Hello, Even in peaceful New Mexico my inbox is full of this discussion, so please allow me to at least share a link to a Dictionary of English Idioms <https://raw.githubusercontent.com/asymptopia/tuxwordsmith/master/xdxf/English-Idioms/dict.xdxf> .
@Hilary, thanks for figuring out what was even going on! I searched for a reference to anyone's "mother" and skimmed right over "run to mommie". It did not even occur to me that that was the refernce, because I understand it as an idiom immediately and automatically. Charles On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Hilary Naylor <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi James and all, > > It appears to me that the phrase "run to Mommie" (or "mommy" as is more > common) is a perfect example of your first scenario. It just doesn't mean > what the translation probably implies "run to your mother." I quick review > of the phrase in Google (in English) illustrates how it is used (not that > it is polite, but it has nothing to do with anyone's mother). > I'd suggest that the first rule of multi-cultural, multi-lingual > e-lists like this one should be "no English idioms"! > > thanks > Hilary > > ---Original Message--- > Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 09:06:09 +1000 > From: James Cameron <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], [email protected] > Subject: Re: [IAEP] Code of Conduct Motion to add Anti-harassment policy > - Sugar Labs > > > Long reply. > > I'm very familiar with the geek feminism team and the conference > anti-harassment policy, as I've been a regular speaker at > linux.conf.au. I support the work of the geek feminism team. For my > part, two of my friends who are female are part of the overall geek > feminism movement. The conference policy is essential. I support the > policy itself, but I don't think Sugar Labs needs it yet. > > I'm also familiar with abuse and harassment policies in general, as > I've been studying and implementing them as part of another > organisation. Earlier this week 130 or so pages of canon law passed > my eyes. > > Walter asked Laura why existing code of conduct is insufficient; > perhaps another way of asking why the policy would be needed. At time > of my writing, Laura hasn't answered. I look forward to an answer. > > For my part, I guess there are two possible scenarios, and which is > correct I cannot be sure. Perhaps none, perhaps one, perhaps both. > > 1. a misunderstanding. > > Since almost everything here in Sugar Labs mailing lists is in > English, and there is no independent third party doing translation, > any non-english speaker is obliged to manage their own translation, > > Laura says english is not her first language. So everything I say has > to be translated. When translating there are a choice of > interpretations. English has several meanings. > > This risks an uncharitable translation, which may result in silently > taking offense, which may set a person against me. > > This in turn increases the probability of the next translation being > uncharitable, caused now by a decision to act against all my > interests, despite some interests being held in common. > > A positive feedback loop begins, with each communication raising the > ire of each participant. This may partly explain my stress and tears > in the design meeting; I felt I wasn't listened to, as if a prejudice > had already built to the point of deafness. > > For my part, I hope Sebastian isn't the translator. If so, I'm > doomed. ;-) > > 2. side attack. > > A less charitable interpretation is that Laura is searching around for > procedural weapons to use against me, which in itself is a form of > abuse. This seems less likely now than a misunderstanding, because it > would be such an unwise thing to do. Laura should not be the one to > propose this motion, because it could look like an attack. Laura > might instead have asked another to propose it, or the motion could > have been private to slobs@. It can only be an attack on me if it is > copied to iaep@. > > > Summary > > The proposed policy is not needed, because the code of conduct already > includes a summary form, and says the oversight board will arbitrate. > The oversight board is the response team, and reports would be private > to them. > > (As an aside, If I had approached the board alleging harassment under > the code of conduct, I would have written to the board without > including anyone involved in the abuse or harassment. If Laura had > approach the board alleging harassment under the code of conduct, the > board would have to acknowledge and then discuss without including > Laura. The proposed policy identifies the same difficulty with the > response team.) > > The proposed policy is unsustainable, because we have so few active > people in Sugar Labs. With GCI and GSoC inactive, most posts are from > myself, Laura, or the oversight board. It is unlikely there would be > agreement on making a separate response team, and the confidential > nature of the response team would make it hard for them to manage > communication. > > Alternatives > > However, I welcome any independent third party to assist Laura and > myself to be more charitable in our translations and interpretations, > and defuse what might be seen as mutual harassment born from > misunderstanding. Others have become silent instead. > > As Sugar Labs is so small, I don't expect an independent third party > will make such an offer, so as an alternative I ask that Laura and > others clearly identify any harassment, and in return I'll do the > same. I've already begun this. It will increase volume of mailing > list posts, which is unfortunate, but seems necessary. > > I recognise that the proposed policy would also protect me, and I > could make a report under the policy; on the issues of employment, > intimidation, and sustained disruption of discussion. > > Thank you to the six people who responded privately to my concerns of > harassment, and I hope we can make Sugar Labs a place where you can > speak freely. > --- > Hilary Naylor, Ph.D. > www.a2zed.us > Oakland CA > > _______________________________________________ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep >
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
