On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 02:15:13PM +0000, Ted Lemon wrote:
The path is harassment->ombudsbeing, not harassment->wg chair. I
would expect the ombudsperson to push back at this point unless
something inappropriate was said. If someone says "that's a stupid
idea, because FOO" and "because FOO" is valid, then it would be
appropriate for the ombudsperson to say to the offending party, "you
know, you didn't need to say that was a stupid idea—all you needed
to say was 'because FOO.'". OTOH, if the offending party said "I'm
going to cut off a deer's head and leave it in your refrigerator if
you don't stop denying that FOO," then that would elicit a different
response.
What about a slide presentation in a wg discussion in perpass which
included the following image?
http://blog.chron.com/nickanderson/tag/nsa/
Bjoern Hoehrmann has already asserted he believes it would be
considered harassment.
- Ted