Require public evidence for all AHRD cases that result in any public release

[ember palm]

You can censors names Idrc just give us evidence, evidence has been provided for many other previous public releases with a simple trigger warning. For some reason, recent public releases haven't had any evidence attached and I think this would be a great move for transparency.

[signal sigil]

yeah

[mild basin]

We literally had evidence for the blind fam

And they did way worse shit

Even though the worst of shit shit isn't show

Still smth

[tiny obsidian]

not happening

the reasoning isn't because it's "triggering" its because it would likely revela the identity of the plaintiff

[ember palm]

so censor names

[tiny obsidian]

and let them simply look at who sent the messages, right

"censoring names" only does so much when you can SEARCH THE EXACT WORDS and see who they were said to or who said them

[ember palm]

ok well then womp womp

public releases should have evidence

not providing evidence lowers trust in ahrd and makes people question

harassment is already banned, if you get harassed over a report to ahrd you can just report that

[tiny obsidian]

"not providing evidence lowers trust", thats why we have people who you CAN trust (like yknow, ToML) look over it

or if you dont trust ToML, IC can always step in and see everything we do

if the evidence could be released then it would have been

but it cannot, regardless of that it was checked and overseen

toml was informed and had seen the evidence along every step, this stuff was outlined in the release i believe

[ember palm]

another secretive body of high ranks saw the evidence guys

[junior shore]

trust me bro

[lethal lark]

😐

[serene ivy]

"yeah this is approved"
"by who"
"ourselves"

on a side note i understand why evidence may be considered harmful to certain people if released to the public

so i am not really agreeing with this suggestion

just wanted to do the joke

[tiny obsidian]

i get the point of the joke but it wasnt approved by us, it was approved by the people who run the group for the chairman smh

[turbid onyx]

I concur however with the 6 family case it would directly leak who the plaintiff is, who wished to be anonymous

[turbid onyx]

and regarding this, big cases that warrant public releases are approved by me, toml, and rib who is both doe and SJB

there really isn't anyone else we can go to get approval from

[serene ivy]

yeah yeah it was a joke

didnt mean it seriously

should not have said it in a suggestion

[turbid onyx]

and additionally, we have officer+ and divisional leadership have the ability to review the public release in case we missed something prior to the full release

we do as much as we can to be transparent, but sometimes we have to keep certain stuff behind closed doors

[gray laurel]

i will say as a plaintiff who was publicly named in an sjb case as the one who filed a complaint against a toml, without sjb asking me if this was okay first, i think the provision of keeping evidence from the public here is a good thing

retaliation is a thing in this community, as much as it shouldnt be, and limiting that possibility is a good thing

[hasty sequoia]

Great idea

[junior shore]

Fym great idea