Re: [Diversity] Review of draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

SM,

As always, thank you for such thoughtful comments.

Some quick responses.  (These are my own; Narelle might have others.)


On 3/18/2015 4:33 PM, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Is there is a link between diversity and professional conduct?   Would,
> for example, an aggressive culture cause diversity issues?  

I thought (and think) that the draft discusses exactly this point, and
at length.

It specifically asserts that aggressive behavior is a disincentive for
participation by those from polite societies.  And it asserts that
bullying and harassment -- one hopes those qualify as unprofessional
conduct -- marginalize targeted participants.


> My response
> to those questions would be that there is a link.  Would would be the
> view of the average reader, especially someone who does not know much
> about the IETF, after reading the document?  The IETF might be viewed as
> an organisation comprised of "well-funded, American, white, male
> engineers" with a harassment or bullying problem to fix.

That quoted text described the /origins/ of the IETF.  Later text noted
that participation now is far more open and diverse.


> Section 2.2 does not fit in as it break the flow, i.e. the draft is
> discussing about the IETF issues, it then discusses about the nature and
> extent of bullying, then gets back to the IETF participation, and after
> that discusses about the IETF Track record.  It then discusses about
> participation again.  I suggest that the authors consider looking at the
> material in the draft as follows:

Section 2 describes the nature of diversity, the nature of attempts to
ensure it, and the nature of some important problems that work against
it.  Section 2.2 focuses on a distinctive aspect of IETF culture that
works against practical diversity.  One could have other sections
discussing other factors, but you won't be surprised to hear that I
think harassment and bullying are central issues in the IETF culture
that work against constructive diversity.


> The draft does not reference RFC 3774. 

The draft is not seeking to cite or deal with a wide range of issues.
Nor is it trying to review other discussions of surrounding issues.

Those issues are important and that RFC is useful.  But I don't see that
citing it alters the current draft meaningfully.


>  Shouldn't that RFC be taken into
> consideration for Section 1 given that the section provides some
> historical information?

The historical discussion is focused solely on forces that have worked
against diversity and against constructive, respectful discourse.


> The question I have to answer is why should this document be published
> in the Independent Submissions Stream.  Could the authors help me answer
> that question?

The draft is not a specification. It does not offer normative statements
about policy or practice.  Rather, it is a think-piece, that is, a
discussion of issues.

What would be the benefits in having it processed through the IETF
stream?  What would be the risks?

In considering Independent stream, my feeling was (and remains) that a
document of this sort is a personal offering.  Hence the Independent stream.

If there were some sort of outpouring of interest in having it in the
IETF stream, that would be fine, but I'm not expecting it, nor do I
think it significantly affects the document's relevance or utility.

But again, thank you for the comments.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net