Talk:Training modules/Keeping events safe/Final draft

"recourse for the reporter"

[Training modules/Keeping events safe/slides/dealing-with-the-subjects-of-reports/11/ja] and its latter part, It helps to let them know if there is recourse for the reporter and what this may be (as and when applicable). may not always apply to Japanese attendants at Wikimedia events; @JSutherland (WMF): would you advise me I should put that half into Japanese nevertheless? Usually, they don't care about the reporter if they were misunderstood as offenders, but worry that they "loose their faces" or shamed that blame the reporter making 'them' feel uncomfortable, and on top of that, worry someone might see them taken away by WMF or its volunteers. As to translate from original English sentences into Japanese is generally good, while some sentence may not make sense in some culture. ----Omotecho (talk) 18:09, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Omotecho - I must thank you again for your work in translations here, I appreciate it greatly. :) I spoke about this with the rest of the Support and Safety team, especially Jan, who is working closely with Japanese volunteers during the Wikimedia strategy work. We believe that, at least right now, we should continue to translate the English text as it currently is, without changes. I understand this will create issues like this in the future, but we should be able to revise for specific cultural norms going forward with this. (Please, feel free to tell me of others you find - they are very interesting and will prove very useful going forward. They will allow us to better understand how the communities function and think.) Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 21:37, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

JSutherland (WMF), yes, things are clear with me. (: Allow me to ping you if I come across similar cases. Hope we'd come closer to your idea for the milestone, I enjoy translating for WMF. :) Regards, ----Omotecho (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

JSutherland (WMF) I have a question about the same phrase. What does "recourse for the reporter" mean? Is it saying essentially "We've decided this is an invalid report, but the reporter can appeal", "You can report the reporter if you believe they intentionally filed a false report", ...? Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 02:51, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Omotecho and Mattflaschen-WMF: I've had a go at updating this. I have kept the old translations and have just added a new section. I will update the translations myself if it makes sense. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 19:30, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

FYI, @JSutherland (WMF): I translated the new section, and adjusted wording for the existing section accordingly. Could you have a see please? --Omotecho (talk) 18:43, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Please help me correct errors

Sorry to bother you, or I tried to edit with the Translation Tool, but failed to find the parts as noted here.

dealing-with-valid-incident-reports needs correction

Please correct;

• move "。" out of **メモを書いてください。** so that the bold Markup will work.

• The phrase '' '犠牲者が行動を決めるのを助ける' ''。 needs to be corrected as '''犠牲者が行動を決めるのを助ける'''。. Also, please delete a space after "。". ----Omotecho (talk) 14:12, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

dealing-with-the-subjects-of-reports

Please correct the following for bold Markup;

• move "。" out of **通報の対象者が、たとえ受け入れられない言動をした場合も、常に丁寧な態度で接してください。**

• move "。" out of **あなたが頼んでも通報の対象者が従わない場合は、ほかの人に援助してもらってください。** ----Omotecho (talk) 14:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

conduct-a-post-incident-review

Please correct the following for bold Markup;

• move "。" out of **事後評価。**.

• move "。" out of **文書化。**.

affiliates-long-term-groups

Please correct the following;

• replace all 関連団体 to 提携団体, including the slide title.

• replace all 関連団体委員会 to 提携団体委員会.

Thank you. ----Omotecho (talk) 14:34, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Omotecho - thank you for indicating these. I have made these corrections, and am very sorry for the difficulties here. Thank you very much for your work, once again :) Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 22:25, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your trouble, JSutherland (WMF). I've found how I will link to the translation page I need to correct; check the page title on Training Library Dashboard with the list of slide titles. Great structure and very helpful for sure. (; Thank you again for taking care of my request. Regards, ----Omotecho (talk) 20:20, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Size of event response team

It says, "Ensure the emergency response team is staffed sufficiently", but it doesn't indicate how big it should be. A specific ratio (1 emergency response for N participants) would be helpful. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 02:12, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Kalliope (WMF): Do you have thoughts on what this should be? I'm not sure what it has been at previous Wikimedia events. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 19:09, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Some of the info under "Prepare important information" should be shared with participants

Some of the information under "Prepare important information" (specifically but not limited phone numbers) should be shared directly with participants, as noted under foundation:Friendly space policy ("Local phone numbers for hotel/venue security, local law enforcement, local sexual assault hotline, local emergency and non-emergency medical, and local taxi company to be publicized to event participants as appropriate on a per-event basis."). It would be good if all those types of numbers were mentioned here (and it mentioned to share them directly with participants) for ease of reference. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 02:18, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Mattflaschen-WMF: I've tweaked this to try to clarify. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 19:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

"Who may report" is confusing

The "Who may report" section has an unclear message. It first says, "It is very important that the person immediately affected by one's harassing behavior is the person reporting the issue (a direct report)." That indicates only the target of harassment should report.

However, both the Friendly Space Policy ("If you are being harassed, notice that someone else is being harassed") and Code of Conduct ("People who experience or observe unacceptable behavior") support witnesses reporting harassment. This is necessary as sometimes the target of harassment is reluctant to report for some reason, or does not know the policies. If no one reports it (for whatever reason), the harasser may harass someone else later.

This module also then says, "Βy-stander reports are also encouraged." and clarifies this applies to both severe and minor incidents.

But the way it's phrased (both the "very important" line, and the way by-stander reports are first mentioned only in connection with the most severe reports (violence)) may imply by-stander reports should be discouraged or perhaps limited to severe cases (or severe or minor, but not in between). None of those limitations are in the other policies.

I would suggest this be kept brief. Something like "Either a target of harassment or a witness may report a violation of the friendly space policy. Witnesses will generally not be kept updated, for confidentiality reasons." Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 02:35, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Mattflaschen-WMF: Those are fair points, and I have updated the slide to match the FSP. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 19:45, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Subject of report

I would move up "Make sure you are not alone" to "During the event: Dealing with the subjects of reports". This is important advice, and it should be easily visible. Also, it applies to both valid and invalid reports.

The term "subject[] of report" may not be clear, so you may also want to define it. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 02:52, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Mattflaschen-WMF: Agreed on both; tweaked. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 19:55, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

After a technical event: Reporting to the Code of Conduct Committee

There is a "After the event" section about reporting, which is good.

I think there should also be a note that (for technical events) they should report incidents (minor and severe) to the Code of Conduct Committee. E.g.

"For technical events (such as hackathons), incidents should be reported to the Code of Conduct Committee at techconductwikimedia.org. This allows them to consider as much of a person's history as possible (including low-level and severe incidents, in person and online), when assessing reports. This will help them detect patterns.".

A primary goal of the Code of Conduct has always been to be a one-stop shop, both for reporters (one place to report for all technical spaces) and for the Committee (having all the information in one place, rather than spread across multiple wikis and email inboxes). Of course, an exception is that it's more practical to report in-person incidents (especially major ones) in-person (and the CoC directly gives that as an option). But for the second part (the Committee having everything in one place), it's important to consolidate this information.

This applies to both severe and low-level incidents, but the latter has especially been a problem in the past (not detecting patterns of low-level harassment because each incident isn't bad enough on its own to justify a more serious response). Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 03:07, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Also, re "there may be important developments between the people involved, post-event", if there is harassment after the event, that should also be reported, at least for the CoC (where online harassment is covered) and for matters Support & Safety covers. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 03:10, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Conduct a post-incident review

Where it says, "the reporter, the person reported, other volunteers, participants or attendees", since the reporter may be a witness, it should add "target of harassment". Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 03:15, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Mattflaschen-WMF: Added. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Order of events

I could be wrong, but this is just a suggestion of an order that might work better for "After the event". The idea is that the section order should match the chronological order:

1. "After the event: Following up" (they might reply at any time, but doing this first makes it more likely you'll get more info before submitting a report)
2. "After the event: Conduct post-incident reviews". I would suggest this cover:
   • Completing the report (e.g. if something was reported verbally, making sure it's written down, and that all steps taken are written down)
   • Figuring out lessons learned (the current section focuses on this)
   • Making a (thoroughly) anonymized and condensed version based on above, removing confidential information and focusing only on lessons learned. The non-anonymized version (with full details) would be sent to ca@ or techconductwikimedia.org, and the anonymized version could be treated as mentioned already.
3. "After the event: Get self-care" (placed after "Conduct post-incident reviews") due to suggestion "an informal discussion session where members of the event organizing team can talk about their experience" which could maybe be combined with above. Alternative would be to put this last.
4. "After the event: Report incidents for follow-up and long-term tracking" (proposed rename for "After the event: Report to the Wikimedia Foundation" after it's updated to handle CoC as well)

--Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 03:29, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Mattflaschen-WMF: I've changed this around a bit. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Match sentence style between ca and de

After update, sentence style is not matching between ca and de. Ideally, it reads as:

• アミカル・ウィキメディア: 攻撃や嫌がらせに対するプロトコル (Protocol contra aggressions i assetjament) $lang-ca
• WMAT: Wikimedia オーストリア イベントのガイドライン (Veranstaltungsrichtlinien) $lang-de --Omotecho (talk) 13:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Addendum: Do we need to correct template using $wmcat-policy as I changed above? --Omotecho (talk) 14:01, 28 September 2017 (UTC) / Added minor edit --Omotecho (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

@Omotecho: I am sorry, which section do you refer to? :) Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 19:33, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@JSutherland (WMF):, hello, could you check See also for 関連項目 ? --Omotecho (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

After the event

From my experience, harassment complaints are most often raised after the conference, not during it. A person who was harassed sometimes contemplates on whether or not (s)he should report it, and takes until after the conference to report it. Some people wait to talk with friends or family about the incident to be entirely sure that the incident they have experienced is a harassment before meeting the safety team. I think we must include the possibility of a retrospective harassment complaint (and what to do if one arises) in the module. --Netha Hussain (talk) 13:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Netha - thanks for your question, and sorry for the delay. I agree that there could be more information in these modules for those receiving reports after the event is over. While there is no right and wrong answer for how long the team should continue to exist after the event, the modules ought to acknowledge that reports do happen (often!) after the fact. We'll look at ways to improve this - we're already looking at making adjustments to the modules to be more useful "on the ground" for organisers, which will provide an opportunity to add things like this. (If you have any further suggestions, we're all ears!) Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 00:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Joe, for the comment. During the Diversity Conference in Sweden, we decided that we'll be available even after the conference to receive incident reports. Thanks for willing to add more details in future. --Netha Hussain (talk) 12:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)