Timi Wahalahti 6:56 pm on August 28, 2019

Incident Report: Deputy Asked to Step Away from Official Roles

After Hugh posted one incident report a few days ago, I feel bad to share another report now. Please, bear with me.

A few of the key elements working as a deputyProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. in Community Team are respectful communication and helping to grow the local or global WordPress community. DeputiesProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. represent WordPress, and we grant a high level of trust to them from the beginning – at the same time, we also set some expectations. The Community Deputy Agreement outlines those expectations, and every deputy has signed the agreement.

A few experienced community team deputies have been meditating the issues between one local community and one community team deputy for almost a year. Unfortunately, that hasn’t resolved all conflicts, and some months ago, the situation resulted in a formal complaint about the behavior of the deputy in question. The complaint described the deputy communicating and behaving in a divisive, disrespectful manner with others in the local community as well as undermining community team goals by behaving as a gatekeeper in the local community.

A review board was formed, and it requested more information from the deputy in question, members of the local community, and other deputies who have been working with the deputy. The review board found that comprehensive additional information validated the claims in the original complaint. The deputy in question has undermined the community team goals by acting as a gatekeeper, and communicating and behaving towards the local community members in a disrespectful and deceptive manner.

During the mediation done previously, the deputy and representatives of the local community had agreed on certain things (refraining from gatekeeping behavior for example) to make the situation better. The review board found that the deputy has not followed through on this agreement. The deputy has also continued non-collaborative behavior, even after they were informed about the complaint and review process.

Based on the original complaint and comprehensive additional information, the review board had multiple lengthy and challenging discussions, not least because this is the first time the community team has faced this kind of problem.

In this case, the review board concluded that the deputy in question needs to step away from the deputy role. In addition to that, the person was asked to step away from any official roles (organizing, speaking, sponsoring and volunteering) in official WordPress events for a minimum of 12 months. This decision is severe, but the review board believes it to be the only way to allow the local community to revitalize fully. If the person wishes to be part of official WordPress events in any role other than attendee after the 12 months, they can apply for an official role at that time.

The review board included Andrea Middleton (@andreamiddleton), Birgit Pauli-Haack (@bph), Francesca Marano (@francina), Hugh Lashbrooke (@hlashbrooke), Kevin Cristiano (@kcristiano) and Timi Wahalahti (@sippis). Andrea facilitated the work of the review board but refrained from voting on the matter. Thank you all who shared information with us and helped the board come to this difficult decision, we hope that the local community can be revitalized and function more healthily going forward.

Edited after publication for grammar/typos by @chanthaboune. 23:53 UTC, Wed, Aug 28. The content was unchanged.

Edited after publication to make more clear what roles deputy was asked to step away. @sippis 2019-09-11 10:54

Andrea Middleton 11:25 pm on September 17, 2019
As noted above, this post was edited to clarify what roles the person was asked to step away from, for the next year — the role of sponsor was added to the list of official roles, because it had previously been omitted in error.

There’s been some conversation on Twitter in the past few days about whether it’s appropriate for the community team to ask someone to refrain from sponsoring or representing sponsors. Certainly, any time that community program limits affect business interests, things get extra-sensitive — so I’m commenting here to explain the logic behind that decision.

Some Background

Before we accept a company as a sponsor, we ask them to confirm their understanding that WordCampWordCamp WordCamps are casual, locally-organized conferences covering everything related to WordPress. They're one of the places where the WordPress community comes together to teach one another what they’ve learned throughout the year and share the joy. Learn more. organizers, speakers, sponsors, and volunteers are expected to support the WordPress project and its principles. That includes anyone they send as a representative of their product, since all official roles function as ambassadorship.

It’s very rare for the community team to ask someone to step away from holding official roles in community programs. This only happens when:
1. someone exhibits a pattern of damaging behavior that did not change after multiple discussions and opportunities, or
2. a single incident has a serious impact on another participant (physical assault, racial slurs, sexual harassment, etc).
Clarifying Information

Asking someone to avoid official roles for a defined period of time is a way for the community team to put attendees’ well-being and trust first, especially when we’ve determined that someone acting in an official role in our own program has caused harm in our program.

The person is always asked to refrain from participating in ANY official role, not just one or two. From an attendee perspective, all people in leadership have the same level of trust. From the program’s perspective, broken expectations harm the trust that we believe is so important in our community building. The more visible the role, the more that the role represents WordPress.

It’s entirely possible that someone will behave in a systematically damaging way in one role but not in others, though in my experience that is rare. Regardless, I think it’s appropriate — and important — to ask sponsors not to send representatives to community events who have displayed a pattern of behavior that does not live up to community expectations.

To be crystal clear, no one in the community team is suggesting someone should be fired by their company. The decision is motivated by our responsibility to protect attendees and other contributors, not as a punishment.

Questions?

I hope this context is helpful — I am sorry it’s so long. If you have questions or concerns, please reply with a comment here, and either I or another contributor will do our best to answer them!
- carlhancock 12:05 am on September 18, 2019
  
  If the issue was primarily surrounding their participation as a DeputyProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. on the Community Team and with issues surrounding organizing events why not simply remove them as a Deputy and ban them from participating as an organizer for 12 months?
  
  Extending that ban to include everything in the sphere of WordCampWordCamp WordCamps are casual, locally-organized conferences covering everything related to WordPress. They're one of the places where the WordPress community comes together to teach one another what they’ve learned throughout the year and share the joy. Learn more. influence, especially given it’s already been stated this situation was a first for the team to deal with, seems extremely heavy handed. Especially given the issues were between them and others involved with the Community Team and event organization and NOT with attendees, sponsors, etc.
  
  This individual has given the WordPress project years worth of volunteering. Organized numerous successful events and was absolutely fantastic to work with as an event sponsor. I know this firsthand. I also know the individual personally. So before anyone makes the claim they are toxic… you don’t truly know the individual so sit back down.
  
  If this was indeed a first for the community team why bring down the hammer so hard instead of taking a more compassionate approach that doesn’t harm the individuals ability to make a living in WordPress?
  
  And to clarify my above statement how this harms the individuals ability to make a living in WordPress, I know for a fact it will, and already has. My own company was considering hiring them specifically to represent us at events in Latin America. And seeing as how WordCamp’s are pretty much the only WordPress events of any real significance… that effectively kills this opportunity for him. Decisions made by volunteers in a SlackSlack Slack is a Collaborative Group Chat Platform https://slack.com/. The WordPress community has its own Slack Channel at https://make.wordpress.org/chat/. channel a continent away have very real consequences.
  
  Removing this individual as a deputy and organizer would have solved this problem. And if it didn’t? You could have extended the ban to include other roles at that time. Taking it all the way to a full ban right away comes across as heavy handed and designed to hurt the individual. Which it most definitely has.
- Jon Brown 8:58 pm on September 18, 2019
  
  I don’t know who the individual is, but I’m with Carl on this.
  
  Reading the incident report I don’t see how banning them as a sponsor rep is reasonable.
  
  From the report, they’re a bad organizer, they’re a bad leader, they never should have been made a deputyProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. and representative of WC.
  
  Ok… I get all that, but unless you’re leaving out real evidence that this person violated code of conductCode of Conduct “A code of conduct is a set of rules outlining the norms, rules, and responsibilities or proper practices of an individual party.” - Wikipedia to the point of being outright banned from all WordCamps as an attendee, I think banning them as a sponsor rep is over the line.
  
  No one (IMHO) views sponsors as representing the WordCampWordCamp WordCamps are casual, locally-organized conferences covering everything related to WordPress. They're one of the places where the WordPress community comes together to teach one another what they’ve learned throughout the year and share the joy. Learn more. Community, they’re literally there to represent their companies. Yes, we do ask them to uphold the “WordPress project and its principles” and
  “not be a jerk” but the above doesn’t indicate how they violated that so egregiously to be banned.
  
  Being a “gatekeeper” is a leadership flaw, it is not being a toxic person.
  
  1. someone exhibits a pattern of damaging behavior that did not change after multiple discussions and opportunities, or
  2. a single incident has a serious impact on another participant (physical assault, racial slurs, sexual harassment, etc).
  Clarifying Information
  
  In regards to #1. It seems like this shouldn’t be so lenient. If they’re a bad leader/deputy/organizer, remove them from that position. If you think they’re redeemable, great, try that and if you fail, remove them from that position. The buck stops with whomever made them a deputy/organizer in the first place, and who decided they might be redeemable.
  
  In regards to #2. Are you saying this happened? if so, why not document it above and ban them from all WordCamps under any circumstances.
  - carlhancock 4:02 pm on September 19, 2019
    
    The individual has been a deputyProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook., organizer, mentorEvent Supporter Event Supporter (formerly Mentor) is someone who has already organised a WordCamp and has time to meet with their assigned mentee every 2 weeks, they talk over where they should be in their timeline, help them to identify their issues, and also identify solutions for their issues., meetupMeetup Meetup groups are locally-organized groups that get together for face-to-face events on a regular basis (commonly once a month). Learn more about Meetups in our Meetup Organizer Handbook. organizer, and heavily involved in the community for years. They gave countless volunteer hours of their time to the project and community. They were not toxic.
    
    They aren’t saying #2 happened. They are saying #1 and #2 are the reasons why the community team would ask someone to step away from holding official roles in community programs.
    
    Although I must admit I chuckled at the “would ask…” when they aren’t actually asking, they are telling and accompanying it with punishment (ban).
pamelacr89 11:51 pm on September 21, 2019

this is wrong in so many levels as the initial post never mentioned the sponsoring ban, and there is no documentation about it (just the convenient editing), This is like changing the sentence of a trial weeks later; clearly the mistake was made by the team that created the documentation. As someone stated in a previous post, everyone attending a camp should respect the CoCCode of Conduct “A code of conduct is a set of rules outlining the norms, rules, and responsibilities or proper practices of an individual party.” - Wikipedia, ( sponsor, speaker, volunteer, or ateendee) so this individual can attend but not represent a company , this makes no sense at all. Sponsors employees usually are not even related to the WP community, they get paid to do a job, like many other “volunteers” here get paid to contribute.
From an attendee perspective, all people in leadership (organizers, volunteers, speakers) have the same level of trust, but sponsors don’t even should get related to the organizing team to avoid conflict of interests. Their job is to share with the community about the products and help users, not making decisions of any type.

I’ve heard of a similar outcome back in 2016 with Pantheon, who they banned for a whole year for posting a sticker on the elevator of the WCUSWCUS WordCamp US. The US flagship WordCamp event. hotel, however a few months ago when Jetpack overwrote the pluginPlugin A plugin is a piece of software containing a group of functions that can be added to a WordPress website. They can extend functionality or add new features to your WordPress websites. WordPress plugins are written in the PHP programming language and integrate seamlessly with WordPress. These can be free in the WordPress.org Plugin Directory https://wordpress.org/plugins/ or can be cost-based plugin from a third-party repository on every single wp site doing self-promotion they never stated anything from the official channel, is that because most of the leaders work for Automattic ?. This sounds like double standards to me.

This individual was the only deputyProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. on Latin America and helped to create a great inclusive community, helping on events budgets and making public calls about non GPLGPL GPL is an acronym for GNU Public License. It is the standard license WordPress uses for Open Source licensing https://wordpress.org/about/license/. The GPL is a ‘copyleft’ license https://www.gnu.org/licenses/copyleft.en.html. This means that derivative work can only be distributed under the same license terms. This is in distinction to permissive free software licenses, of which the BSD license and the MIT License are widely used examples. content, sponsors exclusivity or wp trademark and this made him a “toxic person”…. we call ourselves inclusive, diverse and a open minded but when some one calls out our mistakes, we exclude and silence this individual?
Rachel Cherry 6:13 pm on September 23, 2019

What is the process for if this individual wants to refute the statements made here or contest the decision?
pamelacr89 9:29 pm on September 23, 2019

The complaint described the deputyProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. communicating and behaving in a divisive, disrespectful manner with others in the local community as well as undermining community team goals by behaving as a gatekeeper in the local community.

Is there any evidence about disrespectful communication?
Did at least the individual got the evidence of this accusation?
How can someone be gatekeeper on a community if Central have admin access to the all official channels, slackSlack Slack is a Collaborative Group Chat Platform https://slack.com/. The WordPress community has its own Slack Channel at https://make.wordpress.org/chat/., meetupMeetup Meetup groups are locally-organized groups that get together for face-to-face events on a regular basis (commonly once a month). Learn more about Meetups in our Meetup Organizer Handbook. and the WordCampWordCamp WordCamps are casual, locally-organized conferences covering everything related to WordPress. They're one of the places where the WordPress community comes together to teach one another what they’ve learned throughout the year and share the joy. Learn more. site? (did some one remove a co-organizer or exclude a member here)
Should central and .org have control over unofficial groups on social media?
What is the scope to define how to be gatekeeper?
Does any of this unofficial social media groups use the WordPress name and trademark or is a wpxxx?
Is central 100% sure that the other part won’t get any red flag or personal interest on this result?
Will be this the standard from now on for every fault?
How is possible that you work with some one for so many years and all ends up on this drastic decision?
Can leadership identify this on the future and just ask some one step away as deputy before being so drastic?
Ernesto Morales 6:23 pm on September 24, 2019

Reading this and having known the individual for more than 2 years, it seems too severe a pity. The individual has helped us countless times in the formation of our community, has served as a mentorEvent Supporter Event Supporter (formerly Mentor) is someone who has already organised a WordCamp and has time to meet with their assigned mentee every 2 weeks, they talk over where they should be in their timeline, help them to identify their issues, and also identify solutions for their issues. for more than a year, always in a courteous, kind manner and clearly delineating what can and cannot be done, according to WordPress guidelines, not at your his own discretion.

Prohibiting this person to participate in events as a sponsor, clearly causes damage to his work and becomes an attack against the person and is not a punishment that fits the so-called “infractions” committed by him.

It is a shame that this decision was taken, reflecting that no effort was made to establish an acceptable limit to the punishment, where this person’s livelihood was not put at risk.
kcristiano 12:33 pm on September 26, 2019

As a first thing, thank you to everyone for expressing your concerns. I’ll try to address them below.

The review board has protected the confidentiality of the parties involved in this situation by not naming or hinting at anyone’s identity. We would like to ask the same from further commenters. Specifics of this case are confidential and must remain so, to ensure that public reports on important decisions like this can happen, without making it unsafe for people to report incidents.

I want to emphasize what was said in the post initially. “A few experienced community team deputiesProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. have been meditating the issues between one local community and one community team deputyProgram Supporter Community Program Supporters (formerly Deputies) are a team of people worldwide who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Find more about program supporters in our Program Supporter Handbook. for almost a year.”

In the Community Team, we give a great deal of trust to persons working in any role, right from the beginning. That trust is not easily lost.

If the issue is such that it can be resolved with meditation, other Community Team members will put a lot of work to solve things with meditation.

Same applies to this case. There was a meditation for almost a year until the trust was eventually lost. I can assure you, experienced community team deputies have done all in their power to try to solve conflict before a formal complaint resulted in calling this review board. The review board’s decisions, to ask the deputy in question to step away from official roles for a defined period, resulted from a situation where active meditation didn’t lead to resolution.

As to whether the community team can work to avoid this kind of decision in the future, I think that every situation will be dealt with separately and forming this kind of review board is the last resort. It says something, that during the six years of the Community Team’s existence, this is the first situation where a review board was needed.

initial post never mentioned the sponsoring ban, and there is no documentation about it (just the convenient editing), This is like changing the sentence of a trial weeks later; clearly the mistake was made by the team that created the documentation.

The review board made a mistake in the post content – yes. The title of the post has not changed, and it states “step away from official roles”. Official roles do include sponsoring, and the content of the post was updated to reflect this in a clearer way. Also, the person in question was informed and the review board made clear with them that they did understand what the official roles mean.

Is there any evidence about disrespectful communication?
Did at least the individual got the evidence of this accusation?

The review board can not share specifics of this case. What I can say, is that during its work, the review board asked for additional information from multiple people involved with the situation and meditation done previously. This includes the person who was the subject of the formal complaint.

What is the process for if this individual wants to refute the statements made here or contest the decision?

The decision was delivered via video call and person in question accepted it and did not ask to appeal at that time.

To appeal a decision from the review board, the person in question can start the process by sending an email with specifics to report@wordcamp.org and it will be forwarded to the executive director of the project. The request for appeal will be shared with the review board.

I want to say that it’s great to see how passionate everyone commenting here is, about fair play and justice. One thing that makes the WordPress community great is how much we care about honesty, ethics, and transparency. It’s difficult when we don’t all see things the same way, and it’s really painful for our tight-knit community to ask someone to step away from a role or roles. We will be closing comments on this post on September 30th to avoid any inadvertent breach of confidentiality.

There is a post about deputy review procedure added to Community Team handbook. That might be a better place to discuss the procedure or whether sponsoring and sponsor representation roles should be for the Community Team to limit.

Comments are closed.

Welcome!

Get Involved

Let’s Talk

Learn More

Incident Report: Deputy Asked to Step Away from Official Roles

Welcome!

Get Involved

Let’s Talk

Learn More

Share this: