Eight Escalation Patterns

Recurring "moves" that bypass early conflict resolution stages

Understanding Stage-Skipping

The Core Finding: These patterns are stage-skipping mechanisms — specific, repeatable tactics that bypass resolution-possible stages (1-3) and force conflicts directly into the Win-Lose phase (4-6). Each pattern shows how Elle transforms conflicts from dialogue-based to coalition-based and punitive.
Normal Conflict Resolution: Addresses issues at Stages 1-3 through dialogue. Conflicts naturally escalate through stages sequentially, with opportunities for de-escalation at each step.
Stage-Skipping: Bypassing early stages where dialogue and resolution are possible, jumping directly to coalition-building (Stage 4) and character attacks (Stage 5). This makes conflicts larger than necessary and prevents resolution.

Normal Conflict Progression

Stage 1 (Hardening) → Stage 2 (Debate) → [resolution possible] → Stage 3 (Actions)
    ↓                       ↓                                              ↓
Positions       Verbal confrontation                              Talk → Action
crystallize     but rational                                      empathy drops

                ← De-escalation possible at each stage →

Stage-Skipping Pattern

Stage 1 → Stage 2 → [SKIP] → Stages 4-6
                        │
                        └── Use escalation "moves" to jump stages:
                            • Identity Reframing
                            • Policy Injection
                            • Ally Recruitment
                            • Mechanism Weaponization
                            • Forced Public Escalation
                            • etc.

Why Stage-Skipping Is Harmful

  1. Bypasses dialogue: Resolution through conversation becomes impossible
  2. Creates permanent damage: Public accusations create lasting records
  3. Involves more people: Coalition-building expands the conflict
  4. Raises stakes: Character is now at issue, not just the original disagreement
  5. Makes retreat costly: Face-saving options are eliminated

The Eight Stage-Skipping Patterns

Each pattern below shows a specific stage jump: the badge indicates which stages are bypassed. For example, "Stage 2 → 4-5" means the pattern skips Stage 3 (and potentially Stage 4) entirely, jumping from debate directly to coalition-building or character attacks.

1. Identity Reframing

Stage 2 → 4-5

Stage Jump: Bypasses Stage 3 (actions not words) by transforming debate directly into identity-based coalition warfare.

The Move: Transform a substantive disagreement into an identity-based accusation (sexism, racism, ableism), making the conflict about the opponent's character rather than the original issue.

Example: Carbon Fiber / Wyatt (July 2024)

Original conflict (Stage 2): Technical disagreement about cutting carbon fiber in the space.

Elle's reframe (Stage 4-5): "There's some blatant sexism protruding here and it's not a good look for Noisebridge."

Before Reframe After Reframe
Debate about materials and ventilation Defense against sexism accusation
Technical resolution possible Character now at stake
Disagreement is about facts Disagreement is about identity
Can be resolved through dialogue Requires public vindication

→ Read full analysis with more examples

2. Policy Injection

Stage 2 → 3-4

Stage Jump: Bypasses dialogue by creating fake procedural requirements that force public escalation.

The Move: Fabricate a rule that doesn't exist and cite it as established community policy to gain procedural advantage.

Example: "Bravespace Rule" (December 2024)

Original conflict (Stage 2): Disagreement with Justin Morrison about fundraising letter.

Elle's policy injection (Stage 3-4): "Bravespace is where Noisebridgers work out differences, not private texts. I have not responded to your private text. I ignored it."

Reality: No such rule exists. This policy was fabricated.

→ Read full analysis with mechanism details

Stage Jump: Bypasses two-party resolution by bringing in third parties with reframed narrative.

The Move: Recruit third parties to apply pressure on the opponent, often by providing a reframed narrative of the conflict.

Example: LX / WE/Z (December 2025)

WE/Z's actual request: Take a break from Tuesday meetings for a month.

Elle's recharacterization to LX: Described it as being "ATLd."

LX's response (after talking to Elle): "Elle just told me someone ATLd her I'm assuming its WEZ, and this is honestly a NB sabotaging move of all time"

→ Read full analysis with more examples

Stage Jump: Bypasses Stages 4-5 entirely by jumping straight from actions to threats/ultimatums.

The Move: Use community safety mechanisms (ATL, disengagement) as weapons for punishment or advantage rather than their intended purpose.

Example: ATL During Mediation (September 2025)

Intended purpose of ATL: Emergency safety response when de-escalation fails.

Elle's use: Punishment during active mediation.

Elle's own words (per zoda): "There had to be consequences. Otherwise, she may have done the same thing, again…"

Proper Use Weaponized Use
Response to immediate threat Punishment for past behavior
De-escalation tool Escalation tool
Last resort when dialogue fails Used instead of dialogue
Temporary and proportionate Escalating demands

→ Read full analysis with escalating disengagement example

Stage Jump: Bypasses private resolution and face-saving by forcing conflicts into permanent public record.

The Move: Force a conflict into public channels where there is a permanent record, the opponent cannot save face, and coalition dynamics favor Elle.

Example: Justin Morrison DM → Bravespace (December 2024)

Justin's private DM: Conciliatory message attempting de-escalation.

Elle's response: Public post in Bravespace citing fabricated rule.

Justin's objection: "Also @Elle I did not consent for you to respond to my DM with a post here"

The Contradiction

When public accountability works against Elle: "I am getting tired of being dragged into Bravespace for the same thing over and over again."

When Elle is overruled publicly: "Would this private convo work better in DMs?" (sewing channel)

→ Read full analysis with pattern details

Stage Maintenance: Prevents de-escalation by dismissing attempts to return to dialogue.

The Move: When someone pushes back on Elle's framing, dismiss their input with a label that prevents engagement with the substance.

Example: "Tone Policing" (July 2024)

Cloud's pushback (as a woman in the space): "I would like to promote safe environment for women in the space, but this is not the way to go about it. Some of us do not want to see someone we know attacked on here."

Elle's dismissal: "You are tone policing and I have no idea what tone you want from me."

Example: "Mansplaining" (December 2024)

Justin forwarded: Bravespace channel guidelines (written by nthmost).

Elle's dismissal: "Disengage means leave me alone. It is not a request for you to mansplain Noisebridge to me."

→ Read full analysis showing prevention of de-escalation

7. Victim Repositioning

Maintains 4-5

Stage Maintenance: Prevents accountability-based de-escalation by reframing it as victimization.

The Move: Reframe accountability or pushback as victimization, recruiting sympathy and allies.

Example: "Dragged to Bravespace" (September 2025)

Context: Elle is being held accountable for ATL during mediation.

Elle's framing: "I am getting tired of being dragged into Bravespace for the same thing over and over again."

Example: "Whisper Campaign" (August 2025)

Context: Cloud discussed the conflict with others.

Elle's framing: "Learning that she is going behind my back to gossip and complain makes me feel a) hurt by her slander, b) that backbiting and dragging 3rd parties into a negative whisper campaign is detrimental for the community"

The Inversion

  • Accountability becomes victimization: "I'm being dragged"
  • Others discussing her behavior becomes slander: "whisper campaign"
  • Her own discussion becomes reluctant revelation: "I'm not supposed to..."

→ Read full analysis with more examples

Stage Jump: Bypasses all dialogue, coalition-building, and face-saving by declaring unilateral authority.

The Move: Claim authority to make unilateral decisions that should require dialogue or consensus.

Example: "If I Say It's Unsafe" (November 2025)

Elle's claim: "If I say something is unsafe, then it's unsafe."

EigenVexer's response: "I replied that this isn't how things work here."

Example: "All Tuesdays Are Bad" (December 2025)

Elle's claim: "Again, Tuesdays are bad nights to have events at sewing. All Tuesdays."

Reality: Ms. Judy (actual authority) said it was fine with the door closed.

Collaborative Decision Unilateral Authority Claim
Discussion of concerns Pronouncement of rules
Others can contribute Others must comply
Resolution is negotiated Resolution is imposed
Authority is earned Authority is claimed

→ Read full analysis with pattern implications

Pattern Summary: Stage-Skipping Mechanisms

Each pattern demonstrates a specific way Elle bypasses resolution-possible stages. The "Stage Jump" column shows which stages are skipped.

Pattern Stage Jump What Gets Skipped Resulting Escalation
1. Identity Reframing 2 → 4-5 Bypasses debate (Stage 2-3) Conflict becomes about character/identity, not substance
2. Policy Injection 2 → 3-4 Bypasses dialogue by creating fake rules Opposition becomes rule-breaking instead of valid disagreement
3. Ally Recruitment 2-3 → 4 Bypasses two-party resolution Individual conflict becomes group pressure dynamic
4. Mechanism Weaponization 3 → 6 Bypasses all dialogue stages Safety tools become punishment weapons
5. Forced Public Escalation 2 → 5 Bypasses private resolution Creates permanent record, eliminates face-saving
6. Dismissive Reframing Maintains 4-5 Prevents de-escalation to Stages 1-3 Blocks return to dialogue; keeps conflict high
7. Victim Repositioning Maintains 4-5 Prevents accountability-based de-escalation Accountability attempts become "attacks"
8. Unilateral Authority 2 → 6 Bypasses all dialogue and negotiation Discussion becomes command; normalizes autocratic decisions

Key Insight: Complementary Mechanisms

Patterns 1-5 are escalation mechanisms that skip early stages and jump to high stages.

Patterns 6-7 are maintenance mechanisms that prevent de-escalation and keep conflicts at high stages.

Pattern 8 is an override mechanism that bypasses all stages entirely, jumping straight to unilateral punishment.

How These Patterns Work Together

These patterns are not used in isolation. They often combine and reinforce each other:

Example: The Romy Incident (May 29, 2025)

Pattern 1: Identity Reframing

Romy's comment about trans women → framed as "sexist dismissive comments about other women"

Pattern 5: Forced Public Escalation

Moved to Bravespace, creating permanent public record

Pattern 8: Unilateral Authority

"I am going to demand you come offf NB discord for 24 hours"

Pattern 3: Ally Recruitment

Elan agreed comment was "needlessly antagonistic"; no one challenged Elle's authority

Result

Romy went silent for 4 months

Example: Cloud/Elle Conflict (2024-2025)

Community Impact of These Patterns

Resource Consumption

Contributor Loss

Governance Erosion