[IAEP] Arbitration request: Caryl Bigenho a first warning for moderation [WAS: Re: Improving our Code of Conduct (was: Re: Code of Conduct Motion to add Anti-harassment policy - Sugar Labs)

Laura Vargas laura at somosazucar.org
Wed Oct 4 23:00:50 EDT 2017

Dear SLOBs and community members;

cc Ombusman

We need to clearly state every member when interacting within the Sugar
Labs project channels is expected to serve as an example for children.

This is logical as within Sugar Labs, children make software,
documentation, art, testing, etc.

*I am sad because today, again, me and my family have been mistreated on a
Sugar Labs mailing list by a Sugar Labs member.*
I am sad because our Code of Conduct is not sufficient to deal with these
situations and other than Walter no other SLOB notice me needing the
addition of the anti-harassment Policy earlier.

It is necessary we make a *list of acceptable and unacceptably behaviors
within Sugar Labs communication channels *so we can add that to the Sugar
Labs Code of Conduct.

In this case Caryl might be unaware: in our culture, it is completely
unacceptable to mention someone's mother.

Sebastian's mother is my mother in law, a real person.

So my petition is: to send Caryl a first warning for moderation and a
suggestion to apologize to Sebastian.

Thank you for your consideration.


Laura V

2017-10-04 19:34 GMT-05:00 Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho at hotmail.com>:

> Sebastian,
> In my culture and, possibly in James's culture, accusations such as this
> one you are making against James, and the one Laura made against me a few
> weeks ago, are considered "harassment"... actually, extreme harassment.


We are far from understanding what your culture is.

> You are denying us the freedom to express our opinions or feelings in a
> rational way without fearing reprisals and intimidation as what the two of
> you have chosen to do.
We are all adults here (at least will be after Samson turns 18 on
Halloween 😊 ).
> It's time we start acting like adults and stop "running to Mommie!"
In my culture you can be a "Grannie" but it would still be* extremelly rude
and disrespectful*l to talk about someone's mother.

I may have to make you realize this person you are talking about actually

We are a family.


> ------------------------------
> *From:* IAEP <iaep-bounces at lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of Sebastian
> Silva <sebastian at fuentelibre.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 3, 2017 7:41 PM
> *To:* James Cameron; Laura Vargas
> *Cc:* iaep; SLOBs
> *Subject:* [IAEP] Improving our Code of Conduct (was: Re: Code of Conduct
> Motion to add Anti-harassment policy - Sugar Labs)
> Hi,
> I had asked that we discuss changes to our Code of Conduct in a wiki page
> <https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Conduct> I have worked on,
> where I put the result of a lot of research.
> The time I spent, back in January, on this document, is because I myself
> felt not only harassed but threatened. It came as a realization then, that
> perhaps more people have had similar experiences and have abandoned Sugar
> Labs because they were less tenacious than others. Hopefully you'll find
> the references I put there (beyond geek feminism) interesting. They
> represent a broad spectrum of approaches to making a community more
> welcoming.
> I found our current Code of Conduct
> <https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Legal/Code_of_Conduct> was not
> sufficient because (1) it is vague and difficult to evaluate when it's been
> infringed. Cultures vary widely with regard to what is *considerate*,
> *respectful*, *collaborative*, and *flexible*. It would be much better if
> specific acceptable or not acceptable behaviors were listed. (2) There is
> no defined procedure on how to report a problem and what the expected
> outcome, timeline, or response could be. (3) There's no defined solution or
> action such as warning or temporarily moderating a person to signal bad
> behavior.
> James, you insist on victimizing yourself and have a confrontational form
> of writing. Perhaps I'm misreading you. Please improve your tone. I have
> only seen vague complaints on the alleged dispute (*"rate of posting and
> Wiki editing"*, and *"use of many paths to achieve your goals"*).
> If all of this is because I had the audacity to merge an icon, I feel your
> attitude is disproportionate, unfair and itself sufficient for a complaint.
> Trying to flag my github profile seems particularly aggressive and harmful,
> considering the market use of such profiles.
> The trademarked icon has already been reinstated in master branch, but my
> valid concern (that neither Sugar Labs nor downstream distributors have
> permission to use it), has not been resolved. I raised the same question
> openly in 2016, and you responded with sarcasm
> <http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2016-04-01T19:01:31#i_2864254>.
> I don't think this is acceptable.
> At the moment I don't support Laura's motion because I think it's
> necessary to write something more specific for Sugar Labs, taking into
> consideration the other references listed in the page at the least.
> Regards,
> Sebastian

Laura V.
* I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*

“Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
~ L. Victoria

Happy Learning!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20171004/8e86b935/attachment.html>

More information about the IAEP mailing list