As an extra data point—I had a couple of extremely uncomfortable conversations with someone at an EAG a few years back and didn’t report it, because I tend to think it’s my fault/ I might be misinterpreting things/ I don’t want to escalate things. I was relieved to later find out the person had been banned from EAG for making various women feel uncomfortable. I wished I had erred on the side of reporting (maybe with no steps taken if it was just my report), and was very glad CH exists!
Would it be helpful for CH to publicize a policy that explicitly commits to honoring the affected person’s wishes as to the limits of any investigation and response, at least for less serious reports?
For instance, a reporter could limit their report to background use only, to help CH identify a trend if there is a future report involving the same person. Or could limit the action to, as @Tiresias said, having someone say “hey, you may not realize, but you’re making people uncomfortable.”
As an extra data point—I had a couple of extremely uncomfortable conversations with someone at an EAG a few years back and didn’t report it, because I tend to think it’s my fault/ I might be misinterpreting things/ I don’t want to escalate things. I was relieved to later find out the person had been banned from EAG for making various women feel uncomfortable. I wished I had erred on the side of reporting (maybe with no steps taken if it was just my report), and was very glad CH exists!
Would it be helpful for CH to publicize a policy that explicitly commits to honoring the affected person’s wishes as to the limits of any investigation and response, at least for less serious reports?
For instance, a reporter could limit their report to background use only, to help CH identify a trend if there is a future report involving the same person. Or could limit the action to, as @Tiresias said, having someone say “hey, you may not realize, but you’re making people uncomfortable.”