Return to Answer

Welcome to meta (and SE in general)! We've briefly had the chance to indirectly talk on comments; after a discussion with Shog9, journeyman geek and a couple of others, I thought I'd ask this question related to the plans of SO/SE.

As I am sure you are aware, a volunteer was fed to the lions/press in the recent past, by name, and to this day, this specter lingers on. I am sure that we can agree, this kind of spotlight, even if it is corrected after the fact, tends to tarnish one's name for a very, very long while.

Shog9 briefly stated a No comment policy on talking to the press; however, I personally deem this to not be clear enough of a statement, and I'm sure I am not the only one to think so. Ever since this, I have stopped helping others completely, because of the fear that, out of the blue, something like this might happen to me. Who did it is irrelevant; after all, everybody makes mistakes. The problem, and the fear I have is that it may still be easy for somebody to do it again.

You've briefly touched on the "safe" and "positive" experience for employees on meta. I would like to ask you if you could consider the "safe" and "positive" experience of the volunteers on this site in and outside of the site as well. As a result, the question I would like to ask you is twofold:

1. What safeguards were put in place to prevent this kind of feed-somebody-to-the-press event from happening again?
2. What remediation process is there in the case that it does happen again?

I am sure we can agree that this is important. After all, imagine if this happened to me and a potential employer found the article in the press. This isn't just some small thing - real people could be having real problems due to this, and because it happened once, it's at the back of people's minds and it will be for a while, until there's more than a one-liner about what can and cannot happen. Specifics would be great.

Welcome to meta (and SE in general)! We've briefly had the chance to indirectly talk on comments; after a discussion with Shog9, journeyman geek and a couple of others, I thought I'd ask this question related to the plans of SO/SE.

As I am sure you are aware, a volunteer was fed to the lions/press in the recent past, by name, and to this day, this specter lingers on. I am sure that we can agree, this kind of spotlight, even if it is corrected after the fact, tends to tarnish one's name for a very, very long while.

Shog9 briefly stated a No comment policy on talking to the press; however, I personally deem this to not be clear enough of a statement, and I'm sure I am not the only one to think so. Ever since this, I have stopped helping others completely, because of the fear that, out of the blue, something like this might happen to me. Who did it is irrelevant; after all, everybody makes mistakes. The problem, and the fear I have is that it may still be easy for somebody to do it again.

You've briefly touched on the "safe" and "positive" experience for employees on meta. I would like to ask you if you could consider the "safe" and "positive" experience of the volunteers on this site in and outside of the site as well. As a result, the question I would like to ask you is twofold:

1. What safeguards were put in place to prevent this kind of feed-somebody-to-the-press event from happening again?
2. What remediation process is there in the case that it does happen again?

I am sure we can agree that this is important. After all, imagine if this happened to me and a potential employer found the article in the press. This isn't just some small thing - real people could be having real problems due to this, and because it happened once, it's at the back of people's minds and it will be for a while, until there's more than a one-liner about what can and cannot happen. Specifics would be great.

Update from SE: Teresa has posted an official answer to this question, addressing this issue.

Welcome to meta (and SE in general)! We've briefly had the chance to indirectly talk on comments; after a discussion with Shog9, journeyman geek and a couple of others, I thought I'd ask this question related to the plans of SO/SE.

As I am sure you are aware, a volunteer was fed to the lions/press in the recent past, by name, and to this day, this specter lingers on. I am sure that we can agree, this kind of spotlight, even if it is corrected after the fact, tends to tarnish one's name for a very, very long while.

Shog9 briefly stated a No comment policy on talking to the press; however, I personally deem this to not be clear enough of a statement, and I'm sure I am not the only one to think so. Ever since this, I have stopped helping others completely, because of the fear that, out of the blue, something like this might happen to me. Who did it is irrelevant; after all, everybody makes mistakes. The problem, and the fear I have is that it may still be easy for somebody to do it again.

You've briefly touched on the "safe" and "positive" experience for employees on meta. I would like to ask you if you could consider the "safe" and "positive" experience of the volunteers on this site in and outside of the site as well. As a result, the question I would like to ask you is twofold:

1. What safeguards were put in place to prevent this kind of feed-somebody-to-the-press event from happening again?
2. What remediation process is there in the case that it does happen again?

Welcome to meta (and SE in general)! We've briefly had the chance to indirectly talk on comments; after a discussion with Shog9, journeyman geek and a couple of others, I thought I'd ask this question related to the plans of SO/SE.

As I am sure you are aware, a volunteer was fed to the lions/press in the recent past, by name, and to this day, this specter lingers on. I am sure that we can agree, this kind of spotlight, even if it is corrected after the fact, tends to tarnish one's name for a very, very long while.

Shog9 briefly stated a No comment policy on talking to the press; however, I personally deem this to not be clear enough of a statement, and I'm sure I am not the only one to think so. Ever since this, I have stopped helping others completely, because of the fear that, out of the blue, something like this might happen to me. Who did it is irrelevant; after all, everybody makes mistakes. The problem, and the fear I have is that it may still be easy for somebody to do it again.

You've briefly touched on the "safe" and "positive" experience for employees on meta. I would like to ask you if you could consider the "safe" and "positive" experience of the volunteers on this site in and outside of the site as well. As a result, the question I would like to ask you is twofold:

1. What safeguards were put in place to prevent this kind of feed-somebody-to-the-press event from happening again?
2. What remediation process is there in the case that it does happen again?

I am sure we can agree that this is important. After all, imagine if this happened to me and a potential employer found the article in the press. This isn't just some small thing - real people could be having real problems due to this, and because it happened once, it's at the back of people's minds and it will be for a while, until there's more than a one-liner about what can and cannot happen. Specifics would be great.

Welcome to meta (and SE in general)! We've briefly had the chance to indirectly talk on comments; after a discussion with Shog9, journeyman geek and a couple of others, I thought I'd ask this question related to the plans of SO/SE.

As I am sure you are aware, a volunteer was fed to the lions/press in the recent past, by name, and to this day, this spectre lingers on. I am sure that we can agree, this kind of spotlight, even if it is corrected after the fact, tends to tarnish one's name for a very, very long while.

Shog9 briefly stated a No comment policy on talking to the press; however, I personally deem this to not be clear enough of a statement, and I'm sure I am not the only one to think so. Ever since this, I have stopped helping others completely, because of the fear that, out of the blue, something like this might happen to me. Who did it is irrelevant; after all, everbody makes mistakes. The problem, and the fear I have is that it may still be easy for somebody to do it again.

You've briefly touched on the "safe" and "positive" experience for employees on meta. I would like to ask you if you could consider the "safe" and "positive" experience of the volunteers on this site in and outside of the site as well. As a result, the question I would like to ask you is twofold:

1. What safeguards were put in place to prevent this kind of feed-somebody-to-the-press event from happening again?
2. What remediation process is there in the case that it does happen again?

Welcome to meta (and SE in general)! We've briefly had the chance to indirectly talk on comments; after a discussion with Shog9, journeyman geek and a couple of others, I thought I'd ask this question related to the plans of SO/SE.

As I am sure you are aware, a volunteer was fed to the lions/press in the recent past, by name, and to this day, this specter lingers on. I am sure that we can agree, this kind of spotlight, even if it is corrected after the fact, tends to tarnish one's name for a very, very long while.

Shog9 briefly stated a No comment policy on talking to the press; however, I personally deem this to not be clear enough of a statement, and I'm sure I am not the only one to think so. Ever since this, I have stopped helping others completely, because of the fear that, out of the blue, something like this might happen to me. Who did it is irrelevant; after all, everybody makes mistakes. The problem, and the fear I have is that it may still be easy for somebody to do it again.

You've briefly touched on the "safe" and "positive" experience for employees on meta. I would like to ask you if you could consider the "safe" and "positive" experience of the volunteers on this site in and outside of the site as well. As a result, the question I would like to ask you is twofold:

1. What safeguards were put in place to prevent this kind of feed-somebody-to-the-press event from happening again?
2. What remediation process is there in the case that it does happen again?