4 ms·

> Solving things privately when one party exercises authority over the other Is'nt this the case for pretty much any relationship? A father-son relation or ev

> Solving things privately when one party exercises authority over the other Is'nt this the case for pretty much any relationship? A father-son relation or even a spouse relationship in many cases? The formal process should always be available, but more like a last stop. It can document what informal steps were taken, (they likely failed - thats why they are doing it). Now both parties are sort of shamed if there were steps missed? Is there harm in trying out a private meeting, knowing one can always have formal channels available at their disposal?

handoflixue 5y ago
> Is there harm in trying out a private meeting, knowing one can always have formal channels available at their disposal? Possible negative outcomes: 1) The senior person is sufficiently abusive and skilled as to shut down discussion and convince you that formal channels would be fruitless (or even actively harmful to you) 2) The senior person now thinks less of the junior and will subtly sabotage them (especially harsh/pedantic grading, a lack of mentorship and support, etc.) 3) The junior person no longer trusts the senior person, and this will sabotage the junior (refusing mentorship and support, ignoring genuinely useful feedback) 4) A lot of issues are "twenty people all have this minor complaint" - the senior can gaslight all twenty people that no one ELSE has ever made this complaint so clearly they're too sensitive, and no one else ever realizes there's more than one victim so they write it off 5) Twenty people ALL have issue with the same one comment the senior made, and he's now getting mobbed - and once people realize it's twenty-on-one, mob justice mentality kicks in and they feel emboldened to say that the senior DEFINITELY needs to be cancelled 6) Twenty people all have DIFFERENT issues with the same one comment, and the situation is now a 50-page-long flame war before an administrator finds out and locks the thread. 7) People assume that the policy should be interpreted as "we don't care, please don't bother us" and just fail to bring up issues at all 8) People with anxiety feel like they need to do the big scary personal confrontation first, and thus fail to bring up the issue at all (These are not just hypotheticals - I've either been in the situation or seen friends in that situation.)
- foolinaround 5y ago
  these are all great points; what can be draw from this - and still consider a path of private settling before taking it publicly? More awareness and resources provided to the victim? There can be a 3rd party org, a private arbitration that is sworn to privacy that can guide the victim so that he does not suffer from the above weaknesses? Knowing that the issue is being watched even though privately should cause the more powerful person from abusing the situation?

handoflixue 5y ago

> Is there harm in trying out a private meeting, knowing one can always have formal channels available at their disposal? Possible negative outcomes: 1) The senior person is sufficiently abusive and skilled as to shut down discussion and convince you that formal channels would be fruitless (or even actively harmful to you) 2) The senior person now thinks less of the junior and will subtly sabotage them (especially harsh/pedantic grading, a lack of mentorship and support, etc.) 3) The junior person no longer trusts the senior person, and this will sabotage the junior (refusing mentorship and support, ignoring genuinely useful feedback) 4) A lot of issues are "twenty people all have this minor complaint" - the senior can gaslight all twenty people that no one ELSE has ever made this complaint so clearly they're too sensitive, and no one else ever realizes there's more than one victim so they write it off 5) Twenty people ALL have issue with the same one comment the senior made, and he's now getting mobbed - and once people realize it's twenty-on-one, mob justice mentality kicks in and they feel emboldened to say that the senior DEFINITELY needs to be cancelled 6) Twenty people all have DIFFERENT issues with the same one comment, and the situation is now a 50-page-long flame war before an administrator finds out and locks the thread. 7) People assume that the policy should be interpreted as "we don't care, please don't bother us" and just fail to bring up issues at all 8) People with anxiety feel like they need to do the big scary personal confrontation first, and thus fail to bring up the issue at all (These are not just hypotheticals - I've either been in the situation or seen friends in that situation.)

foolinaround 5y ago
these are all great points; what can be draw from this - and still consider a path of private settling before taking it publicly? More awareness and resources provided to the victim? There can be a 3rd party org, a private arbitration that is sworn to privacy that can guide the victim so that he does not suffer from the above weaknesses? Knowing that the issue is being watched even though privately should cause the more powerful person from abusing the situation?