Re: Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

On 10/03/2015 21:59, Jari Arkko wrote:
> I wanted to say that I’m in agreement with Adrian on this. Ultimately,
> no list will be complete, some judgment needs to apply, and I
> think we’ve covered this in the text better than if we attempted
> to expand the list.
>
> (And I am, of course, in agreement with Stewart that things that
> he lists are definitely important and certainly should not be misused
> in any professional discussion.)
>
> Jari
>
Jari

I fail to see why the IETF which has no significant expertise
in this area has chosen to make up its own list rather than
using one put together by professionals.

I did not just think up those additional items, they are part
of a list that experts on the subject put together for
example:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

However given the degree on integration on this subject I
am sure it will align with EU position on the subject.
This is very much a case where we should use the more
encompassing list rather than an abbreviated one.

The most glaring omission from the IETF list is of course
disability.

- Stewart