I think I'll stick my head in here for a minute because this is something that I've seen myself, though to a limited degree, and not aimed at me, nor was I involved in it.
One of the problems here is one that was mentioned in the OP, and that was that the community can be, for lack of a better term, "mean". I don't mean publicly (or privately) cussing someone out...I mean a rather subtle, only-a-few-words/phrases-here-and-there kind of thing. @DoctorDaveMD just left a
post a couple'a days ago about him leaving, and to quote it...
Quote:The passive-aggressive attitudes I've been getting from people I don't even know has been getting on my nerves for the past two weeks and I've had it. More so because of the fact none of them want to actually come out and say it to my e-face as they proceed to go to people and ****-talk me behind my back.
Now, here's a question: if there's only a few, here-and-there things going on that are rather subtle, and difficult to show in logs...how would one go about reporting it? For instance, at my new job, we watched a very, VERY in-depth movie about sexual harassment (they take it super-seriously), and one thing to mention was this, which I have quoted from
here (they cite it from the
EEOC, which is the actual legal text):
Quote:Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when
1. submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment,
2. submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individuals, or
3. such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment. (29 C.F.R. ยง 1604.11 [1980])
That last stipulation is the one I wanted to focus on. Bear in mind, this particular definition has the word
unwelcome in it, but most (if not all) employers extend their own policies to say
any sexual advances, etc., because it's so easy to misconstrue something, or for it to be taken the wrong way, or even for some third party (an onlooker/witness) to take offense. (Bear in mind, if a couple people are telling crude jokes, someone who overhears them -can- file for sexual harassment.) I point this out because it's a good analogy for indicating that even the law make allowances for a "general feeling" gotten from a group or individual (again, the "
hostile or offensive work environment" quote). However, the filing process is long, difficult, and expensive, so they try to work things out beforehand, just like the GM team, with verbal warnings first, then more serious reprimandations afterwards.
There's a difference here, however. Where with speech we get through many subjects in the span of a few minutes, typing out that same conversation would take hours. Therefor, day-to-day, we aren't exposed to as much...and it therefor might have a higher impact, due to limited interaction, speaking generally. Where in going to my supervisor, I'd be able to say that <name> said this, this, this, and that, and it all felt derogatory; going to a GM, I'd have much less to show, due to less word-for-word interaction (or even conversation-to-conversation).
So a question is due. Is the GM team willing to take the issue mention in the OP:
Loxmardin Wrote:In short, I see people mentioning that the community has been unfriendly, that they have issues with certain groups, [and] attitudes go unchecked....
and use the relatively limited information that will be made available, even with things like elephant? If yes, then I would, personally, encourage anyone to keep a stash of logs from here on out (if they haven't already) about
every single conversation or interaction with someone they feel is being unfriendly, or even passively-aggressively hostile. I would recommend showing the GM's anything relevant to the context of the piece of conversation in said report, and be specific about
what is being said
where that makes them feel like that. That way, the GM's have solid evidence to work with, and if they don't feel like the report is enough to warrant any action, adding on more logs and proof to it might then be enough, given time.
So again, is the GM team willing to add this issue to their already-high-level of responsibilities, in this, or a similar way?