@moodlenet I'd like to suggest an alternative wording or procedure, which would be to ask the reporter if they're okay with being named, and or if they'd be open to some kind of process.
It's more work for operators, but it empowers reporters and makes the possibility for a better world.
Good point! Do you think adding that individuals involved can opt-out of anonymity would help? Otherwise how would you word it? Keeping in mind that this is designed to be enforced in a decentralised/federated way (starting with community/group moderators, then instance administrators, and finally Moodle HQ being able to cut instance off of the "mothership").
@mayel @moodlenet After I wrote the commend, I got up and thought about how shitty it is to kvetch and then not offer a suggestion.
I suggest that people be given an option when they report, and if not then, later. That does put more work on operators though (and no one should be obligated to do this work), but it may make things better in the world.
My concern is that for some people, we're losing the opportunity to bring them over to our side if we just showed some compassion.
(...)
@mayel @moodlenet My approach tends to be about protocols and "what goes over the wire" or social systems in person, rather than over distributed systems.
This is why I *dislike* Mastodon's new federated block system, as it hands off the block to the other instance, telling them someone's been blocked.
I think that these things should be confidential by default, but an option kept for some kind of external process, if both parties are amenable to it.
@mayel @emacsen @moodlenet just now hearing of federated Moodle. Seems coo. Are you working on it, Mayel?
Yeah, though it's not actually federating the Moodle LMS but rather creating a new education-focused social network (which will also be accessible from within Moodle).
@mayel @moodlenet @emacsen ahhh that makes sense. Congrats on getting such a cool contract! Will it connect with the fediverse in general?
@mayel @emacsen @moodlenet that rules. Your idea?
No, Martin (Moodle's founder) has wanted this for a long time, and @dajbelshaw (project lead) thought federation with ActivityPub would be a good fit.
@mayel @datatitian @moodlenet @emacsen ...and as Technical Architect, Mayel's making it happen!
@moodlenet The User Agreement states, "Unless otherwise noted, all content or materials contributed on this instance (including resources, metadata, and contents of public discussions) is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license."
I think a lot of people (especially in education) would like to have the option to use a CC NC license. Why should people license discussions etc. for commercial harvesting and sale?
@moodlenet A second concern - are you sure 'covenant' is the word you want to use? It may be considered by some (including me) to have some religious connotations.
Server run by the main developers of the project 
It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!
@moodlenet
There's a lot that's nice here. It's short, it gets to the point and addresses a lot of concerns.
One that that stood out was about enforcement. It says operators *must* remain confidential about reporters.This is a good default stance but it also precludes the possibility of restorative justice or any other reconsiliation process.
Those may not always be applicable but should be be possible and encouraged when both sides are open to the process.