Glam and ND seem to be taking a position that this is unacceptable.

I do not speak for Glam, but I can say from my side I think you are misinterpreting me a bit. I'm in line with what you are saying at the end. We can't make people feel contrite or safe or any of those things. These are not things that can be done through a set of diligent rules in my opinion and I've actually not been advocating setting up rules to that effect. I'm saying much of what you are at the end. This is a question of where each person stands on these things, and how those align with our chosen community on this board. I think each of us has an internal compass and we do lean towards discussion and learning, but at the bottom of things each person needs to look at the choices the community makes and if they aren't working then they either work to see if they can change viewpoints, or they make the decision to move on. This can and will happen on both sides of most issues. This community is not homogenous, while we tend to lean in the same direction in a broad sense, we are also a group of smart, talky people with a large variety of viewpoints. With that being the case, we will always have different views on how things should be prioritized.

I do not speak for Glam, but I can say from my side I think you are misinterpreting me a bit

Thanks for clarifying that. Sorry I put words in your mouth.

I agree with that, too, David. My "move to action" post is just how do people want to modify (or, do people want to modify and how?) the FAQ or wherever this wants to be. I don't think codifying how someone has to respond to a call-out makes any kind of sense for all the reasons you point out. I also think providing a link or two to how it can be done if one chooses to might be helpful.

Or, is it sufficient to just continue on with community life having had this discussion and acknowledged these things?

I think something needs to be added and announced in Press. If people don't follow this thread, they have no idea this discussion is going on.

I agree with Dana. I really agree with the paragraph from David that everyone has cited. Unfortunately I think someone needs to step up and take a small change it to vote, to announce in press etc. I am honestly not sure I have the bandwidth to do that.

I really hate the idea of voting on this. We’re not really instituting a new process here are we? This feels more like an update or clarification of general principles. Maybe I’m wrong but it feels like the moment calls for a bullshit consensus.

Or to put it another way - I think putting this to vote has the power to do further harm to people who’ve already been hurt in this incident. Not the outcome, but the very act of voting.

I was thinking something like that too. I don't want it to feel like we're targeting anyone specifically, and I do think this issue has come up other times, though in a less explosive way.

We have been talking about revising/updating the FAQ etc for forever. Maybe it’s time to actually do it and this would be part of that. Would that need a vote?

This feels more like an update or clarification of general principles.

We have been talking about revising/updating the FAQ etc for forever. Maybe it’s time to actually do it and this would be part of that. Would that need a vote?

I think this is where we are but I'd like to hear from Glam again on the issues first. She's raised some of the biggest concerns and I'd want to hear her thoughts.

I don't know if we need a vote to clarify/update principles. Probably? But I don't think we're instituting new policies (as yet).

Or to put it another way - I think putting this to vote has the power to do further harm to people who’ve already been hurt in this incident. Not the outcome, but the very act of voting.

Agreed. That already happens enough in the larger political sphere. I don't think we should vote on each other's right to be treated fairly.