8 ms·

Indeed. The first paragraph jumps straight to "and now it's time to talk to the person in question to get them to stop". If you get a complaint about somebody

Indeed. The first paragraph jumps straight to "and now it's time to talk to the person in question to get them to stop". If you get a complaint about somebody somebody in your organization, the first thing it is time to do is listen to both sides with your best critical thinking hat on. Going into a conversation with the accused party with the intention of getting them to do anything, before hearing their side, is an injustice.

isoskeles 7y ago
I read “reports”, plural, so I didn’t interpret this as jumping straight to some punishment after a single complaint. He also writes, specifically, that you listen to the “accused” party when taking them aside, explaining why this is important. Did you actually read this?
jefftk 7y ago
This post is trying to give details on "if I've decided that taking someone aside for a warning is the right next step, how do I do it?" There are cases where a warning would be a bad first step: perhaps you've only heard a report from one person, or it's not clear what happened, or you think there may be a misunderstanding. Then an opening more like "I saw some of what happened back there, can you help me figure out what was going on?" could be good, with more of a "let's find out" than a "let's change behavior" approach. The cases that prompted me to write this post, however, were ones where a dancer had been doing a minorly harmful thing for a long time. It was very clear that they were doing the thing, and we had dozens of people who had seen them do it, including several organizers.
tomatotomato37 7y ago
In this context though proof of unwanted behavior could easily be verified just by watching their behavior for a couple minutes; someone dancing a bit too enthusiastically tends to be quite visible
mlang23 7y ago
Thanks for expressing what I tried to say in much better english terms.

isoskeles 7y ago

I read “reports”, plural, so I didn’t interpret this as jumping straight to some punishment after a single complaint. He also writes, specifically, that you listen to the “accused” party when taking them aside, explaining why this is important. Did you actually read this?

jefftk 7y ago

This post is trying to give details on "if I've decided that taking someone aside for a warning is the right next step, how do I do it?" There are cases where a warning would be a bad first step: perhaps you've only heard a report from one person, or it's not clear what happened, or you think there may be a misunderstanding. Then an opening more like "I saw some of what happened back there, can you help me figure out what was going on?" could be good, with more of a "let's find out" than a "let's change behavior" approach. The cases that prompted me to write this post, however, were ones where a dancer had been doing a minorly harmful thing for a long time. It was very clear that they were doing the thing, and we had dozens of people who had seen them do it, including several organizers.

tomatotomato37 7y ago

In this context though proof of unwanted behavior could easily be verified just by watching their behavior for a couple minutes; someone dancing a bit too enthusiastically tends to be quite visible

mlang23 7y ago

Thanks for expressing what I tried to say in much better english terms.