Matches well with a piece I saw the other day about how US rail safety was being improved by an anonymized reporting mechanism through NASA (which is used to handling transport safety reports). Because the railway workers face no sanctions for reporting incidents, they don’t hesitate to do so.
In this case, the undesired behaviour is being sanctioned in a way that doesn’t activate people’s defensiveness at being accused, so they’re more likely to stop.
Originally shared by ****
This little article about how MIT admins used to handle trolls, harassment, and other issues has been making the rounds on Mastodon today and I thought it was interesting.
——
The third stopit mechanism is a carefully-structured standard note to alleged perpetrators of harassment, improper use, or other uncivil behavior. “Someone using your account,” the note begins, “did [whatever the offense is].” The u.y.a. note (as this mechanism is known, for its introductory words) then explains why this behavior or action is offensive, or violates MIT harassment policy, or Rules of Use, or whatever. “Account holders are responsible for the use of their accounts. If you were unaware that your account was being used in this way,” the note continues, “it may have been compromised. User Accounts can help you change your password and re-secure your account.” Detailed directions to User Accounts follow. The note concludes with a short sentence: “If you were aware that your account was being used to [whatever it was], then we trust you will take steps to ensure that this does not happen again.”
Two interesting outcomes ensue.
First, many recipients of u.y.a. notes go to User Accounts, say their accounts have been compromised, and change their passwords – even when it’s clear, from eyewitnesses or other evidence, that they personally were the offenders.
Second, and most important, u.y.a. recipients virtually never repeat the offending behavior.
This is important: even though recipients concede no guilt, and receive no punishment, they stop.
That’s interesting. We’ve become such a “call out” culture, and that so often devolves into name-calling and denials and “alternate facts” and other euphemisms for lying.
This approach on the other hand, leaves room for the person to save face and back out quietly. Hmmm . . . .
Yes, a public calling out often doesn’t allow much room for redemption.