On 05/25/12 13:22, Anton Cohen wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:54 AM, <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Also, I think the Code-Of-Ethics really covers things.
I pay for LOPSA membership because I believe in the sysadmin profession
and I want to support it. I don't actually get any personal value from
my membership. If I see my membership money going to lawyers to draft or
review policies to cover incidents that haven't happened yet, and for
which there are already rules or laws covering, I might not renew my
membership.
Ok, I think we need to be clear about the role of the Code of Ethics vs.
the role of an Anti-Harassment policy.
The Code of Ethics defines what we, as professionals, strive for as
expected conduct. It is not really enforcible, outside of bouncing the
perpetrator out of the organization, if we have code somewhere that
specifies that to be a member, you MUST follow the Code of Ethics.
The code that specifies that you MUST follow the Code of Ethics, would
be an organizational policy. Since the Code of Ethics doesn't say
anywhere what can be done if a violation is found, it alone is not
enforcible.
An Anti-Harassment policy could point to the Code of Ethics for expected
behavior. It will have to also go on and specify what
recourses/escalations are available upon violation.
Since a policy contains the recourse/escalations, the review of the
final document by legal counsel is, as most agree, necessary. As the
actions specified in the recourse/escalations part can cause liability
issues.
A quick search on lopsa.org and I find the Etiquette Policy that states
that "All LOPSA members are bound by our Code of Ethics", among
additional guidelines. And it contains the recourse of "there will be
at least one warning issued with possible more strict punitive measures
depending on the medium or forum and nature of the infraction".
Now this covers, in very broad strokes, what can happen if someone
breaks the rules, as long as they are a member of LOPSA. (we get a stern
talking to...)
A conference is a whole other matter. There would have to be a policy
stated in the registration process on expected behavior and recourse,
since there would be non-LOPSA attendees, who never agreed to the LOPSA
policies.
Example of legal agreement: (I found humorous)
http://lanning.cc/pub/SYMC-Ped-Agreement.jpg
--
Mr. Flibble
King of the Potato People
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
