really generated much discussion, huh? Well, we said we'd give you a week, but we're going to extend it because it's really important to us that this is a community-led plan. We don't want to be the ones dictating what will happen if you get hurt - we want you to tell us what you want to happen.

So, we're throwing out some questions to get you started. This is not prescriptive! Please feel free to go in any direction you want, whether or not we've mentioned anything about your idea.

• Who should enforce the policy? (some ideas from us: One person or a team? A team made of admods or of users, or of a mixture of the two?)
• How should we choose the person/people in the team?

Personally, I think it should be the Admin team, or people appointed to the admin team to deal with this. I think they should be appointed by the admin team, or if that's not possible, volunteers selected by votes.

• What happens if someone in the anti-harassment team is the perpetrator of harassment?

then they should be temporarily removed from dealing with harassment cases, until the case is examined/investigated. Depending on the context, there are at least several out comes. The ones I can think of at the moment are: Accused is innocent via misunderstanding/circumstances. This would be explained to both parties. The accused would be warned to be more careful (note would be made, in case this occurs again). The Accused is guilty, but intended no harm. Same thing, warning and record made. The accused purposefully did so (and not a sever grievance) warning or Temp ban, record made. if it's a sever grievance, permanent ban. The accused is innocent, and the report seems to be made in malice, action is taken against the complainant (this would be harassment in itself)

If the party is innocent, they can return and investigate harassment claims. If guilty they should at least temporarily be removed from investigating harassment claims, if not from the admin team completely.
Also, with all issues, the people on the team should be encouraged to step aside if they feel they are too close to any of the people involved in the incident (conflict of interest)

• What happens if Captain Awkward or carbonated wit is the perpetrator?

we all stagger and fall seated in shock? I have no Idea, other then what I wrote above.

• Does this policy only include what happens on the forum, or does it also apply to meetups? If to meetups, does it only apply to those advertised here, or all Captain Awkward-affiliated events?

Unless this site ever directly sponsor meet ups I don't think it should be directly applied, unless the organizers wish to do so themselves. How ever, if a person harasses another user, and that user feels that it might carry over to the forums they should be able to contact the admin about it, and they should keep their eyes open (the user also has the option of blocking the other user just in case.)

• What do the team do if they hear about a user who has harassed people in non-Awkward spaces but not broken any rules in our forums/meetups?

Nothing, unless another user feels that this person may harass or stalk them, then take appropriate action.

• How strict/lenient will we be when it comes to looking for proof?

It depends on the case. If it's a case, like the one posted earlier, then the evidince seems obvious. Otherwise, confirmation of the events, and successful stating of the reason the user thinks the behaviour will continue here. for a minimum.

• What are the consequences for harassment? What if it's a second or further offence?

if the first offence got was guilty + warning, a temp ban, then a perm ban. if it was a temp ban, a perm ban. If innocent, decide if warning or temp ban is needed, then follow the guilty part

• Are we accepting the linked policy/Rose Fox's policy wholesale or are we editing it/them to match our community needs?

It needs editing to suit our community.

• Where do unwanted Jedi Hugs fall on the spectrum of harassment? How does that fit with our community vibe?

[/list][/list][/list][/list][/list][/list][/list][/list]

These are just ideas to get you started. We hope to have much more input this week!

Unfortunately, we also want to have a policy in place as soon as we can. So, if we still don't get much help from you, we'll just implement the linked policy wholesale with the entire admod team doubling as the anti-harassment team. This is almost certainly not the best way to go, but it's the only way we can go without input from you. If you have worries about this, now is the time to give us your concerns and ideas!

If we see someone constantly using Jedi-hugs or other physical expressions when they are explicitly not asked for, warn them 2-3 times, then a temp ban, then a perm ban.
And at the very least, if you must implement the policy without detailed examination, please edit/delete the reverse -ism part.

[letternext]

It's just really dawned on me again that this is a big job for the admod team, so I want to say I really appreciate the work being put into it.

What happens if someone in the anti-harassment team is the perpetrator of harassment?

This doesn't exactly solve the problem if it happens, but could a line be added saying that everybody must follow the policy? People could be encouraged to focus on the behaviours themselves, not on any other factor like whether the person is an admod, how long they have been posting, or anything else. Having a list [with descriptions?] of unacceptable behaviours would make this easier.

Does this policy only include what happens on the forum, or does it also apply to meetups? If to meetups, does it only apply to those advertised here, or all Captain Awkward-affiliated events?

I see the on read first post on the meetups forum that it already has some guidelines, including "don't be creepy." This is for posts on that forum, could it be expanded to include behaviours that are not acceptable for FOCA affiliated meetups too? Having those guidelines laid out would at least give the organisers or people attending something to point to if they are in a situation of having to tell someone they are making others uncomfortable. For another project I have been reading about safer space policies, a lot of them are very similar to the Readercon code of conduct Rose Fox linked. Sometimes they recommend having a grievance person or grievance collective, it then becomes an issue of those people believing/taking seriously complaints. Another thing I've seen is some include that people should get explicit verbal permission to take photos of others. I'm afraid I really don't know how to do this but it would be good to have a way to warn about people who have been a problem at a meetup & vice versa.

I have some thoughts about reverse -isms, but I couldn't find anywhere in the links that specifically mentioned them. But I don't think, for eg, racism & reverse racism are the same thing & it makes sense to me to treat them differently. I was in another community where discussions of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia & other isms were shut down very easily by accusations of reverse -ism. I don't mean to argue against a straw-argument or say that would or could happen here, just that I think it can be a silencing tactic & the idea of treating them in the same way makes me nervous. I think there are alternatives for eg saying that talking from a position of forced gender norms is unacceptable could be another option. [There is probably a better term for this, but arguments that "men are just like X" or "women prefer Y" etc, maybe this is something I will bring up in the 101 space.]

[teabooksandchocolate]

Thank you for posting some guiding questions. It made thinking about this much more focused and reply-able for me. Without them it was just too much to think about.

Who should enforce the policy? (some ideas from us: One person or a team? A team made of admods or of users, or of a mixture of the two?)

Personally, I think I would be fine with having the admod team enforce the policy. (Sorry for the vote to add more to your plates!) I think you all have done an amazing job running and moderating the forum, which already involves caring for user safety. If the admod team feels like it would be overwhelming for them, maybe the forum can nominate members they think would be good to become either mods or part of the harassment policy enforcement team. (Could they get colored names if that happened? I think it would be good to have those members, if not mods or admins, designated.)

What happens if someone in the anti-harassment team is the perpetrator of harassment?

I think the person should not be allowed to investigate the case against them, and should be taken off the team until the matter is decided. If it is a misunderstanding case, where the accused is innocent but the accuser felt uncomfortable, the accused would have to understand which boundaries they crossed and apologize (if wanted) before resuming duties. If the accused is innocent and the accuser was acting in bad faith (like trying to get the accused in trouble), then I think the accuser should get a two week ban and have to apologize before being allowed back fully. If the accused was actually harassing, I think they should be permanently banned, because the position of power they were in and then abused would definitely make me feel unsafe here.

Does this policy only include what happens on the forum, or does it also apply to meetups? If to meetups, does it only apply to those advertised here, or all Captain Awkward-affiliated events?

I think if something happens at a meetup that was advertised on this forum that makes someone so uncomfortable that they would report harassment on the forum, it should be taken seriously. I don't think it should include all CA affliated events, but I am not sure why...

What do the team do if they hear about a user who has harassed people in non-Awkward spaces but not broken any rules in our forums/meetups?

This is something I've been thinking about for a while. I have lingering fears that the people who abused/assaulted me will join this forum. (Not like I'd necessarily know if they did, but it really freaks me out that they could.) I think, if someone can prove that the person has done something outside the forum and them being here makes them feel unsafe, the other person should be permanently banned. Because, I foresee this being for other survivors of assault and rape getting their abuser out, someone who was stalked getting their stalker out, etc.

How strict/lenient will we be when it comes to looking for proof?

I'm not sure about this. I think of harassment as being a major thing, so it would be pretty apparent, especially as the forum is in writing. Maybe I am misunderstanding harassment, but I feel like it would be extra obvious since we don't have tone of voice to deal with. Can we clarify what harassment means? I'm thinking of insults, pressuring people to give details they would be uncomfortable giving (specific locations, photos, etc), which I feel would be pretty evident over text-based communication.

What are the consequences for harassment? What if it's a second or further offence?

Personally, as I touch on before, my ideas of harassment are really big, nasty, in bad spirit attacks, in which case I think a permanent ban would be the only way to maintain the community. But, I'm not sure what more subtle or smaller-scale harassment would look like, so I can't really figure out how to handle it, especially with the "good faith" clause of the rules. I do think if a person shows a pattern of harassment, they should be banned for the safety of all community members.

Where do unwanted Jedi Hugs fall on the spectrum of harassment? How does that fit with our community vibe?

I think if a person posts and asks for no Jedi Hugs, and someone offers them, it should be treated like offering advice in the Jedi R Us forum, in that an admod comes in, states this is not the place for hugs, and deletes the comment. However, that really doesn't help if a person has a habit of intrusively making Jedi Hugs. Could that be something the admods/harassment policy team watch out for? If A gives B Jedi hugs and B didn't say "I don't want Jedi Hugs," I don't think A is in fault as there is no way A could've known. And if B never wants them, I think it is on B to draw that boundary, either when they post in the Jedi R Us subforum and other places where one might want to offer Jedi Hugs, or include it in a signature, as in this community with so many members, it might be hard to keep track of who doesn't want Jedi Hugs, since they are pretty ingrained in the community.

So yeah, throwing my two cents in!

[RollingHead]

I appreciate the work you all are doing to improve our community. Maybe I just missed it, but shouldn't the policy include some kind of guide line defining what "counts" as harassment?

[theleakypen]

My thoughts are still percolating on other stuff, but I am strongly in favor of their being a whole team of people who deal with harassment rather than a single person, in particular so that, if a person ON the team gets accused of harassment there will be other people who can investigate this without the whole thing falling apart.

Whether the team is made up of current admins/moderators or new people, I think should be up for some kind of a vote? I don't have a strong preference in either direction, personally.

I think if Captain Awkward or carbonatedwit are accused of harassment it should be dealt with just as any other person accused of harassment--a member of the harassment team looks into it according to the policies that are currently in place (whatever those will be) and acts accordingly depending on what is found.

[Hrovitnir]

I definitely think a team, and probably just mods unless it's an unusual situation. I pretty much agree with all of kathlynn's comments.

A guideline as to what "counts" would be ideal, really, but it does make me wince imagining trying to get that really clear. Still, it's nice to have something to point to apart from anything else.

Thank you so much for your hard work!

[Doggle]

[*] What do the team do if they hear about a user who has harassed people in non-Awkward spaces but not broken any rules in our forums/meetups?

Nothing, unless another user feels that this person may harass or stalk them, then take appropriate action.

[*] How strict/lenient will we be when it comes to looking for proof?

It depends on the case. If it's a case, like the one posted earlier, then the evidince seems obvious. Otherwise, confirmation of the events, and successful stating of the reason the user thinks the behaviour will continue here. for a minimum.

This is really difficult to draw the line.

E.g., suppose the person from this thread turned up: http://friendsofcaptainawkward.com/foru ... ker#p39200

There would be no evidence, and no way to confirm the events, but the OP would still be legitimately uncomfortable and have good reason to feel unhappy with having him posting here.

Are we saying nothing can be done about a situation like that? The OP would have to choose between having their creep here and leaving?

Of course the failure mode the other way is to ban people without evidence, which isn't great either.

[kathlynn]

[*] What do the team do if they hear about a user who has harassed people in non-Awkward spaces but not broken any rules in our forums/meetups?

Nothing, unless another user feels that this person may harass or stalk them, then take appropriate action.

[*] How strict/lenient will we be when it comes to looking for proof?

It depends on the case. If it's a case, like the one posted earlier, then the evidince seems obvious. Otherwise, confirmation of the events, and successful stating of the reason the user thinks the behaviour will continue here. for a minimum.

This is really difficult to draw the line.

E.g., suppose the person from this thread turned up: http://friendsofcaptainawkward.com/foru ... ker#p39200

There would be no evidence, and no way to confirm the events, but the OP would still be legitimately uncomfortable and have good reason to feel unhappy with having him posting here.

Are we saying nothing can be done about a situation like that? The OP would have to choose between having their creep here and leaving?

Of course the failure mode the other way is to ban people without evidence, which isn't great either.

The first thing would be for the existing user to block the new user, then inform the admin team as to the situation. in the example you linked? it is more then likely that there are people who can vouch for the existing user, and would be able to submit a statement. With or without the proof, the Admin team would know to watch out for this person and their behaviour. And if the coworker from your example tried to gather information about the existing user, then that would be a good reason to ban them, as it's stalking type behaviour, in this case. I thought of suggesting that they warn the new user, but the new user might not even know that the existing user is their coworker.