The lack of transparency of TCC actions and assessment processes is troubling. TCC was supposed to be a means to handle serious misuse or harassment, not to use steel boots to stamp out all "non-positivity".
Trivial cases like this should best be handled firstly by off project grown-up mediation, rather than TCC warnings for which the next step may be a global ban. Honestly, the TCC's actions have looked so authoritarian to my eyes, I fear I am adding evidence to a case for a permanent ban of my account by writing non-positive words here. The TCC is guilty of creating a hostile environment that appears unwelcoming and threatens volunteers in all "technical spaces". Fae On Sun, 24 Jun 2018, 22:46 MZMcBride, <[email protected]> wrote: > >Hello, > >Please refrain from name calling, the CoC has received some reports about > >users being offended by you calling them trolls. While those comments > >might not have been malicious they are not constructive and do not > >contribute to a welcoming environment for contributors. > > > >Best > > > >-- > >This email was sent by TechConductCommittee to MZMcBride by the "Email > >this user" function at MediaWiki. If you reply to this email, your email > >will be sent directly to the original sender, revealing your email > >address to them. > > Wikimedia Foundation Inc. employees have blocked the ability of new users > to report bugs or file feature requests or even read the issue tracker. > But yes, please focus on me calling Andre a troll for resetting the > priority of <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T197550>. My single comment > ("andre__: Such a troll.") is clearly what contributes to an unwelcoming > environment for contributors, not blocking them from reading the site and > demanding that they be vetted first. Great work, all. > > A pseudo-focus on "civility" while you take a hard-line and skeptical view > toward outsiders. Maybe these people are auditioning for roles in the > Trump Administration. :-) > > I'm mostly forwarding this garbage here so that there's some better and > more appropriate context when, in a few months, someone says "well, the > code of conduct committee has dealt with dozens of incidents! Clearly it's > necessary!" The people pushing this campaign for more bureaucracy have > repeatedly declined to provide specifics about incidents because it's > pretty obvious that nobody would take them seriously (and rightfully!) if > there were a clearer understanding of what they're actually doing. > > Best! > > MZMcBride > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
