20 Jul
2016
20 Jul
'16
11:20 a.m.
i recuse myself.
i'm sorry that you felt that the mediation wasn't helpful. for the record,
during that mediation we discussed this claim that's on the sudo wiki right
now <https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Meeting_Notes_2016-07-13#bans>: "At my last
place of residence, I had someone who said they were going to kick me out
if I didn't submit to their sexual advances." and all parties agreed that
this is in fact not what happened. so it's frustrating to me to see you
using this statement to get johnny banned given that last time we were all
in the same room, everyone agreed that this is in fact not what happened.
also, i'd like to clarify that at no point did i suggest that all of
johnny's behaviors were jokes. we discussed specific instances and in those
instances, i was sharing what johnny told me he was trying to do, which is
to be teasing. i also remember johnny apologizing for specific comments
that you brought up and indicated were hurtful. i'm only saying all this so
that i don't get accused of defending abusive language as joking - that is
very much opposite to my philosophy.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Lesley Bell <zvezdalune(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Marina,
I appreciate your offer, and your past willingness to mediate. However,
due to the results of the past mediation, I am not comfortable having you
mediate at this time.
Your repeated suggestion that Johnny might just be joking and I should
reframe his insults/harassment as humor did not prove to be helpful, as
evidenced by his subsequent criminal breaking and entering and physical
assault. I also did not feel that his words in your presence were sincere,
as he repeated some of his inappropriate behavior very soon afterward.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016, 10:56 AM Marc Juul <juul(a)labitat.dk> wrote:
On Wednesday, July 20, 2016, Marina Kukso <marina.kukso(a)gmail.com> wrote:
aside from any other issues, i sincerely doubt
that this is a game to
johnny given that he wants to participate in the space..
let's focus on "restorative" instead of "retributive" - johnny
seems (to
me) to want to follow the process in a good faith way. for anyone who is
more familiar with the omni and sudo remediation process than i am, any
ideas on how to move forward from here?
Accusations are one thing but the way people choose to respond to
accusations is usually a very good predictor of whether they end up with a
resolved conflict and regaining access to the space.
After Johnny's comments in this thread I predict that he will not be
allowed back any time soon.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 7:24 AM, robb
<sf99er(a)gmail.com> wrote:
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
#swish?
really, this is all just a game to you johnny?
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 3:46 AM, Patrik D'haeseleer <patrikd(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Johnny,
>
> Is it true that Lesley's has a temporary restraining order against
> you? That seems to rise above mere "gossip and accusations", and seems
like
> it would be substantial enough to trigger at least a temporary ban.
>
> Also, it's the nature of interpersonal conflicts that there may not be
> any more than "accusations" available to make a decision on. So if someone
> states that they feel unsafe around another person, it may be justified to
> remove that other person from the space at least temporarily, until a
> better informed decision can be reached.
>
> Patrik
>
> On Jul 20, 2016 2:16 AM, "Johnny" <mostmodernist(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> that link says if "someone's safety is at risk, a temporary ban may be
> placed". it says nothing about how, and obviously is meant to deal with
> clear present safety issues, not gossip and accusations.
>
> abusing that vague apparatus of the super-system to ban people on mere
> claims is totally fascist and supremacist behavior.
>
> defending it is also fascist.
>
> calling out for the record that Marc, Matt, Cere, Sigma, Jeremy are
> fascists for consent to abuse system and unjustly override process without
> sudo quorum; ya'll better not step on any cracks!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Marc Juul <juul(a)labitat.dk> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Johnny <mostmodernist(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Marc,
>>>
>>> No quorum you say? Sub-Section 3.2.2 "Maintaining Safe Space During
>>> Conflict Resolution" states that my ban would have had to been ratified
>>> online without quorum.
>>>
>>>
>> The sudo room space, being part of Omni, is also subject to all Omni
>> rules, including the Omni safer space policy which I linked previously.
>>
>> --
>> marc/juul
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________