You know what, I agree with you on that (at least concerning racism/sexism). But when it comes to "ass(holes)" and other "terrible people", as we can see from the whole RMS debacle, most people are unreliable and incapable of correctly identifying those terrible people.
I should've been more precise in this: Seemingly terrible people deserve an accurate evaluation that does not rely on "feelings" or the lynch-mob.
Definitions of an "ass(hole)" are pretty subjective, and the tolerances here vary far greater than those that are racist or sexist. You shouldn't mix them up.
That's fair and it is subjective - but I think it's pretty simple to come up with an "Employee Bill of Rights" that can enumerate "inalienable" rights for your employees, e.g. the right respectful communication (aka not being shouted at) etc. The internet is full of them.
This is, of course, different from being blunt, quiet, or other sorts of personality quirks people can associate negatively with. But I would say the line between proper and improper workplace behavior is more defined than people think.
I think the fear you are bringing up is the slippery slope into people being fearful of every interaction, but that will always need to be managed just like privacy and security and there will never be a one size fits all. But there certainly can be some pretty simple baselines established. Unions do it all the time - to varying degrees of success.
I should've been more precise in this: Seemingly terrible people deserve an accurate evaluation that does not rely on "feelings" or the lynch-mob.
Definitions of an "ass(hole)" are pretty subjective, and the tolerances here vary far greater than those that are racist or sexist. You shouldn't mix them up.