Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    I don't know if it would be a good rule, but I feel safer if I only
    write in the first person.  Writing in the second person comes out
    sometimes, but it is talking to a universal *you*.  I try not to
    write in the third person.  It has been my experience that I could
    take whatever I wanted to communicate and reframe it into the first
    person.  The only part about first person that bothers me is read
    what I wrote and discover that every sentence begins with "I".
    
    							bob

    How about a good system for entering anonymous notes (besides asking
    the moderators to post them; that's an unfair burden on them)? It
    would make it easier to avoid references to identifiable people.
    
    It would also be subject to abuse, but it's probably worth considering.
    
    					Val

    Re 1.4 ("Harassment"): I hate to pick nits, but I fail to see how
    any one note constitutes harassment. There's a word for making
    disparaging comments in public, and that's "slander" or "libel" depending
    on whether you treat notes as spoken or written. 
    
    I'm no legal expert, but I thought harassment had to have an element
    of repetition, and possibly unavoidability (i. e. forcing someone
    to read the comments posted about them). I hope nobody's already
    been charged with the wrong crime.
    
    					Val

Personally, I was disappointed that a note was deleted, but I am most 
thankful that the conference and its overall tone has been saved.

And in the real world, that is what's really important.

I wish to thank our moderators (Jim, Tamzen, and Steve) for all their 
work on the part of us all.

I feel that they truely negotiated, it was not a hollow compromise.

I, for one, can live with this compromise.

	THANKS,	Mike

    I have not singled out any of the current notes as problems,
    but we ARE becoming aware of what management might think of as
    a problem.  In fact, I will go as far as to say that no note
    currently in this file is specifically viewed as objectionable
    by Personnel.  I don't even think they've read note 25.  But
    the risk IS there, and this note is to discuss it.
    
    The tricky point is this - the only thing that really matters is
    if a person believes that a note is insulting to them - not what
    the author thinks or anyone else.

    My personal preference would be to leave everything where it is,
    and hope for the best.  I know a lot of emotions went into the notes
    written by myself, Suzanne, and many others - emotions we have
    a hard time believing could be troublesome.  I hope we can have
    a straightforward and honest discussion of the issues involved.
    
    I'm afraid - afraid that everyone believes that HUMAN_RELATIONS
    is no longer useful to them.  Afraid that in our attempts to
    satisfy management, that we've killed the conference.  I can't believe
    some of the mail I received this morning about this issue - and
    I'm quite depressed about it.
    
    					Steve

Would making this a members-only conference help? That is, by (in some
manner) restricting the access to the material, would we be seen as 
less of a risk?

Not that I'm suggesting any form of membership criteria (Steve, JimB and
Tamzen meeting in closed session to approve or disapprove membership
requests sounds a little silly to me) other than a request to the
moderator. 

Any thoughts?
	Nigel

    I don't see the usefulness of this file diminishing. I think everyone
    needs to be aware of the potential (and currently only potential)
    problems that could (not will) arise.
    
    This is a new medium. It's going to take a while before all the
    areas it affects are satisfied with what's going on. But, everybody
    shouldn't panic. Individual problems will be dealt with as individual
    problems. I know _I_ tend to forget that this file isn't just a bunch
    of friends sitting around and talking out their troubles. It's
    accessible by 50,000 people (?). That's a lot of differing lifestyles,
    philosophies, and cultures. These all have to be taken into account
    as well as the good of Digital as a corporation.
    
    That means that Security, Personnel, Legal and other areas of Digital
    will all have their own viewpoint on what we can and can't do with this
    wonderful NOTES utility. I think the communications that have gone on
    have been great, both in this file and outside of it. We were listened
    to and solved our own problems to the satisfaction of all involved.
    That's a great step forward. Most of us remember what happened the last
    time we tried to talk about how people interact with people. We're
    getting it right. 
    
    We may need to change things to keep our noses clean. That hasn't
    been decided yet, but the moderators of this file and other files
    are discussing this very issue. And we'll keep talking about things
    until we reach a consensus that satisfies us and Digital.
    
    So, stay cool, keep calm and know where your towel is ;-).
    
    Tamzen
                     

    Re .8:
    
    The day HUMAN_RELATIONS becomes a members-only conference is the
    day it truly dies.  
					Steve

        Members only won't work, Nigel. Suppose I wasn't a member of
        this conference, but you were, and you were to write a note here
        about how terrible it is that I beat my wife. The fact that only
        100-200 known individuals could directly see that (and
        potentially pass it around to others) wouldn't affect by one
        iota the fact that I could go to personnel and complain that you
        were harassing me. 
        
        As an aside, I'm under the impression that in the US legal
        system in order for something to be harassment, there person A
        has to offend person B, be told it is offensive, and do it
        again. At DEC, as I understand it, if person A writes someting
        negative or insulting about person B, and B goes to Personnel
        and complains, Personnel (with very little judgement as to
        whether it is suffuciently offensive to be classified as
        harassment) officially orders person A to cease and desist and
        puts them on a probation in which a second offense is grounds
        for termination. Doing it again thus is legal grounds for
        harassment and grounds for DEC to let you go. (I assume the
        reason that Personnel doesn't have a lot of lee-way in judging
        how offensive something is is that they can't afford to say it
        isn't, do nothing and then have a case go to court and have the
        court decide it is.)
        
        In short, you really mustn't talk about my beating my wife in
        public and in print. Remember that in many ways writing a note
        is like writing a letter to the editor, or perhaps like speaking
        in a public forum that is being recorded and which is watched by
        everyone. Everyone in this context is any one who works for DEC
        or who might: all of our current bosses, the guy that interviews
        you for your next job, currently minor children, grey-haired
        grandmothers who might decide to be part-time secretaries,
        anybody who isn't dead yet. 
        
        Disclaimers:
        
        	1) I am not a lawyer and am not attempting to practice
        	   law or to give legal advice.
        	2) I am not a manager at DEC and my understanding of
        	   policy may not be totally accurate.
        	3) I don't really beat my wife, nor expect Nigel to
             	   accuse me of it, although I wouldn't put it past
        	   him to grin wickedly and asked me if I'd stopped
        	   beating my wife yet, probably in the lunch line.
        	4) I do work for DEC and am not dead yet.
        
        JimB.

	To the moderators:

	I'm not going to ask who lodged the complaint or what note it
	was over, but feel free to say this is none of my business
	anyway: Did whoever lodged the complaint take the proper steps
	in making their complaint? Did they first contact the author
	of the note in question, then failing to reach a satisfactory
	agreement contact the moderators, then still failing to have
	their complaint dealt with satisfactorily escalate their
	complaint to personnel? Did they ever examine note 1 for the
	conference "rules"?
	
	Mike

    re: .7
    
        Personally, I would hate to see H_R bite the dust.  I feel as
    though I have learned quite a bit of valuable information in how
    to deal with the various day to day problems that plague us all
    at one time or another.  I'm not married, haven't been divorced,
    and I haven't experienced 40% of this conferences topics, but all
    these topics and replies will serve as a future reference (guide,
    if you will) to my life and trials.
    
        I will do whatever it takes (in my own humble way) to maintain
    the integrity of this conference and hope that others will do so
    also.  I'm sure we are all adults and that we won't let our passions
    cloud (no pun intended) our thoughts.  Although, at times this does
    happen, and I hope that Personnel, the Net Policia, and other powers
    that be will see this and forgive us if we get carried away at times.
    
    		LONG LIVE HUMAN_RELATIONS!!
    
    
    						Phil

    This is only my belief, but... I am fairly certain that Personnel,
    management, etc. has no intention to "monitor" HUMAN_RELATIONS.
    In fact, they seem to be going out of their way not to read it
    at all.  The only way I believe they will get involved again is
    if there is another incident.  THAT is what we (your moderators)
    are seeking to prevent, and we are looking for suggestions as to
    how to do that.
    
    Many, many notes have been written in this conference which contain
    much emotion, my own included.  This is good, and I don't want to
    see it stop.  I do feel, however, that we have an obligation to
    reduce the risks enough so that we feel comfortable that no further
    incidents will occur.  Perhaps posting the rules, with consequences
    laid out, will be enough - if someone breaks the rules and
    causes a problem, it will be THEIR problem, not the file's.  That
    concept appears to satisfy Personnel, at least the one contact I
    have spoken with.
    
    Too many people have written to me, upset that the "net police"
    will be reading everything they write in this conference.  I don't
    believe this to be true, but that shouldn't matter in the sense
    that you should try not to put in notes that could cause problems
    later.
    
    I'm really getting worn out by this whole mess - there have been
    times today where I regret ever taking over H_R - the grief I am
    getting just doesn't seem worth it.  But then I realize that
    most of you care about the conference as much as I do, and realize
    that life is full of compromises (and negotiations!).  It is our
    jobs to do what we can to keep H_R going without getting stomped
    on again.  H_R has done enough for me that I'm willing to go on
    fighting.
    					Steve

re: -1,

	Yes, it would seem that a great deal of the actual "harrassment"
    occurs AFTER the complaint is lodged with Personnel, and results in
    endless headaches for both the moderators, management, and all of the
    rest of us who end-up having to bend over backwards to avoid "offending"
    the noting community at large.

	If this conference were to be made members only, and the process of
    applying for membership was somehow automated so as to relieve Steve (or
    the next guy when Steve finally pulls his hair out and quits as moderator)
    from having to spend all day updating the memeber list, then maybe rules
    could actually be enforced such that when someone breaks them, they get
    the boot from the member list (or at least get grounded temporarily).

	I really don't see what would be such a bad idea about a members list.
    It is, after all, one of the many features of Vaxnotes which are currently
    enjoying use in other conferences.  Besides, I'm not a member of anything,
    and I feel like joining something.

								-davo

    If the concept of posting rules, consequences for breaking rules,
    etc., seems to satisfy Personnel, let's go with it.  There are rules
    we deal with everyday, what's a few more?  Especially if it's for
    the good of all and the preservation of the conference...  Seems
    like a small price to me.
    
    Thank you, moderators.  Seems so inadequate just to say thank you...
    Billie