Originally posted by Hannah Lissaman:Hannah (all!), I'm sorry that my message may have been misunderstood in that manner.
I'm a little disappointed by the number of experienced male judges derailed this thread about sexism to say ‘it’s not really about sexism, let's make this about all judges'.
Originally posted by Meghan Baum:
Even here
Milan you thanked Eskil, but didnt beleive Hannah, who pointed out the same thing. She wrote a long and well reasoned response that was also very respectful and polite. You still didn't believe her. Yet when Eskil says one sentence then it is believed. That is exactly what we are talking about and what is so frustrating. *and it happens to us all the time*
Originally posted by Dustin De Leeuw:
I still stand behind my original message of “maybe it's not sexism”, but I believe I should explain a bit more. Whenever I take a call at Competitive REL, in the back of my mind is a little voice that tells me “maybe it's not just a GRV, maybe it's cheating”. I try to find a reasonable explanation, that satisfies my curiosity and suspicion, and then I fix the issue… sometimes by issuing a DQ, but most of the times I find a reason to believe the player is innocent.
Originally posted by Hannah Lissaman:
As others have said, the specific situation above is a little tricky since the presence of a second judge is often distracting regardless of the underlying reason.
Edited John Brian McCarthy (Jan. 11, 2018 10:02:59 AM)
Originally posted by Milan Majerčík:
Actually the topic IS about all judges.
Originally posted by Isaac King:Difficult to say without being there. There's an argument for dealing with it immediately. For example, if you've already told them once to talk to the active judge, and they again turn to you with a “Is that how it works?” I'm going to respond to it more directly with a “Why do you keep asking me? Is there some reason you don't believe her? You can either present your reasoning to her or appeal, but this is the last time you should be addressing me on this call.”
1. At what point should something be said to the players about this behavior?
2. If/when it is brought up to the players, should it simply be a mention of why this behavior might be offensive? Or should it be a Warning for USC - Minor?Like others, I would hesitate to issue USC - Minor here. Again, highly context dependent. Hannah put it best: “Players have to do something actively bad to wind up with a USC Minor!” Disrespect, especially with unknown motives shouldn't reach this. Keep it in mind as a potential outcome, but probably not a first or second result.
3. Which judge should be the one to bring it up?This is a conversation that the two judges should have to decide. Broken record, but Hannah correctly points out that the disrespected judge might not feel comfortable doing this. There's arguments for one, the other, and even both. Discuss the situation.