IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [88attendees] Anti-harassment policy and ombudsperson

Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@nomountain.net> Mon, 04 November 2013 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <melinda.shore@nomountain.net>
X-Original-To: 88attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 88attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA2DC11E826D for <88attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:16:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NqjoHKLmn8za for <88attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:16:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a106.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcagg.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B2321E8205 for <88attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:16:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a106.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a106.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21FFC2005D10B for <88attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:16:35 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=nomountain.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=nomountain.net; b= MtlbQ1cHuXnICVUvGuSfVjwnkPEriP+KQ8mUNwxyyjcLXoROaPy/WLrxBZpwWs+P UPoabw2tLwMBzkTL9XXWCaSZ4itjTqAiOxHFAp6nSYYtaWyhIXl/q+znD2su6S7a UUNP57yCYkL9fa1cGxoRTVePRE+uwgVyChlOpE5SOKg=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=nomountain.net; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= nomountain.net; bh=90JuFgGaV3ViXjh+JrRJrfOrGbI=; b=YHfYEmD13uEv5 UPGofxLknN8W9wPN+cs2ZteI1fJYM9ZbtnUVrWZ8IV4a2F7fCNEcNCpcu0gedVh/ 929tZpTFnwhIWTBBAkRaXzxM41shdZt6FjopZILB28A/YIQpxUhItQemeNBlTuJV UfRl+vBNQyg+v9RQwgL7uSgpzaEW/8=
Received: from [31.133.160.91] (dhcp-a05b.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.160.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: melinda.shore@nomountain.net) by homiemail-a106.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 042DE2005D108 for <88attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:16:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5277F292.9020109@nomountain.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 11:16:34 -0800
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@nomountain.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 88attendees@ietf.org
References: <211BE376-9766-4024-9443-304336C6C14D@ietf.org> <5276E036.4030808@sunet.se> <5277B272.5090007@ericsson.com> <CAHBU6iu5vyxio1G0Z8WpSxbWK2Y_XGumX_4M-ALZChNLW4YT6A@mail.gmail.com> <6C6450A1-BF6E-4EB9-BB36-EBA8E3F07F0C@fugue.com> <CACrD=+-15f-Z3JngACVGviuf=6dNaC6vM_Jgy0sJoZQAiVOqKA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACrD=+-15f-Z3JngACVGviuf=6dNaC6vM_Jgy0sJoZQAiVOqKA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [88attendees] Anti-harassment policy and ombudsperson
X-BeenThere: 88attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 88 attendees that have opted in to the list." <88attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/88attendees>, <mailto:88attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/88attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:88attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:88attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/88attendees>, <mailto:88attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 19:16:42 -0000

On 11/04/2013 11:09 AM, Monty Montgomery wrote:
> Didn't pycon have a clear policy that simply wasn't followed?

Yes.  It's in part due to PyCon having a clear and readily available 
policy that's at least in part responsible for not having the problems
that have plagued Ruby conferences and other, similar events.  It
appears to be the case that organizations with policies have had fewer
problems than those without, although it should be pointed out that
it may be that organizations that start from the position of being
more welcoming of women and more sensitive to gender diversity issues
that have harassment policies in the first place.  Where the IETF fits
into that is left as an exercise, etc.

Melinda

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email