Stack Overflow Inc.: more delays
Oct. 15th, 2019 08:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellioContinuing from my previous post, the company published policies for moderator removal and reinstatement on Friday to all moderators. I understood this to be an announcement, so when I hadn't heard from David Fullerton with an update by Sunday, I sent email asking about it.
It turns out that what they posted was a draft, and they are making updates based on feedback. I'm glad to hear they're listening to feedback, but this introduces another delay. David said they are finalizing the policies "this week" and will send me the final version when it's done.
Reminder: the company has absolutely refused to reinstate me now, even though they admit that they failed to follow the process they already had for moderator removal. Even though David admits that I deserved the benefit of a private, comprehensive process, and even though a senior employee, Sara Chipps, subsequently maligned me repeatedly and very publicly (which is causing damage), they are unwilling to revert the change and then look at the original situation afresh. I have to instead apply for reinstatement.
From what I've heard through the rumor mill, the process, once started, takes two weeks and is probably biased toward the status quo.
With that as background, here is the email I sent to David tonight in reply to that message:
Thank you for the update.
Can we expedite any of this? Sara's public, defamatory accusations, made in violation of all prior Stack Exchange rules and conventions about privacy, are actively causing me harm every single day. They also resulted from a lack of due process for me. Reinstating me alone will not fix that, but it seems reinstatement is a precondition before SE will mitigate the harm done by these actions. From what you've said and the rumors I've heard about the timing in the policy, we're looking at another three weeks of delay and thus continuing damage.
I don't think you intend to cause serious ongoing harm to me. What can we do to alleviate it?
While I'm posting... a couple people have asked me questions privately, so:
I was not warned either that I was violating the CoC or that I was facing possible removal.
If SE is considering the messages in TL from Sara on September 18 to be warnings, then I did not subsequently violate the CoC, current or future. (I also did not interpret them as warnings that my status was in danger.)
There was one piece of email from a CM that suggested that if I couldn't see a path toward resolving the matter, I should step down. But I did see a path and said so. So (1) that wasn't a warning of impending termination and (2) even if it had been, the condition was not met.
I didn't go disrupt something elsewhere on the network after leaving TL. I didn't do anything that would call for an urgent response.
I think it is likely that the reinstatement process will be rigged against me. Nonetheless, I will go through it if that path is made available in the reasonably near future.
Edit 2019-10-22: The next email I received was on October 21, when a community manager emailed me to let me know the new processes were about to be posted.
Speechless
Date: 2019-10-16 01:09 am (UTC)"Fools", said I, "You do not know
Silence like a cancer grows
Hear my words that I might teach you
Take my arms that I might reach you"
But my words, like silent raindrops, fell
And echoed in the wells of silence.
Keep strong.
Silvio
Torquemada Lounge
Date: 2019-10-16 01:14 am (UTC)I'm not active on SO/SE but the TL didn't seem to me like it was a "star chamber" where you were on trial without knowing it, much less the charges against you, and tried, found guilty and executed IN PRIVATE, where there are all kinds of "we can't expose private information" excuses.
Meanwhile Sara libeled you in public via the Register. Instead of "We have removed a moderator and can't comment further", it was "We removed you know who for multiple violations of our Code of Conduct".
While I can understand some emergency removal for criminal activity or doxxing, there is NOTHING I can believe you did that shouldn't have been handled via the EXISTING RULES for removing a Moderator if needed. I assume there would be due process and a public record.
Justice delayed is not merely justice denied, but it is an accumulating injustice.
My thoughts and prayers are with you.
Your opposition is getting record downvotes and the responses as many upvotes.
And it is sad. A community is NOT BUILT ON RULES BUT IS BUILT ON TRUST. A major SO moderator resigned today.
Re: Torquemada Lounge
Date: 2019-10-16 01:25 am (UTC)The thing about TL is that, until now, vigorous policy discussions and hypotheticals and pedantic examination of proposals was *normal* and *welcome*. Better to have a bunch of engaged pedants beat on it and help refine it before you implement it, right? Sometimes those conversations were vigorous, and sometimes they crossed lines that made me uncomfortable enough to leave, and I do think that needs to be fixed. But with the exception of a few rude comments from just a couple people, the conversation on September 18 didn't cross those lines. It was a vigorous but mostly *respectful* policy discussion.
Except that Sara Chipps didn't want to be part of that, apparently. She wanted to make pronouncements but disengage from the rest, and then brought her wrath down on me. And then she libelled me, more than once. Disgusting.
The score on David's "apology" post was close to 600 at one point; now it's below 200 and continuing to drop, as time passes without visible progress. Sadly, I don't think anybody at company HQ cares how things are received on meta any more. As with TL, pushback, questioning, and disagreement are interpreted as problem users, not problem content.
Temprament
Date: 2019-10-16 01:32 am (UTC)While I don't want to get personal, Sara went public earlier with her own misunderstanding:
https://stackoverflow.blog/2019/07/18/building-community-inclusivity-stack-overflow/
A quick synopsis is she introduced a change, there were lots of objections, she too them all PERSONALLY, and stewed all weekend. Then she read them trying to find the insults and throwing shade, and found ... oh, it was rational disagreement and reasonable suggestions that disagreed with the policy!
I don't know who removed you from moderation, but the non-Apology and the explanation not relitigate post seems to show Sara does NOT have the temprament to interact with the community in this way. I don't think SE should take action beyond that, but if she is emotionally too quick on the trigger and will wield a ban hammer she should be relegated to somewhere else where she can be productive without causing problems.
We are all different - as we were created as stones, not bricks. I know someone who is excellent when he writes but now has a "podcast" but every comment seems to distract him saying they need to be banned, or redirects the subject, or something else. He doesn't have the temprament to do intereractive live podcasts. He should stick to writing.
There are many things I avoid because I know I won't do them well even if I'm technically not merely capable but would excel - if I had the temperament.
Re: Torquemada Lounge
Date: 2019-10-16 01:42 am (UTC)If Sara libeled you in TL it would be bad enough. I only know about her public libeling and doubling down.
How much is it going to cost SE to hire even some foreign outsourcing company to keep things from being a sewer if they lose the key moderators, and even then, having someone kind, understanding, who will correct and build community is very different than a delete-bot, AI or human.
I think it is terrible but it is like SE is about to die, but would rather deny the situation rather than admit error. This is not Sara, but the entire SE corporation. Is there no one there that realizes the community is the product, not just the static answers and the system, and that the Moderators are the most important part - many will ask, many will answer, but few will keep things organized and clean - especially without pay.
Re: Temprament
Date: 2019-10-16 01:46 am (UTC)I have the temperament for written communication and for moderation. Among the moderators I'm pretty widely regarded as being fair and respectful. I've suspended users and had them thank me for explaining the problem, and then seen them improve when they came back.
I've concluded that I don't have the temperament for high-velocity chat like occurs in Teachers' Lounge. I did when we were all among friends, but there are enough moderators now that we can't know everybody, some of them wield their agendas like sledgehammers, and because of the former you don't know who'll do the latter. I miss the days when we had thoughtful, respectful conversations among people from all over the world and from all sorts of different perspectives. But that's in the past, so if I get reinstated I still don't plan to go back to that room -- or at least not until I hear that there've been major changes.
I regret that I didn't have the strength of will to stay out of that room that day. I entered because another moderator called something I wrote "bigoted", which it isn't at all, and I sought dialogue. Turns out that's one of the sledgehammer-wielders, who I now know to ignore. Oh well. (I'm not ashamed of anything I said that day, just frustrated that I was there and thus available to be attacked.)
(no subject)
Date: 2019-10-16 01:49 am (UTC)But of course, on the other hand, it would be so heart-warming if you win. We all here wish you a victory.
Now Blender
Date: 2019-10-16 01:50 am (UTC)The only thing I disagree about is "Even if you agree that Monica violated the CoC"... How can you even have an opinion without any evidence either way!
Re: Torquemada Lounge
Date: 2019-10-16 01:52 am (UTC)The person who sent the email firing me did lie about what happened in TL. And, for that matter, announced that I'd been fired, which we Don't Do. I don't know if something that's not technically public counts as libel. That's not something I'm focusing on; Sara's damage is much more far-reaching. That TL announcement is just one more piece of evidence that the company thinks its policies, including privacy, are for *other people*.
(no subject)
Date: 2019-10-16 01:54 am (UTC)I have to defend myself against the defamation. That's causing real harm to me. :-(
Re: Now Blender
Date: 2019-10-16 01:55 am (UTC)I've heard that some moderators do think I violated the CoC, though from what I gather, they think I did so *more than a year ago*. Whether sudden, unwarned firing is an appropriate response to something that old is an open question; if so, several other people should have been fired too. And I don't have access to the transcripts to review for myself, so we're taking their word for it and, well, some people's words aren't worth very much. So there's that.
Re: Temprament
Date: 2019-10-16 02:00 am (UTC)Temprament goes deeper, and is a problem. First is the "welcoming" problem, but also when you call a transgender by the opposite pronoun. If they are very sensitive about it, they will be hurt.
The Journalist Tim Pool describes the problem as playing Guitar. At first your fingers will bleed but you will develop callouses. I don't think it is possible to mix thin and thick skins. I remember the embarassemnt when I started coding and made newbie mistakes (more expensive since some were hollerith cards that needed to be repunched). But the same thing with LGBTQ+.
There are many who are defending you and are upset from the lavender community that are proud - in the sense that they don't need anyone elses affirmation or acceptance - of their identity or status.
I know of no better testimony in your favor or compliment you could get. That you can completely disagree with some fundamental value, but recognize as a person someone is made of gold.
Re: Torquemada Lounge
Date: 2019-10-16 02:06 am (UTC)There was a kerfuffle with Indegogo over an Arkhaven Comic (by Vox Day, voxday.blogspot.com) where they cancelled the day they were supposed to pay out, and the lawyers figured out that 1K arbitrations might bankrupt Indegogo.
Vox has something he calls his "Legal Legion of Evil" which might provide advice if you don't have a lawyer you can consult with. Sara did libel you, quite publicly.
I think that is one of the things which so upsets the other members of SE. If they merely kept it quiet, they could hide, but by making public libelous accusations, they signalled all their Moderators that it could happen to them.
And in the age of the internet, defamation is very sticky.
Re: Now Blender
Date: 2019-10-16 02:09 am (UTC)Except I dont have a business, I'd hire you in a minute. Anyone honest and capable is better than someone with an apparently good resume.
Re: Temprament
Date: 2019-10-16 02:09 am (UTC)This should be what we all aspire to. I've had vigorous debates with people with whom I fundamentally disagree on important matters, but we've both come out of it stronger because it was respectful and we both learned stuff. Caleb talked about that some in his resignation post on Christianity. He and I have fundamental religious differences, yet we respect each other.
One on one, you can learn over time to gauge how resilient the other person is and adjust. In a room that 600 people can visit, there's bound to be somebody who is super-fragile about something, and you find out about it due to an explosion because the person feels hurt and can't engage constructively. I'm not blaming, just analyzing. Online chat, where all you have is text and it's often real-time, well, there be dragons. TL now has dragons.
To me, diversity is about encountering different perspectives, some of which you'll think are Very Wrong and some of which will mystify you. To some, however, diversity is about having a place where you don't have to hear things that are Very Wrong. These views can't coexist in one place, alas.
Re: Torquemada Lounge
Date: 2019-10-16 02:13 am (UTC)I can't tell if arbitration would cost me $250 or $1000. I also don't yet know the tradeoffs (cost/benefit on both sides) of arbitration versus suing them. I'd like them to resolve it directly with me so I don't have to do either, but as you say, there are other options.
Re: Now Blender
Date: 2019-10-16 02:16 am (UTC)If this goes to arbitration or court, SE is going to have to share a lot more from TL transcripts than what was already leaked to Reddit. That would make lots of people unhappy; people participated in those vigorous, often-personal discussions under an expectation of privacy.
(no subject)
Date: 2019-10-16 11:43 am (UTC)If your suggested path forward was to avoid the use of pronouns, and SE had already declined that suggestion, then I can understand why they removed your moderator status for refusal to follow the CoC (while the new CoC makes the pronoun thing explicit, misgendering/degendering is still disrespectful/rude and in violation of the old CoC). It's not that you violated the CoC, but that you told them you would violate the CoC.
I don't agree with the public statements they've made against you. I'm sorry you've had to experience that. It's not fair and really awful of them.
Kafka Trap Ahead?
Date: 2019-10-16 12:30 pm (UTC)Yes, or no, have you stopped beating your wife?
It may be blatant, but may be subtle, "I promise to stop violating...", "I will never again violate...", etc. which will require a subtle confession and admission of guilt, reinforcing the defamation.
I can imagine something like the following:
SE: Here, just agree that you will stop and we will reinstate you.
M: Stop what? You haven't told anyone includng me SPECIFICALLY what I did to violate the CoC.
SE: It was all in the TL so we can't make it public.
M: Fine, send me a highlighted or annotated transcript showing where I violated the CoC.
SE: Why can't you just agree to our kind offer of reinstatement so everyone can move on?
Any kind of apology will be seen as an admission of guilt.
You have to decide, but if I were you: Don't give them any quarter because they will spin it as "Monica admits guilt!". Demand they retract their libel or prove it. Or reinstate you and use their own stated procedure for removal if they still want you gone.
Maybe some people had their feeling hurt, but we are not telepaths nor empaths, especially over the internet. The reason they like CoCs to be ambiguous even only in the enforcment is because it shifts the proof from "You said X which is hurtful" to "They said they felt hurt when you said X". And anyone can be "they" and claim anything is hurtful. Even worse when someone is acting as a white knight on behalf of a "they" which they assume is being hurt without any actual person saying so.
Re: Kafka Trap Ahead?
Date: 2019-10-16 01:59 pm (UTC)A representative of the company libeled me, and they need to sustain that lie to defend themselves from the predictable consequences of that act. They haven't even asked me if there's room for a settlement there instead. (There is, but they have to be willing to act in good faith too.)
I won't apologize or admit guilt for things I did not do. If that means they refuse to reinstate me, then that strengthens my case against them.
(Also, Sara Chipps is in gross violation of the code of conduct, specifically the parts about bullying and (dis)respectfulness. Just sayin'.)
(no subject)
Date: 2019-10-16 08:24 pm (UTC)I think... is it possible to divide how SE furiously mishandled a disagreement from the subject of the disagreement? There have been things people said to you about transgender people that I would challenge were it really not the time and place. I really think Sara and the others involved in your firing who claim they did to make people safer have not done so in any way shape or form (quite the opposite) but I also wouldn't want to see people punish the vulnerable for it. I think SE abused your longstanding record of goodwill and disbelieved your statements that you would not harm people, and I think we can at least partially divide that discussion from the one about pronouns and respect which SE so mishandled but which does actually have a point even though SE failed to support that point in a meaningful way and chose instead to railroad you and thus make no one safe.
(no subject)
Date: 2019-10-16 08:57 pm (UTC)People are also trying to separate the issues, but seem to be largely failing. It's all bound up together in the public mind because of how SE botched the announcement on top of their botched treatment of me.
There's also been a lot of twisting and misrepresentation on both sides. Some want a policy of "you must use these specific pronouns, and you must inject gender into everything even where it doesn't belong or you're a bigot". (That's pretty close to Sara Chipps's original position, though those aren't her words.) That's clearly unworkable. On the other hand, some are saying crap like "those pronouns are fake" and "well then I get to make up my own words too", which makes it worse. And yes, we've seen the "attack helicopter" thing several times already.
In the midst of all this, anybody trying to express a nuanced position that *happens* to look similar to things that some bigots do gets accused of dog-whistling and bigotry and gets shut down. The logical fallacy of "bigots do X; you did X; therefore you are a bigot" is in play. This was apparently in play in Teachers' Lounge back in mid-September, but I didn't yet recognize it. (I'm not up on all the current dog-whistles...)
Professional writers are trained to avoid unnecessary gender references, which can be unclear and/or give offense. Apparently the UN even has guidelines on this, which I was quite surprised to learn. (Section 3. Some of the earlier stuff is dated, but that part is solid and, in my experience, current professional practice.) This doesn't mean anybody's being disrespectful; quite the opposite. In addition, we almost never *need* third-person singular pronouns on the parts of Stack Exchange I use; we talk about spam flags or unclear questions or users (as a class) or site features or whatever, or we might link to a specific post or refer to a user by name, but we don't generally talk about individual people. We might talk *with* individual people, but that's second-person which in English is ungendered, so that's fine.
So against that backdrop -- rare if any need, and an existing, respectful writing style -- I asked questions, seeking to continue to do what I do. One person pointed out that if I use "he" and "she" but not singular "they" then I'm discriminating against nonbinary folks now that some of them use that pronoun. That's a position I hadn't considered before, and I agreed that would be bad and I wouldn't do that. Some folks claimed that I was "twisting" my writing style to avoid recognizing people, which isn't at all true. (I guess we've got some amount of "*I'm* not a good enough writer to do that and therefore nobody could be"? I practice my craft; I am in fact good enough to do that.)
Now they've rushed out sloppy CoC updates, calling down the maelstrom they should have expected, and all the arguments -- extreme and nuanced, sincere and trolling -- are flying around. When people are upset they aren't in the headspace to consider nuanced positions, so it just means a lot of shouting. SE, for their part, has lobbed this into the community, left conflicting comments all over the place (good luck putting it all together), and otherwise done nothing to calm things down. It's hurting everybody, and it's hurting the queer community worst of all because their *identity* is being dragged through all the mess. Ugh.
I want to, separately, post here about language/writing -- some of the stuff I said in this comment, but more clear and careful and with more context and stuff. But I don't want to be part of making things worse for people I care about, and I fear that anything I say will be twisted and weaponized. So I probably shouldn't even leave this comment, but I don't want to ignore you either.
Sigh. This is not what inclusion means. This is not what diversity means. And it's sure not what respect means.
(no subject)
Date: 2019-10-16 09:24 pm (UTC)You can screen your comment, or the whole thread, which makes this conversation effectively private.
I think you should keep this comment, though, because it's excellently said and you may need to repeat this explanation elsewhere, so you might as well not have to write it twice.
hugs you
(no subject)
Date: 2019-10-16 09:31 pm (UTC)Thanks for the support. They've been really awful and do not seem to care about the human cost of their attacks. The SE I once knew, the one that cared at least a little about its communities and the people who build them, is gone.
Re: Kafka Trap Ahead?
Date: 2019-10-16 11:43 pm (UTC)