3 ms·

Yep, this is the logical conclusion of trying to solve all minor social conflicts with a complex and legalistic set of rules and processes. Nothing got fixed.

• briandear 6y ago
  > It would have been a lot simpler to ask the author to tone it down a bit next time. Or not. Unless you're personally attacking someone, a spirited debate/talk/opinion should be welcomed. We shouldn't tone it down unless it's venturing into ad hominem territory. "I attack ideas, I don't attack people - and some very good people have some very bad ideas." -- Antonin Scalia We should be thicker skinned and not so g-damned fragile that a tech talk leads to an apparent need to "recover." I would never tolerate someone making fun of a person or attacking their humanity/personality -- however, ideas should be fair game, assuming the "attack" is supported by a robust argument. If someone disagrees with an idea, there shouldn't be a ballroom of eggshells one must navigate in order to disagree.
• Chris2048 6y ago
  If it doesn't touch on something like harassment or racism, I can't see how people can't complain to the speaker directly. Anonymous complaints are meant to protect people, especially if subject to harassment; but does that apply in a case like this?