Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]

Scott Kitterman <scott@kitterman.com> Fri, 20 March 2015 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <scott@kitterman.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEC51A8A8D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:41:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TFJQVJ2yjaY2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:41:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout03.controlledmail.com (mailout03.controlledmail.com [208.43.65.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CB551A87AD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:41:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kitterma-e6430.localnet (static-72-81-252-21.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout03.controlledmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80041C40477 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:41:51 -0500 (CDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=kitterman.com; s=201409; t=1426880511; bh=prZF0pZX9GFX71vUuOcyXXjFZXPL5vuaazPg9Fe3Rcs=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=bxFZgC90VJ7DaIdPYXaJoQJRezcmVsiYUQKkwdrr9fZyHRq9bvBStGnHRb9p6PO6g 3JACAoX7wWRJwulvwmj1UoEuRkGg99OXeLn5HuB74XY/Q80LRRgQfG81xpcM17cgM4 E4gW+cpspG6TwCIn1G4Dq5Zedi3wwYLNZE3UczJQ=
From: Scott Kitterman <scott@kitterman.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 15:41:51 -0400
Message-ID: <2263965.eHjMaG3zTm@kitterma-e6430>
User-Agent: KMail/4.13.3 (Linux/3.13.0-46-generic; KDE/4.13.3; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <550C6AF2.4030105@gmail.com>
References: <5503914A.7060209@gmail.com> <965AA861-EAB8-4DCE-BB9B-9D02BE63AE68@piuha.net> <550C6AF2.4030105@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/4-kUnmLDAmpjfBeVWOOzW-Fh85k>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 19:41:54 -0000

On Saturday, March 21, 2015 07:46:10 AM Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 21/03/2015 07:23, Jari Arkko wrote:
> > I agree with the points from Scott, Christian, and you John that it is
> > possible that confidentiality is not maintained on a case involving
> > a continuously bad actor. (Assuming we get to such a bad situation
> > to begin with, which I hope we wont.)
> 
> In fact I think it's stronger. It's not just possible, it's virtually
> certain that a persistent bad actor will be outed by gossip. And that
> puts the privacy of the victim(s) at real risk.
> 
> > My question to you though is what effect do you believe that observation
> > should have on our procedures? Are you suggesting that they should
> > not by default be confidential?
> 
> No. But maybe the lawyer should craft a phrase to avoid liability if
> there is a leak.

Don't promise confidentiality where you can't provide it.  That should solve 
the problem.

It's not limited to 'bad actors'.  I'll tell you in advance that if I'm ever 
accused of anything, the resolution won't be private.  I suspect that's true 
for others as well.

Scott K