Re: [hrpc] re history lessons

[Gurshabad Grover <[e-mail]>]

To my knowledge, all RFCs and I-Ds that have a human rights
considerations section (up until a while ago, at least) are listed here:
https://github.com/IRTF-HRPC/reviews/blob/main/drafts_RFCs_with_HRCs.md

(RFC8492 is the one that pokes fun at the section and links it to the
right to bear arms).

-Gurshabad

On 5/3/21 8:49 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> Which rfc is on the right to bear arms?
> 
>> On May 3, 2021, at 11:16, Sandra Braman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Appreciate this, Mallory.  Our interpretations of the effects of
>> particular activities may reasonably differ, but you are also
>> assigning meaning to my comment that was not there. I did not say I
>> was discounting the code 451 effort, although you and I may disagree
>> regarding what the nature of its consequences are.
>>
>> I have so far looked only at RFCs for mention of 8280; there is just
>> the one. Would appreciate it if others could point me to Internet
>> drafts that do. Was fascinated to see that the only RFC mentioning
>> 8280 does so by focusing on the right to bear arms.
>>
>> I agree with you that it would be a great research project for someone
>> to analyze discussions of drafts that do mention human rights
>> considerations, and what the reasons were for not ultimately including
>> that section in documents ultimately published. Actually, that could
>> be useful as input into future HRPC efforts.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 9:53 AM Mallory Knodel <[e-mail]
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Sandra,
>>
>>     It would be incorrect to minimise the impact of RFC 8280 and HRPC
>>     this way, Sandra.
>>
>>     The fact that 451 isn't as technically implementable as authors
>>     envisioned is orthogonal to its human rights considerations. It
>>     shouldn't be discounted.
>>
>>     I believe there are more RFCs and I-D that directly cite a human
>>     rights consideration, but others might chime in on which specifically.
>>
>>     It also won't include the ways in which people engage in draft
>>     reviews with human rights considerations influenced by RFC 8280.
>>     Harder to measure, but still worth doing.
>>
>>     -Mallory
>>
>>     On 5/3/21 10:43 AM, Sandra Braman wrote:
>>>     Point taken, Niels, re the archive -- have read most of it but
>>>     will ensure it is all read and reviewed for its attention to this
>>>     particular question; will return to the list if questions remain.
>>>
>>>     Another, if I may -- It turns out, according to Mallory and
>>>     others, code 451 has not actually been useful. What do members of
>>>     this group make out of the fact that only one RFC since
>>>     publication of 8280 has addressed human rights considerations,
>>>     and that was the right to bear arms?  Is it expected that
>>>     publication of the guidelines document currently in progress will
>>>     make a difference?  Any advice regarding where I can turn for
>>>     explanations of this?
>>>
>>>     Thanks again --
>>>
>>>     Sandra
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     hrpc mailing list
>>>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>     https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc__;!!KwNVnqRv!Wn2KbOw-vOxRhfqX1jGrSQQ6XHuw-3vAOzK3FbU_cYLASdrjLliaZDyzmJ0Nsw$>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Mallory Knodel
>>     CTO, Center for Democracy and Technology
>>     gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> hrpc mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>