Let's move beyond who is and isn't qualified to comment on the policy. The spirit of the Friendly Space Policy is that it should create a friendly space for every participant, regardless of background.
Participants of this thread generally agree on what it means to feel safe. There is relatively little debate about the expectations as written down in the Friendly Space Policy.
What needs fixing is the consequences of violating the policy. The current version of the policy (which has remained virtually unchanged since 2012) has essentially one sentence:
If a participant engages in harassing behavior, the conference
organizers may take any action they deem appropriate, including warning
the offender or expulsion from the conference.
The problem here is that if WMF or the organisers of an event needs to enforce FSP and keeps secret about the entire incident, speculation and one-sided perspectives can run amok in the community debate that ensues.
Lilli and Asaf have a good point: the specifics about a case of FSP enforcement ought not to be the subject of public debate because that creates additional stress on the participants. But for the enforcers to keep utter silence has served the opposite purpose: the lack of an official statement of enforcement has caused speculation to run wild.
It would be in the interest of both transparency and justice that the T&S or the organisers make a short announcement whenever FSP is invoked. It could be as anonymous as "We have had an incident where an attendee felt uncomfortable in a discussion. Attendees are reminded to... [insert appropriate behaviour]"
What is missing from the FSP process is this pre-emptive, limited release of information from an act of enforcement. It can come with a reminder that further discussion of the incident is discouraged to protect the privacy of those involved.
Deryck