Subject: [Diversity] IETF Guidelines for Conduct - draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis-01

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 02:53:58 -0700

Hello,

I submitted draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis-01 [1].  I corrected 
the name of the author of RFC 3184.  Thanks to the two persons who 
emailed me her contact details.

I used the text suggested by Lars Eggert in Section 2, 6th 
paragraph.  I removed the "think globally" following a comment from 
Suresh and added some text to the last paragraph of Section 2.

Appendix A contains some text about where to report violations of the 
guidelines for conduct.

Appendix B documents the existing measures which are available.  The 
isn't any dependency between the guidelines for conduct and the 
measures, i.e. the messages can be updated without changing this document.

I added Appendix C about changes from RFC 3184 (comment from Juliao 
and Arturo).

Adian Farrel mentioned the following [2]:

   "If you are unable or feel unable to do so, it is your responsibility
    to report the misconduct so that it is handled."

Some people may not feel comfortable raising such a matter with an 
unknown person.  Making it the person's responsibility creates an 
uncomfortable situation.  Do the community want Area Directors to act 
on a report where A says: "I heard B being rude to C"?  B can deny it 
or it may not be clear what was said.

There is also the question of off-list messages.  Is that something 
an Area Director should take PR-action on?

Adrian Farrel mentioned that:

   'If the "code of conduct" is breached in a public forum, the
    very first step should be for the community to act.'

Is there someone who is not an Area Director or IAB member who will 
stand up if there is a breach of the guidelines for conduct?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis-01
2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00215.html

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 12:24:43 +0100

Hi SM,

Thanks for the revision and the notes.

> Adrian Farrel mentioned the following [2]:
> 
> unknown person. 

I recognise this, but I don't know the solution.
If the victim does not report, and the witness does not report, it becomes a
little hard for knowledge of the event to reach those who might act.
This logic regrettably causes the installation of large numbers of CCTV camera
around many public spaces <sigh>

> Making it the person's responsibility creates an

This AD wants to hear such reports and to act.
But please be aware that "act" does not mean "go from report directly to
punishment with no intervening steps".
Instead, it includes research, judge impact, assess context, speak to offender.

> an Area Director should take PR-action on?

Actually, yes.
I think a personal email in the context of IETF work is within scope, just as an
personal interaction in the corridors of a hotel late at night around the dates
of an IETF meeting is in scope.

> stand up if there is a breach of the guidelines for conduct?

If you care to wait until March 2015, you can count me in. (Or you can organise
a recall if you want it sooner ;-)

But this is a serious and important point. It is the choice between being a
community/social group, and being a policed grouping. That is, if we as
individuals are not prepared to speak up, then we rely on appointed officers to
detect, investigate, judge, and punish. I would be sad if this was the case in
the IETF.

Cheers,
Adrian

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 17:17:16 +0200

> I recognise this, but I don't know the solution.

The solution is that WG chairs or ADs SHOULD spot any discomforte that
is not related to IETF culture, and report the issue to make sure it
does not happen again. The report SHOULD go to the General Area
Director to mention in such draft related to that Area.

> around many public spaces <sigh>

In IETF, we only need CCTV in IETF meetings, which I beleive we
already have. However, I think all acts/reacts in IETF can be
witnessed by ALL specially by managments that include ADs and WG
chairs. Therefore, I think in IETF we already have witnesses.

> Instead, it includes research, judge impact, assess context, speak to

IMHO, the responsibility is on ALL IETFers, we SHOULD not agree with
any wrong action witnessed. We don't need punishment, just ADs SHOULD
make announcements of who is wrong/mistaken or who is doing something
out of IETF culture. Some people in IETF may not know what is IETF
culture/procedures/BCPs.

> of an IETF meeting is in scope.

I agree,

> detect, investigate, judge, and punish. I would be sad if this was the case

IMHO, we already in IETF have a special police system which includes
ADs, the ADs monitor all participants practices within WGs, but if
these ADs make mistake or did not monitor few things, then I think one
social group or appointed-officer to remind ADs can be a good idea.
That officer will help some people that fear the difficult
communication modes of IETF (which is sadly already known in IETF).

Usually I experienced that ADs assign WG chairs, so IMHO, they mostly
back them up, therefore, an officer that can back up the community
memebrs is very important in such situations (the
difficult-situations). We need balance and diversity in judments so
ADs and Community-Appointed-Officers work together but they have
different duties.

AB

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 09:40:30 -0700

Hi Adrian,
>around many public spaces <sigh>

Yes.

>of an IETF meeting is in scope.

Ok.

>a recall if you want it sooner ;-)

I'll be patient. :-)

>detect, investigate, judge, and punish. I would be sad if this was the case in

You said it better than I could.  Let's see who says that he or she 
will stand up.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 10:51:33 -0700

>> a recall if you want it sooner ;-)

The politics of a recall for this sort of reason could be entertaining 
enough to be worth trying out.  It's summer.  Things are boring...

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net