Norms must be enforced consistently, applying to senior EAs just as much as newcomers.
I think this is unreasonable, in the other direction. Newcomers (and outsiders) can and should be reminded or informed about norm violations the first time or times they screw up, and it should certainly take more than one time before there is any censure. Senior EAs should get far less flexibility and understanding. And I’m not blameless—there are at least two times that can recall I was rebuked for things privately, and I think it was good, and plausibly should have been more stringent and/or public; I have little excuse.
This is especially unfortunate because the level of discourse we aspire to, in my view, needs to be even better than what is already normal here. And many of the things that improvement entails are the points being made in this post! (And that’s true even though the current norms are far better than what is seen elsewhere—the failures that the current post suggests correcting are already fairly egregious compared to my current expectations.) So I, at least, can say I hope to be held to a higher standard, and am happy to be told if and when I am failing to do so.
and plausibly should have been more stringent and/or public
Just wanted to comment on the public aspect. I think in general the old maxim remains true: “praise in public, criticise in private”. I think it’s generally better when people receive feedback about norm violations privately. I also think it’s likely that this does happen today, and that does mean that it’s hard to know how much norm violation policing is going on, because much of it may be private.
I think there’s a place for private criticism, but it needs to be accompanied by public removal of the offending behavior, and/or apologies. Otherwise, other people don’t see that the norms are being reinforced. (And as originally, this applies much more to the more senior / well known EAs.)
Minor complaint / disagreement:
I think this is unreasonable, in the other direction. Newcomers (and outsiders) can and should be reminded or informed about norm violations the first time or times they screw up, and it should certainly take more than one time before there is any censure. Senior EAs should get far less flexibility and understanding. And I’m not blameless—there are at least two times that can recall I was rebuked for things privately, and I think it was good, and plausibly should have been more stringent and/or public; I have little excuse.
This is especially unfortunate because the level of discourse we aspire to, in my view, needs to be even better than what is already normal here. And many of the things that improvement entails are the points being made in this post! (And that’s true even though the current norms are far better than what is seen elsewhere—the failures that the current post suggests correcting are already fairly egregious compared to my current expectations.) So I, at least, can say I hope to be held to a higher standard, and am happy to be told if and when I am failing to do so.
Just wanted to comment on the public aspect. I think in general the old maxim remains true: “praise in public, criticise in private”. I think it’s generally better when people receive feedback about norm violations privately. I also think it’s likely that this does happen today, and that does mean that it’s hard to know how much norm violation policing is going on, because much of it may be private.
I think there’s a place for private criticism, but it needs to be accompanied by public removal of the offending behavior, and/or apologies. Otherwise, other people don’t see that the norms are being reinforced. (And as originally, this applies much more to the more senior / well known EAs.)