Re: [hrpc] re history lessons

[Mallory Knodel <[e-mail]>]

I really like the norm-diffusion concept for evaluation [0]. ISTM it 
would be a lot more appropriate for what we're doing in HRPC since we 
tend to be heavier, in spirit, on the HR than the P.

-M

[0] 
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1354066117720794?journalCode=ejta

On 5/6/21 9:40 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> Adding to the suggestions for draft-braman-evaluation-RFC8280, it might also be interesting to take into account the impact RFC8280 had outside the IETF, such as being named, as the first I-D/RFC afaik, in a report by the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression. Similarly, approaches such as those being developed in RFC8280 are now also inherent part of draft legislation that is tabled in the European Parliament: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0073_EN.html
> Looking forward to hear what the theoretical framework will look like to assess this case of norm-diffusion!
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
>
> On 06-05-2021 09:07, Corinne Cath wrote:
>> Hiya,
>>
>> I think part of the question is also whether the inclusion of a human rights section in RFCs is the only way to judge the effects of the HRPC group.
>>
>> In my PhD, I track the ways in which having these discussions in the IETF/IRTF has changed the sensibilities of engineers in terms of what type of "social" concerns they consider to be relevant to their work.
>>
>> This is much harder to measure quantitatively, as it speaks to change in naturalized ways of seeing the world, but in addition to doing ethnographic work like I did, I think it might also be interesting to do further analysis of mailinglists as Colin suggests.
>>
>> I would remark that in my 3 years of fieldwork in the IETF, I did on more than one occasion find that engineers said one thing on a mailinglist and a different thing in the relative privacy of our one-on-one interviews.
>>
>> Happy to share more of my work when I have done by formal defense later this year.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Corinne
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 1:29 AM Colin Perkins <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>      > On 3 May 2021, at 16:38, Gurshabad Grover <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>      >
>>      > 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 <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).
>>
>>      (RFC 8492 was published on the Independent Stream, I believe, and isn’t an IETF consensus document)
>>
>>      An interesting piece of analysis might be to look not just at the documents that cite RFC 8280, but rather at the extent to which the topics discussed in that RFC are considered during development of IETF standards. It may be possible, for example, to study the mailing list archives, meeting minutes, or the text of the drafts, to see if consideration of related topics has increased over time, irrespective of whether there’s a formal human rights considerations section.
>>
>>      Colin
>>
>>
>>
>>      > -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] <mailto:[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]>
>>      >>> <mailto:[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]> <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >>>>    https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc__;!!KwNVnqRv!Wn2KbOw-vOxRhfqX1jGrSQQ6XHuw-3vAOzK3FbU_cYLASdrjLliaZDyzmJ0Nsw$ <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] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>
>>      >>
>>      >> _______________________________________________
>>      >> hrpc mailing list
>>      >> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>
>>      >>
>>      >
>>      > _______________________________________________
>>      > hrpc mailing list
>>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>
>>
>>
>>
>>      --
>>      Colin Perkins
>>      https://csperkins.org/ <https://csperkins.org/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>      _______________________________________________
>>      hrpc mailing list
>>      [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Corinne Cath - Speth
>> Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Alan Turing Institute
>>
>> Web: www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath>
>> Email: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> & [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> Twitter: @C_CS
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> hrpc mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>>
-- 
Mallory Knodel
CTO, Center for Democracy and Technology
gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780