I-D.farrresnickel-harassment

[James Woodyatt <[e-mail]>]

Everyone—

Having reviewed I-D.farrresnickel-harassment, I have a comment, but first I
want to express my vigorous support for this effort to establish
anti-harassment procedures in IETF.

It occurs to me that the Lead Ombudsperson has a variety of functions
related to the application of remedies, and the draft doesn't clearly
indicate what happens when the term of service ends for a Lead Ombudsperson
with unresolved cases.

It seems obvious that the draft intends to leave this policy for the
Ombudsteam to set, and I suppose that's adequate, but I think the draft
would be improved if Section 3.7 were to make explicit note of that. You
know, so as to remind the Ombudsteam that they really need to plan for
that, because it's a thing that will happen.

I can also imagine one scenario where the procedures in the draft might
become troubled.

Consider the case where a Reporter informs the Lead Ombudsperson they
believe another Ombudsperson should recuse themselves, then later, before
the case is resolved, that Lead Ombudsperson is removed from the
Ombudsteam. If that scenario happened to me, then I'd very much want to be
consulted in the selection of a replacement for the Lead Ombudsperson for
my case.

Perhaps Section 3.7 should say something to the effect that the Ombudsteam
shall in each case select a replacement for the Lead Ombudsperson from
among its members with the agreement of the Reporter.


-- 
james woodyatt <[e-mail]>
Nest Labs, Communications Engineering