Will the “Person of Concern” for each report be told the accusations against them?
Were the “Persons of Concern” given the opportunity to share their side to the COCRC?
(These are non-accusatory, yes-or-no questions).
(I previously posted this as a comment in another thread, but I believe it was off-topic for that thread so I deleted it, my apologies.)
Tagging @coc-reporting and members of the previous board, just incase you didn’t see, thanks in advance! 
@rustin.atkeisson @Sherry @ladeana @doug.wilson @Gary_Titus @squarenuts
Not sure why this message was flagged. I just tagged people. I’ll assume it was an accident.
I am pretty sure you will not receive a answer from any of the tagged members. I have read and re-read the Code of Conduct and the Wiki of the Code of Conduct Committee and I cannot find any instance of where the person of interest will ever be informed or confronted with accusation of violations.
Went searching for Perry Mason, but found McCarthy
so, with that said the person of concern never knows that they were flagged for a violation, and never receives corrective counseling. it’s all saved up like a piggy bank until its dumped out in a meeting. this does sound very secret policey, imo. its as if there were those who were outgoing that didnt want to leave so they opened these secret files up and used it (abused?)to get rid of their democratically elected successor. Since a new vacancy was created, in fairness to the rank and file membership a new special election should be called. otherwise it “could” be viewed as a "stolen election "
All moderated and removed post send a copy of the post to the person who originally posted it, unless it was in reply to a removed post in my experience.
So you’re saying there were 14 forum post violations.
Where did you get the information that the 14 violations came from the forum? Because that information was not disclosed at the meeting nor in the minutes.
No, I’m saying if a forum post was moderated they got an email.
well perhaps on the forum, however I was alluding to recent dismissal events of an elected member who was dismissed from the space before their term could start. was that person advised that there had been complaints lodged against them? it would seem, that transparency is a bit murky from my vantage point in all of this. it makes me worry that there might be a file on me with infractions documented that i will never know about until someone or someones decide they don’t like me and could just spring it up. the kind of bad surprise like finding a hidden easter egg in the august heat.
and might who that be?
Everyone who wanted to run from the current CoC and immediate past Board was elected. Some of us, such as myself, were nominated but declined the nomination for multiple positions.
The immediate past Board and the CoC collectively agreed to not speak to anyone about this situation individually due to confidentiality. Therefore, sharing our phone numbers or finding us in the hallways will do no good. It’s also why we’re not answering specific questions on the forum.
I am no longer on the board. I wish the new board the absolute best of luck, and I sincerely hope they are treated well this year. Please be excellent to them.
Sherry, didn’t you call the new board “Suckers” yesterday?
Have you never listened to the other board members talk about their expectations going into the board and what the experience was actually like?
Have you not had new members ask you in person why people are so mean to you on the forum?
As previously stated, I wish you the best of luck, and I sincerely hope that you are treated well this year. And again, I ask everyone to be excellent to the new board.
im no longer going to comment on this as im picking up on some negative vibes here and am starting to feel threatened by all of this.
Sherry called y’all “suckers”?? What?
I cannot possibly imagine a world in which Sherry might’ve referred to the new board as “suckers” as a joke, considering what people historically serving on boards might, historically, have had to deal with.
Nope.
Yeah I can’t imagine a world where people misunderstand or do not seek clarification on comments made.
This is jest, isn’t it?
would it be a violation of BNBR?
Per my recent training at Textron Aviation concerning harassment, it does not matter the intent of your comment, jest or not, it is how it is received that matters. I assume your intent is not to belittle Mindy’s reception of the message?
