Stack Overflow is doing me ongoing harm; it's time to fix it!

The bottom line is this. Until SE addresses this post, no amount of process, or changes to how meta works, or new CMs are going to make a whit of difference.

This argument hasn't been about the CoC; as a whole I think SE Users are happy to treat each other with respect to the best of their abilities.

Had this just been about pronouns, we might have seen a moderator resignation or two, but just like we took the lumps from the licencing change, or the ad changes, the community would have moved on, and perhaps bled a little, but would be ultimately unharmed in the long term.

The reason this is so egregious is because it highlights one thing: It doesn't matter to SE if we invest a ton of time and effort into their site. It doesn't matter to them that everyone is trying their best, flawed as humans are, to make SE the best it can be.

It turns out that the egos of paid staff trump everything.

They trump the safety and well-being of the LGBTQ community on Stack Exchange.

They trump the trust we place in SE to continue being the best site it can be.

They trump the sincere wishes of the community to make things work.

They trump the happiness and inclusion of people who feel like they are no longer respected or listened to.

They trump the professional and personal safety and reputation of a person who has sunk tens of thousands of hours into our community.

The fact is, someone could not handle polite but relentless disagreement, and abused their position to remove someone without demonstrable cause. This behavior, and the company's subsequent doubling down is teetering on destroying the community that has taken years to grow, and has demonstrably harmed Monica, whose reputation has been dragged through the mud.

If SE does not address this, if they do not take action to make Monica whole, then the ideas SE was born from and molded under are dead, and we may as well give up on ever contributing significantly.

Monica had created a gofundme campaign for legal costs, but it is now closed for new contributions, probably related to this post.
You can find this page by doing a google search for GoFundMe Monica Cellio.

I know you won't like this answer, but I'm writing it anyway, because this is what you would get over at the workplace:

You need to get a lawyer involved.

I'm not saying you need to sue them. I know you don't want to and I agree that that would not be the road to get reinstated. I'm saying you need a real life person with a law degree and letterhead to prove it, having a real life conversation with a company representative. Not a CM. Not a director of public something. A person responsible for the legal side of their actions.

Again, I'm not saying you should threaten them. But a lawyer reaching out to find a solution, even if they write the exact same words you have used here, is way more effective than you writing a post. Because it comes with the realization that this is real. Not an avatar. Not an email. It's a real life paper and real life consequences.

Since lawyers cost money and talk is cheap, feel free to actually take action and help fund it.
You can find this page by doing a google search for GoFundMe Monica Cellio.

Sometimes, no matter what the intentions are - sometimes the end results get out of hand.

In the past few weeks - I've heard folks talk about how it was good the status quo was challenged and... it all went sour.

I honestly think we need to go back to the core of community moderation and start talking like adults.

This feels like literally the last chance to set things right - and actually come to something akin to an understanding.

At this point the damage done to the community, and to Monica's professional standing, feel like they outweigh the short- and long-term good that was intended. Lots of folks pulled together sure, but good people have less spoons than bad ones sometimes. MSE is a less nice place right now.

I've heard lots of arguments that Monica shouldn't be reinstated or she shouldn't come back. I don't think process was followed in removing her. Putting her back in place seems like the right thing to do, as would someone she trusts talking to her.

We clearly are going to have another TL blow up over this either way. I'm not entirely sure they stopped. It might be worth planning for this.

People need to stop yelling and start talking. I'm no genius but we all have blind spots. If you have a specific personal issue with Monica - maybe let her know? If you have a problem with that and need an intermediary, I'd be happy to help.

And honestly, I think everyone is aware that talking to the press was a mistake. The Register hates companies more than people and would be salivating at a retraction. You have a legal team to work out all that liability stuff. We all make mistakes. This is one that might ruin someone's life.

I think Jeff might have actually called Monica straight and handled it, but it was a smaller world then.

Right now, folks are putting out small fires and larger ones. It might be worth removing a source of the heat.

Junior and senior SE employees need to attend a 101 class in human decency.

It's not a joke. Forget about being more inclusive and welcoming, these have proven to be empty words. If executives and/or directors cannot communicate meaningfully in private with someone the calibre of Monica, there is something seriously wrong with their internal policy.

One month on, the gravity of the situation continues to prolong and worsen.

The company has shown every indication so far that it's willing to hold tight, wait for the storm to blow over, and (if it comes to it) deal with any litigation with all the resources a multi-million-dollar business has available to it [which means: drag it out for years till the plaintiff's money runs out, then seek costs, which will bankrupt her]. Thus, no justice to Monica.

If you think that's unacceptable, then Monica's post offers us the opportunity to discuss – quickly, but very transparently – what kinds of actions her supporters might consider taking to put further pressure on the company.

Diamond mods and community members have already shown leadership with actions such as resignations, leaves of absence or withdrawal of labour. Some have also changed their name and/or avatar and/or added a statement of support in their profile. Many of us have posted questions or answers that draw attention to the injustice Monica has experienced. A record number of us have cast their votes in support of these posts.

It's time to escalate

Now is the time to step up the campaign. If you haven't already, consider personally undertaking any of the above actions you feel safe in doing. Perhaps it's time to take a stand, and do one of these actions even if you don't feel entirely safe – remember, there are many many Stack community members who will stand by you and support you.

And going forward, what's our next move (or set of moves)? If the company believes it can weather the storm, what fair, legitimate and legal actions can we take to demonstrate to the company that our user community is more powerful than they think? If the company values its revenue streams and corporate reputation, what actions might persuade the company to rethink its current strategy?

Perhaps we might like to post some detailed suggestions as follow-up answers to Monica's post.

I also use my real name on this site. If what happened to Monica happened to me, I would be just as appalled and frustrated.

SE has to address this rather than simply ignore it.

I also throw my wholehearted support behind Monica in her effort to get as much of this situation repaired as possible.

A few practical suggestions:

• If a GoFundMe page is set up to help deal with the personal expenses that have been and will be faced, I will happily contribute to that.

• If there is a petition created in her support, I will happily sign that.

• If there is some other forum where I can express my public support, I will participate there too.

Monica has started a GoFundMe page. I hope you join me in supporting her there.

I am wholeheartedly yet heavy-heartedly supporting your GoFundMe appeal¹ for legal funds.

Wholeheartedly, as I commented there with my initial donation toward your first goal (copyedited, formatted, and hyperlinked here):

I have known Monica since Mi Yodeya launched into the Stack Exchange network, and she started contributing her knowledge and curiosity to the community. When we held our first mod elections, I endorsed her as an "example of how to behave courteously, respectfully, and productively in an online community," and she has continued to set such an example over many years as a moderator on Mi Yodeya and elsewhere across the Stack Exchange network.

I trust Monica with my money, and so has Stack Exchange. When we needed money to publish "Days of Awe - Mi Yodeya?", Monica set up a fundraising page much like this one to handle donations from the community, which earned us matching funds from Stack Exchange. At every step of the project, Monica displayed due care and more for acquitting the trust that all of us had put in her to handle our money honestly and transparently.

Heavy-heartedly, because it is so stupid, wasteful, and destructive that we're at this stage of conflict. We're all here on Stack Exchange because we like to use words to help other people. Here, though, Stack Exchange has used words to hurt you, you've pleaded with them to use more words to help reverse the damage, and they have responded with

silence.

Stack Exchange isn't refusing to help. They are not dignifying your plea with any response at all, not even an honest "No." Their silence on this issue is so all-consuming that I think it's even preventing them from seriously considering your plea. More than once, I have seen Stack Exchange staff respond to discussion of this post and specifically to calls for them to fix the damage to your name, by essentially changing the subject.

This silent treatment by Stack Exchange toward a long-standing community member and volunteer whom they've harmed strikes me as a classic form of abusive behavior. Whatever confidential corporate risk-management concerns are behind this behavior may explain it, but they cannot excuse it.

I know that Stack Exchange staff is made up of many exceptionally good, caring people. I know that these good people are tremendously frustrated by this whole situation, as we all are.

When good people are stuck in a conflict, especially good, caring people who are expert communicators, the obvious thing to do is to talk to each other. That's what you've been asking for for weeks. But again, some sort of corporate risk-management strategy is dictating that no such human interaction with you is permitted.

So here you are, raising money for legal fees. Here's Stack Exchange, muzzling their best communicators, piling hurt upon hurt to you and the community, and doubtless stocking up their own legal arsenal. And here's hundreds of the rest of us, sad and angry on a daily basis as we watch a company we've loved hurt you and bury its own heart.

So, my heart is heavy as I contribute to your fund, because it is stupid, wasteful, and destructive that this is what has to happen for Stack Exchange to do the basic decent thing and address the harm they've done to you.

Maybe with the intermediation of lawyers, maybe by some miracle without, may Stack Exchange talk to you again, and may you find a way to work together to repair what can be repaired. May we all return together to the noble business of helping people around the world share helpful words.

^{1. I had a link to the GoFundMe appeal here, but Stack Exchange edited it out, per "Why is SE removing links and community ads about legal issues?".}

Anyone who is as offended as I am about the abuse Monica has endured at the hands of SE, Please consider a contribution to her GoFundMe page.
You can find this page by doing a Google search for:

GoFundMe Monica Cellio

Thanks.

In my fantasies...

• Monica is reinstated on every site where she was recently a moderator.
• All the moderators who left or took a leave over this are also given the chance to return.
• SE institutes moderator training like they've been talking about doing and includes gender/pronoun issues (this is important).

And I get to go back to pouring my heart and soul into writing questions and answers and contributing to the community that has been an important part of my life for the last year. Both on Writing, where I'm a moderator, and on many other sites that I am a part of.

And then I wake up.

Reinstating Monica is vital but it's not enough. Stack Exchange the corporation can't treat her like a wrongdoer who has learned the error of her ways and is allowed back into the fold.

Because they have caused damage. Damage to her reputation. Damage to her real life persona (she uses her real name as her user name and anyone can track her down because of that and information in her profiles). How far that will go, I don't know. But the sooner it gets stopped, the better.

At first the only damage was to her status here on SE, when it could have been easily fixed. But that all changed when SE staff spoke to the media. Instead of fixing it then, they doubled down. They made more public statements about Monica's supposed wrongdoing, here on SE (in publicly accessible posts) and alluded to it on Twitter.

Until they fix this, none of the rest of this is going to work. They want her to apply to be reinstated and they've hinted that it will happen (no guarantees though...maybe they have other plans). But they are glossing over the damage.

I want it to be that easy. I want Monica to apply for reinstatement, get it, and everything goes back to normal. But this is a fantasy.

The longer this goes on, the harder it will be to fix. But it's still fixable! It has to come from the upper levels of SE. They have admitted mistakes in how they handled Monica's situation, but they need to go a few steps further. Make a sincere effort to repair her reputation and right the wrongs they've created. Then, and only then, will reinstatement mean anything.

I still love this community and it pains me to have lost it. I know I'm not the only one. I pray that SE will do what's right.

If there was a mensch in senior management at SO Inc, they would already have done two things:

• Reinstated Monica based on at least the appearance that the company's actions were not the way they think matters should have been handled.
• Issued a public apology stating that what had been publically released were personal opinions that don't represent the thoughts of the company, and may have been based on a misunderstanding. And that Monica is held in the highest esteem by the company, as evidenced by her reinstatement.

Instead, senior management appears to be listening to the advice of the corporate lawyers. Their standard playbook includes some basic operating strategy:

• Never admit anything, your position is that you've done nothing wrong.
• Don't deal with anything you don't have to. Most people don't have the energy or money to fight a corporation and its resources. They make a little noise and then go away. Just wait them out.
• Don't do anything to make life easier for an opponent. Don't respond to communications or have human interaction. It makes the opposition burn out and give up that much sooner.
• Once you've screwed somebody, don't let them back in the door. The baggage will always be there, and you will need to deal with it again later.
• If the person does not give up and go away, and they get a lawyer, they've passed the first test of demonstrating that they're serious. That's when any resolution process starts, not before.

Bottom line, there will be no action from SOI until Monica's lawyer contacts SOI's lawyers.

I scrolled to the bottom of this post, hoping to see an official SO response, offering a positive closure to this. But there is none, nothing, nada. And that's pathetic.

Not only did they have to take your job away over reasons that as far as I can tell are mostly/completely made up, they had to humiliate you (very publicly, I might add) on top of it. In no way is this acceptable. I don't care if you burned down SO HQ and told the CEO to you-know-what. That sort of treatment is unacceptable. You're a human being and as such entitled to some basic respect.

If I had to guess, whatever you were discussing irritated a higher-up and your firing was more of a way to get revenge/shut you up than for any legitimate reason. Honestly, comparing your posts on SE in general and the CoC, I'm not seeing any clear violations.

I've encountered you before on these sites, Monica. You're one of my favorite moderators. You're fair, reasonable, and recognize people posting as human. You've even stepped in when another moderator seemed to be after my blood. I, for one, certainly hope you get reinstated. And regarding the legal matters, I'd highly recommend looking into your options. If SO continues to handle it the same way, this could get nasty for you.

And to SO: Please, for God's sake, take the appropriate action here. She did nothing wrong, and your actions were not that of a ethical, well behaved business. I'm in college right now for business administration (freshman year), and everything I've learned thus far indicates you handled this all wrong. You didn't ensure you had adequate reason, and you didn't keep it private. You've made a mistake, big deal. If handled in a fair, ethical, and logical manner, this could all be in the past soon. If you keep handling it poorly, people won't forget this, and some won't forgive. I for one won't.

Some folks showed support by posting question, answers, or just writing about their feelings. Some just silently supported you. One (badly ^^) knitted this :) Keep being strong and fight for your own sake at the moment, hopefully, things will get better, sooner or later...

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like any admission of SE inflicting real harm on you - whether it be a personal apology, summary reinstatement, or retraction of public statements - would expose them to civil litigation. Even if you don't want to sue, no corporate lawyer worth their retainer is going to let SE open themselves up to such a liability.

You probably need a lawyer. Even if you're not looking for money, if your list consists of bright lines for you (and I think you're justified in that), you'll likely need a settlement that puts that in writing before the legal knots involved can be untied.

I don't know why the decision was made to remove Monica as a moderator, as to me it just seems to be "He said, she said" at this point, so I can't say if it was fair or not.

However it is a fact that what SO (the company) did has actively harmed Monica's reputation, both professionally and personally. SO took a private matter and immediately went public with it, both on meta and to external press. That is not how you treat people, and makes me ashamed to think I'm part of a community led by a company that doesn't value individual humans.

Now we all make mistakes. I believe there are only very few people that have not lashed out, or done something in an emotional surge that they later regretted. And that is fine. We are humans, and humans act on impulses and emotions. What makes the difference is how you follow up on your mistakes, and how you learn from them. This is the part SO (the company) has failed on.

What SO should do is retract the public statements made, apologize, and seek to restore the damage done to your reputation. And then clear up any misunderstandings with you in private.

This is the way SE works

I went through a situation a few years ago - utterly trivial by comparison to this - where the way it was handled made a few hard truths obvious.

SE is not interested in people generating good content. SE is not interested in people being good actors for communities. SE is interested in the numbers. The billionth question, the x-millionth user, the number of hits per day, that is all that SE is interested in.

Unless you are overtly contributing to pushing those numbers up, SE really doesn't give a flying one about you. You could be generating great answers on a specialised topic, but you're way down the priority list compared to someone else who might be creating 10 times the quantity but 10% the quality, and if an issue arises you will be made aware of that in no uncertain terms.

It's a signal/noise thing, and SE is more interested in noise than in signal.

In your situation it's time to cut and run. There is no satisfactory outcome from this for you. Even if you were reinstated, would you ever feel safe on SE again? Would you always be watching your back? Would you always have the nagging worry that a CoC would be weaponized against you in an attempt to justify what was done here?

Cut your losses. Get out.

But take consolation from this. Although damage was done to you, it doesn't take a huge amount of scratching beyond the surface to uncover the whole shitstorm, and you're not the one who comes out of it looking like an idiot.

It makes me really sad to see how you are treated. And it doesn't help to realize that "fixing the Monica situation" is of such low (zero?!) priority to Stack Exchange Inc.!

Maybe the point now is really to update profiles: so that every new user who comes in gets a chance to see something will turn him/her/* curious.

People were able to cover "large parts" of facebook with French colors for example, some time back.

Seriously: we can talk here on MSE and MSO and Mwhatever all day long. The majority of the users ... aren't here.

So let's get the message out to them. Be creative!

Now that it’s no longer essential to look good for a potential buyer, and none of the employees publicly involved in it are working at the company any more, maybe it is time to resolve this disgraceful saga?

I mean, really resolve it. Because so far I haven’t seen anything to refute this theory:

Monica isn’t talking about this, presumably because she can’t, and I'm not expecting her to say anything now. But I’ve spoken to a couple of legally knowledgeable acquaintances in the States and the most likely way this went down is like @LindaJeanne speculates in the comment above:

• Stack Overflow sent in a lawyer to react to Monica’s defamation suit and threatened to counter-sue, which would have destroyed her financially far beyond what a Gofundme could raise

• The only choice she would have been given to prevent this countersuit would probably have been to sign a non-disclosure agreement, forcing her to shut up about the entire issue forever under threat of total ruin

• She was probably not, different from popular imagination, paid any money for the damage caused her by Stack Overflow's actions.

If this is how it happened, it remains a huge disgrace to this day, a dark stain on the company’s reputation that continues to alienate a part of the community.

This would probably be very easy to fix:

• Work out a new agreement with Monica that includes a public apology announcement from Stack Overflow that really clears her name, while protecting the company from further legal action

• Pay a reasonable amount of money as restitution.

Come on, people in charge. You all say you are big believers in justice and kindness and all that - put your money where your mouths are. It's really about time.

Not only have they treated you horribly, they responded by repeatedly gaslighting both you and the community as a whole.

Personally, I will not consider this situation resolved until SE takes concrete steps to make amends to you, regardless of how much they try to gaslight me into thinking otherwise.

Monica, I would have written this in a comment to your question if I had the rep, but I just joined this community so that I could express my deepest regret, sorrow and condolences for what is happening to you.

I don't know you, nor have I ever come across any SE material that you are/were directly or indirectly involved with before 30 minutes ago. Yet reading about your story has literally brought tears to my eyes :'(

It makes me seriously reconsider being a part of the SE community, and that is a crying shame. And all over some stupid PC bull that is being taken far too seriously IMHO.

Political correctness in general has become an absolute minefield these days. You can't say or even think anything freely anymore, for fear that someone will take it too seriously.

I am not by any means a bigot; I totally agree with the core of the CoC issue at play here (people being identified in the way/s that they want to be), but for you to be treated in this way is far worse than any comments that you have allegedly made (especially since you didn't actually make them!).

Anyway, I wish you the best of luck with your endeavours. If I had the money I would donate to your GoFundMe page, but I am also curious why a no-win-no-fee lawyer is unable to help you, as others have suggested. In Australia at least, you can take matters like this to court without paying a cent (or a penny in your case :P) until you lose. And I don't think that you would.

Some users have created community ads that link directly to Monica's fundraiser. As described here, SE's strategy has moved from waiting us out to actively suppressing financial support. To counter that strategy, I would suggest changing your community ads so that they do not directly link to the fundraiser. Some options:

• Link to Monica's tweet about the fundraiser
• Link to @IsaacMoses's answer to this question

Other options may also be effective. The benefit of using the Twitter link is that it is outside the control of SE staff. The benefit of using Isaac's answer here on metaSE is that it is harder to argue that the community ad isn't explicitly about this community.

Note: at this point, links like this: Monica's fundraiser are not being removed, as they do not directly link to the fundraiser page.

I honestly cannot believe that SE still hasn't attempted to resolve this situation. You would think that with this amount of public outrage, somebody would do something about it. Even if the company didn't care that it hurt its users (and it did), the situation must have a negative impact on their business, considering all the resignations and strikes and whatnot.

They have three options:

• Admit their mistake, clear Monica's name and reinstate her as a mod.
• Present their proof, let Monica appeal the charges and win, then clear her name and reinstate her as a mod.
• Do nothing; hide from Meta and ignore all the wreckage, pretend like nothing's wrong, lose even more moderators, and let all Stack Exchange networks collapse into chaos.

I don't understand why SE is choosing option 3 right now.

Monica, I can't imagine what you're going through right now, and I feel so sorry for you.

As other answers already stated, SE are not giving any sign of goodwill towards the community in order to resolve this issue, and it is past time for us to do something about it...

The thing is... We, the community, have all the power here... SE was built upon questions and answers that we have been providing for free.

This was (and can continue being) the best Q&A site available on the Internet, but if SE doesn’t appreciate and respect the community that made it great, I say we give away our time to them no more.

Since this whole thing started, and moderators started resigning I don't ask any questions and don't give any answers on non-meta sites...

I'm just a drop in the ocean. I barely know how to speak English properly and just started answering some questions on Stack Overflow in gratitude for the many useful answers I found there since I was in college... But if all of us who care about whats happening, stop providing the answers that keep the site alive, SE will be forced to do something, or go bankrupt while Stack Overflow fades away...

A couple of things have prompted me write this post:

1. Pekka's thoughtful response and
2. a segment¹ from a podcast that's theoretically about video games.

Both were reactions to the news that Stack Overflow has found a willing buyer.² Those of us who spend a lot of time thinking about Stack Overflow might be interested in how two programmers, who occasionally find answers on the site, think about it. My summary of the podcast conversation:

1. Stack Overflow users have the reputation of calling questions stupid and marking them as duplicates. This is understandable ("it's basically just a big forum"), but frustrating when the questions are only superficially the same.
2. The site is a "huge repository of gathered wisdom" about all sorts of things.³
3. Stack Overflow sold for roughly the same amount as Minecraft, but the hosts of the podcast don't actually know how it makes money. (They make pretty good guesses, however.)

What random visitors aren't thinking about is how the company harmed members of the Stack Exchange community. This isn't surprising. I'm a very occasional Reddit user and this list of Reddit controversies was mostly unknown to me. It takes a lot of notoriety for events like this to surface for people who aren't actively part of the community.

Have you heard of the Ship of Theseus thought experiment? Well communities constantly experience a related paradox. People come and go, but the community remains. I've joined and left Stack Overflow at least twice. The subject of this question precipitated the largest turnover the network has seen. Many of the people who were harmed have left the community. They have been replaced by people who, like the podcast hosts, are only vaguely aware of the community's shared history with the company.

Meanwhile, almost all of the principal actors in the drama of 2019 have left the company.⁴ That includes me, of course, but also people responsible for the decision to remove Monica from her moderator positions. Of the people who remain, most were as blindsided as the community was by the actions the company took. I know because I've had conversations with other people who were at the company in the fall of 2019. And obviously people who joined in the last year or so have no more idea what happened than the podcast hosts.

I was recently on a call with some former Stack Overflow employees.⁵ Someone pointed out they worked for two different companies while at Stack Overflow. Someone else wondered how many Stack Overflows they worked at. Every configuration is as much a different organization as it is the same. The company name is a bit like a label that always points to the most recent iteration. With the move to a new owner (and the likely exodus of longtime employees) we're going to see yet another Stack Overflow soon.

As time goes on, the people who made the decisions and played a role in this incident have fewer reasons to stick their necks out. Indeed the message we heard when a settlement was reached was that we could finally move on as a community team. As much as I wish some people would take responsibility, that just doesn't seem realistic these days.

Two moments stand out to me. One was about a week before this happened. I was on the phone with Monica pacing back and forth in front of the pool at the condo where I lived at the time. It was a typical southern California day (just about perfect) and I'd been optimistic we could come to a compromise. As we talked, it dawned on me that there could be no compromise between her position and what was increasingly becoming clear would be the company position.

My 5^th grade teacher used to say:

I'm principled.
You're stubborn.
He's a pig-headed fool.⁶

It just sorta naturally came to mind as I talked with Monica. It seems to me there was an opportunity to deescalate around that time, but that opportunity was missed. Metaphorical clouds hung over me the rest of that day.

The Friday before Rosh Hashanah 2019, I sat in a camp chair reading a book and watching my son's soccer practice. Yet another wonderful day. I knew there was trouble brewing, but I figured it would wait until Monday since there were so many outstanding questions about how to communicate the decision to remove the moderator status of a well-regarded member of the community. Plus the day was ending on the East coast. It's not a good idea to take drastic action just before everyone disappears on the weekend.

And then I got a notification on my phone. Once again my day darkened. Nothing would be the same at Stack Overflow (the company) or Stack Exchange (the network of communities) from that day on. That night I wrote a few emails, including one to my church's prayer chain, and started thinking about what had gone wrong. What I didn't know until later was that this was the beginning of my grieving processes.

According to UpCounsel:

One of the biggest drawbacks of confidential settlement agreements is that it can put the public at risk. When the bad actions of the defendant are kept confidential, it can allow their wrongful actions to continue, removing the public's ability to protect themselves from bad actors.

Probably impossible to prove, but I don't think confidentiality agreements are ever good for a community. I believe the company hoped the settlement would mean the public would move on. Not only has that not happened, but the agreement prevents employees from telling their stories. As a result, the public gets Monica's side of the story and the company's inept response to it. But the truth is not so binary.

I'm resisting the temptation to say the community should move on. For one thing, I find myself drifting away from Stack Exchange as time goes on. It's not my community nearly as much today as it was a year and a half ago. In addition, there is no timetable for grief, pain and disappointment. The company's manifold failures harmed many people and the settlement deprived us of one path toward restoration. I don't know that there are easier roads than to continue attempting to hold the company accountable.

And yet, the core of the Stack Exchange community is building a library of high-quality, practical and accessible answers to questions (both common and long-tail). If the company supports that mission (or at least isn't actively sabotaging it), it's in the community's best interest to rebuild the partnership. So we can't forget the harm done, but we can (in theory) collectively learn from the past.

Footnotes:

1. The segment is answering listener mail. I didn't submit the question, in case you were wondering.

2. Full disclosure: I have some vested options from my time as an employee. I haven't yet heard how the transaction will be settled, but the rumors I've gathered from back channels suggest a significant windfall. Not FYIFV money but enough that you should suspect it biases my opinion. A lot of people who left before I did let their options expire, but I was lucky enough to leave after an important policy change. It's impossible that I won't allow that good fortune to make me more favorable toward the company than if I weren't benefiting financially.

3. This is specifically a reference to Stack Exchange.

4. Exactly how the decision came about is still unclear to me.

5. Whatever I think of the company, I'm always happy to reconnect with the people who have worked there.

6. She was probably quoting Bertrand Russell.

I feel for you and what you are going through. It must be terrible after years of pouring your heart and time into many SE sites.

Looking at the situation from the SE angle, I would imagine that, by now, they realize they have made a terrible mistake, that the ongoing noise is not doing them good (it is only a matter of time until more articles and case studies appear on the crisis) and must be looking at ways to resolve this. At the same time, I would imagine they are worried of future litigation and that their Legal counsel is controlling much of their actions.

As such, I believe you should be more explicit about your legal conditions for a return to normal. For instance, would you be willing to sign an agreement committing you to no future litigation if they accepted your two requests? If yes, I think saying so might make it easier for SE to come to an agreement with you. (It would also make their non-action even more unreasonable and constitute an even stronger basis for you in the future).

I am not suggesting that you accept less than you feel due to you - but rather that you clarify your position from a legal standpoint. The idea is to provide as easy a path to normalization as possible, as far as you would accept. Agreeing to some clear language retracting their statements without further details should be easy if they are not worried it will lead to further litigation. Reinstating a moderator that was highly recognized and appreciated - and that SE itself called to moderate meta - should be even easier in these conditions.

It's bad enough when a company abuses information it should have kept private; it's truly appalling from one that actively encourages (or at least did in the past) its users to use their real names.

It seems very likely that their statements to the Register were a violation of privacy that even one of their own employees that was fired with cause wouldn't suffer, never mind a volunteer under much foggier circumstances. There is no excuse for SE refusing to engage in honest, open dialogue with Monica to resolve the issue; they have written statements that they can avoid legal action (something that should have been obvious from the start given who they're dealing with), and let's be honest... at this point, there's no possible way it could do anything to make them look worse.

For the rest of us, aside from offering our support, I think spreading the news around the large portions of the network that never so much as peek at Meta (the avatar and username changes are great ideas) is probably the most we can do. It's pretty likely that SE just wants the problem to go away; a steady trickle of new users stumbling upon the scandal and coming here to read up on it and offer their opinions is a step toward keeping it alive.

A number of people have advised Monica to get legal counsel; I concur. Note that this does not necessarily mean sue, it just means get advice, and with that advice plan a way forward. A number of people have also mentioned crowd-funding and said they would contribute. Monica posted a comment above about funding, which I repeat in toto here:

Thanks @TheAnathema. On crowdfunding, I'd like to see this happen with somebody other than me running it, for clear transparency and also because I'm kind of bad at that sort of administration. I'd also like there to be a charity fallback: any funds not needed for legal stuff (e.g. because SE decided to actually work with me) go to a charity TBD that works on behalf of the Lavender community -- I'm thinking education, support services, and the like rather than legislative advocacy so it has worldwide benefit. If anyone wants to drive that or nominate charities, please get in touch. –

I'm not the person to organize crowdfunding, although I will certainly contribute. But I hope that someone with the expertise to do so, does, provided that Monica wants it at this time.

Monica: do you want this kind of help now -- or later, and if later, when do you think you would be ready?

And if the answer from Monica is go, how would this be organized and publicized, because SE is very unlikely to allow it to be organized and publicized here more than 5 minutes after the first post about it.

I guess I didn't have any idea how much actually happened. I thought it was pretty bad that they fired you in general, but the fact is, the actions that were taken afterward seem much worse.

I have doubts that both will happen, but I still hope so.

Monica, where are you located (physically)? I'm not asking for a full address, but I think unless otherwise specified, I assume everyone is in the mid-Atlantic region of the US.

(disclaimer: not a lawyer. evidence: wikipedia is my main source.) I think I've read that Defamation laws in the UK are significantly harder to bring charges against than in the US.

I think that I should have changed my user-name to say un-libel instead of un-slander, based on my cursory reading of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures or the like, then it is slander.

In the United States, a person must prove that the statement was false, caused harm, and was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement.
(emphasis mine)

I think that the statements against Monica by SE meet all three criteria.

Article 17 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states

1.No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
2.Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks

So location shouldn't matter too much: there was a wrong done to her reputation.

I do not know if the Right to Be Forgotten law may also (eventually) apply:

It has been defined as "the right to silence on past events in life that are no longer occurring."

It apparently only deletes the search results, not the underlying material, and appears to suppress ALL information about a person, which isn't ideal for reputation either.

I know SE is officially global, users are from all over, but its HQ is in NY -- so U.S. Law may apply, but possibly your own country's laws may also apply?

Sorry, just armchair-legal-theorizing here.

You wrote:

9. The issue I asked about has now been confirmed to comply with the new CoC;

However, there's a possible contradiction indicating that while general users can avoid using pronouns if they do this consistently, it may not apply to moderators. My answer gives details & asks for clarification about this. In particular, the statement of #4 says

You can often avoid using pronouns altogether. It's actually pretty rare to need third-person pronouns at all on most Stack Exchange sites. But conspicuously avoiding using pronouns for one group of people while using them normally for others is a way of refusing to recognize their identity, and that is discriminatory. ...

implying users in general can just write in such a way to avoid using pronouns at all, but then M2, for moderators, says

Using incorrect pronouns or conspicuously avoiding using pronouns is disrespectful. ... If you think you will find using pronouns as stated difficult, please try.

Not using pronouns at all is about conspicuous as you can get, so this seems to not allow this, which appears to be contradictory to the #4 statement. I ask for clarification about this, but with no response yet, although my stated hope it that not using pronouns at all is permitted for all users, including moderators.

Hey I'm sorry that SE was this horrible to you and I'm sorry that this situation even occurred. I honestly wish all of this had never happened as it's hurt quite a few people. I do believe you could've thought about the consequences of some of your posts a little more but I understand the frustration and hurt you must be feeling. SE is in the wrong in this situation and I hope things get resolved soon. I honestly hope this issue gets closure and that we'll soon be able to move on and end the bickering that's been running rampant recently.

I honestly think the only way to solve this is for people to show empathy for others and I guess this is me trying to show that to Monica. Sorry if it’s not that good of an answer.