4 ms·

First manager I've had, great guy and despite his shortcomings I'd work with him again. Straightforward honest guy, did he work well, mentored me well. Then one

First manager I've had, great guy and despite his shortcomings I'd work with him again. Straightforward honest guy, did he work well, mentored me well. Then one day he assaulted another coworker in the break room. Someone's on-the-job performance doesn't mean they are always and forever in the right. Given the lack of any concrete evidence posted but lots of hand-wringing and pearl clutching about vague incidences, I think reserving judgment is the proper course.

baud147258 7y ago
Considering how rarely the community get any answer from the SE company, I doubt we'd ever get their side of the story.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  Well until someone comes forward with some concrete evidence we'll never anything beyond this he said, she said tale.
  - nullc 7y ago
    Don't you mean, "a she-said / stonewall-silence tale"?
vorpalhex 7y ago
Aren't you ignoring your own advice by supporting the dismissal of a moderator before the policy they supposedly might break is even in effect? It seems like SE got rid of a mod because they voiced concerns about an upcoming rule change... comparing that to assaulting someone is a cheap shot.
- jolmg 7y ago
  They're not in support; they're reserving their judgment, staying neutral. They did the comparison only to show how goatinaboat's appeal to trust is a logical fallacy. Before coming to a judgment, one should take the facts at hand, instead of relying solely on the trust you have of the people involved like goatinaboat did. In this case, many details cannot be seen, so it's not proper to decide on a judgment solely on the fact that we trust Monica.
  - vorpalhex 7y ago
    Guilty until proven innocent? It is on the accuser to make the case.
baud147258 7y ago
A "Director of Public Q&A at Stack Overflow" answered with: "We aren’t going to share specifics out of respect for all individuals involved but this is a site reaching millions of people and we have to do what we believe fosters a spirit of inclusion and respect. When a moderator violates that, we will always do our best to resolve it with them privately. When we can’t we must take action." (https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5197 https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5197) So it look like we won't have anymore information, at least from the SE side. The fired mod answered in the comments: "Inclusion and respect are important, yes! I never said otherwise or did anything to violate either the current or forthcoming CoC (as best I understand the latter; y'all haven't answered my questions). Please read the email I sent in response to my firing. It doesn't have to be this way. "
- lonelappde 7y ago
  I understand SE respecting privacy by not publishing details about the firing. I don't understand Monica raising a complaint about being fired, giving a lot of background info, saying he knows why he was fired, but writing in tangles to avoid stating what he believes triggered the firing. If it's something about pronouns, or whatever it is, he should say so. Otherwise it's just "I was fired for something that they think is justified but I won't, but I won't say what, and I ask your support."
  - baud147258 7y ago
    I read that more as "I disagreed and commented on a future CoC change, but I won't discuss a CoC change that's not been publicly revealed, because it's beside the point".
    - baud147258 7y ago
      Well, I read a post from another ex-moderator[0] and it seems the CoC change has a part about pronouns, but it doesn't mean that all the changes are about this and that Monica left because of the changes on pronouns. But that still doesn't change the fact that "firing" a mod for disagreeing with and commenting on a future change of a CoC seem wrong, especially since it didn't look like SE tried to discuss the issue before firing them. [0]https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...
celticmusic 7y ago
I'm curious as to what lead up to the assault.

baud147258 7y ago

Considering how rarely the community get any answer from the SE company, I doubt we'd ever get their side of the story.

mieseratte 7y ago
Well until someone comes forward with some concrete evidence we'll never anything beyond this he said, she said tale.
- nullc 7y ago
  Don't you mean, "a she-said / stonewall-silence tale"?

vorpalhex 7y ago

Aren't you ignoring your own advice by supporting the dismissal of a moderator before the policy they supposedly might break is even in effect? It seems like SE got rid of a mod because they voiced concerns about an upcoming rule change... comparing that to assaulting someone is a cheap shot.

jolmg 7y ago
They're not in support; they're reserving their judgment, staying neutral. They did the comparison only to show how goatinaboat's appeal to trust is a logical fallacy. Before coming to a judgment, one should take the facts at hand, instead of relying solely on the trust you have of the people involved like goatinaboat did. In this case, many details cannot be seen, so it's not proper to decide on a judgment solely on the fact that we trust Monica.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  Guilty until proven innocent? It is on the accuser to make the case.

baud147258 7y ago

A "Director of Public Q&A at Stack Overflow" answered with: "We aren’t going to share specifics out of respect for all individuals involved but this is a site reaching millions of people and we have to do what we believe fosters a spirit of inclusion and respect. When a moderator violates that, we will always do our best to resolve it with them privately. When we can’t we must take action." (https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5197 https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5197) So it look like we won't have anymore information, at least from the SE side. The fired mod answered in the comments: "Inclusion and respect are important, yes! I never said otherwise or did anything to violate either the current or forthcoming CoC (as best I understand the latter; y'all haven't answered my questions). Please read the email I sent in response to my firing. It doesn't have to be this way. "

lonelappde 7y ago
I understand SE respecting privacy by not publishing details about the firing. I don't understand Monica raising a complaint about being fired, giving a lot of background info, saying he knows why he was fired, but writing in tangles to avoid stating what he believes triggered the firing. If it's something about pronouns, or whatever it is, he should say so. Otherwise it's just "I was fired for something that they think is justified but I won't, but I won't say what, and I ask your support."
- baud147258 7y ago
  I read that more as "I disagreed and commented on a future CoC change, but I won't discuss a CoC change that's not been publicly revealed, because it's beside the point".
  - baud147258 7y ago
    Well, I read a post from another ex-moderator[0] and it seems the CoC change has a part about pronouns, but it doesn't mean that all the changes are about this and that Monica left because of the changes on pronouns. But that still doesn't change the fact that "firing" a mod for disagreeing with and commenting on a future change of a CoC seem wrong, especially since it didn't look like SE tried to discuss the issue before firing them. [0]https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...

celticmusic 7y ago

I'm curious as to what lead up to the assault.