Okay, NOW they're going public:
When we wrote our zero-tolerance policy in 2008 (in response to a previous incident), we were operating under the assumption that violators were either intent on their specific behaviors, clueless, or both.
During the course of our conversation with Rene it became immediately apparent that he realized what he had done and was sincerely regretful of his actions. It was that recognition and regret that influenced our decision, not his status in the community. If, as a community, we wish to educate others about harassment, we must also allow for the possibility of reform.
I agree; we must allow for the possibility of reform, which is why the harassment policy should have been designed with multiple distinct levels of consequences in the first instance. But they weren't, as they were likely to designed only to eliminate a particular person with schizophrenia from the con environment for life! That must have been some amaaaaazing apology on the part of Rene Walling to a) to instantaneously inspire such a new and subtle understanding of reform on the part of the committee, b) a change to the rules that moments prior seemed so great and c) that also eliminated the nagging self-critical thoughts the committee members must have experienced. "Are we just letting Rene Walling off lightly because he's a Big Wheel in fandom? No! No! The apology, so profound, so plaintive—not a doubt remains! Nobody on Earth who heard this apology could disagree with us!"
But we didn't get to hear the apology, even.
When we wrote our zero-tolerance policy in 2008 (in response to a previous incident), we were operating under the assumption that violators were either intent on their specific behaviors, clueless, or both.
During the course of our conversation with Rene it became immediately apparent that he realized what he had done and was sincerely regretful of his actions. It was that recognition and regret that influenced our decision, not his status in the community. If, as a community, we wish to educate others about harassment, we must also allow for the possibility of reform.
I agree; we must allow for the possibility of reform, which is why the harassment policy should have been designed with multiple distinct levels of consequences in the first instance. But they weren't, as they were likely to designed only to eliminate a particular person with schizophrenia from the con environment for life! That must have been some amaaaaazing apology on the part of Rene Walling to a) to instantaneously inspire such a new and subtle understanding of reform on the part of the committee, b) a change to the rules that moments prior seemed so great and c) that also eliminated the nagging self-critical thoughts the committee members must have experienced. "Are we just letting Rene Walling off lightly because he's a Big Wheel in fandom? No! No! The apology, so profound, so plaintive—not a doubt remains! Nobody on Earth who heard this apology could disagree with us!"
But we didn't get to hear the apology, even.