Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> It's pretty common that the outcome is explicitly not communicated to
> the complainants, since it's actually none of their business. They
> should receive a «we have received your complaint» message, though.
This isn't my experience of complaints processes used by various
activist groups I've helped over the years. I don't understand how
anyone would have faith in a system where they can't spot the difference
between a rejected complaint and negligence by inaction.
Here's a complaints procedure one campaign group used recently:
- the complainant is kept informed at each step (or at least supposed to
be, but they're not in fact, which is the subject of another complaint ;-) )
Can you show that it's pretty common not to respond to complainants, please?
I suggest that providing some sort of summary response to complaints
would be analogous to Enrico's good advice in
if we don't want conduct complaints to become long threads, it would be
good to follow those tips.
Need we force this by amending the Code of Conduct?
MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op
http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer.
In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/
Please respect the privacy of this mailing list. Some posts may be declassified
3 years after posting as per http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002
To UNSUBSCRIBE, use the web form at <http://db.debian.org/>.