Remarking that "reverse racism" is not harassment does not preclude minorities from being harassers. A plain english reading of the document suggests otherwise

Remarking that "reverse racism" is not harassment does not preclude minorities from being harassers. A plain english reading of the document suggests otherwise. They don't say "all -isms are banned", they say "we will not act on complaints of X Y and Z". In other words, it would appear to legitimize harassment committed by non-minorities. If they meant your definition, that definition is what should have found its way into the repository. Put another way, if this is a legalistic document that people are going to be expected to adhere to, it needs to be as unambiguous as possible. I really don't think that's asking a whole lot.