[nabdab]

> Saying that making a complaint public and it's answer public constitutes harassment just sounds trollish

Have we really reached the point where people think it’s normal to run every proceeding live on Twitter? Imagine if this was at an event, and a person was wearing a “I love HN” hat”, if another attendant stood up on a chair and started screaming from the top of their lungs “This makes me feel uncomfortable!!! It’s a violation of the CoC!!”.

Would your first thought be “this is a great process” or “perhaps we should tell the screamer to stop yelling and talk to the officials”.

It constitutes harassment because the aim here was not a proper review of a potential Violation, but an attempt at instilling mob mentality against an individual and forefinger due process in evaluating the case.

As for the complaint about exact motives being hidden. The argument is only that since the rest was conducted in public, the public should have transparency into the motives and review. Which seems reasonable as a response to this case, not as a general rule.

[Iv]

First, twitter is one of the many public medias. If something is appropriate publicly, then it is appropriate on twitter. It all depends on the rules.

> if another attendant stood up on a chair and started screaming from the top of their lungs “This makes me feel uncomfortable!!! It’s a violation of the CoC!!”.

First, you'll have to admit, putting on twitter would be far less disruptive.

Then, if people in the community value a CoC (I personally am on the fence over that tbh) they should value a fair process and examine the complaints they receive.

"No, that complaint is frivolous" could be the judges answers. And quickly they'll discover why there are penalties for frivolous lawsuits.

> It constitutes harassment

Exactly. And its great that there is a process to file your complaint!

> Which seems reasonable as a response to this case, not as a general rule.

Yeah, so what is the problem again?

But generally, you want as much of the judicial process open. You want to know what was done, what the witnesses confirm, how the defendants pleaded and how the judges reasoned on the conclusion.

Closing one of these parts has to be done only consciously for protection reasons, which in that case, I see none.