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

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 20 March 2015 19:44 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 A72F31A6FFE; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.044
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.044 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no
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 zyqcpuV_E1vV; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a110.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECEF61B3023; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a110.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a110.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7B42005E80F; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=GbDORlAhvTOxod9FZ+mw cfBv5ms=; b=SMtUGnoSkltAxfKSuXr6nIHLfq7YrujYRBACxeRflmpjsQCwX3fp 18f5oZUmLytdoGTq1brJ7WuOCg12Qm7cM6yGOdN8o9CNEtSrnbJBN1QKigR8HWIV YkwDqWfB3X4DoK14THu7aEguh6ptBh2x6NlDWQvlgd7ineun9m0BcC8=
Received: from mail-ig0-f181.google.com (mail-ig0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a110.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 255FF2005E80E; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by igbud6 with SMTP id ud6so595577igb.1; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.85.82 with SMTP id p18mr6589481icl.58.1426880640524; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.130.66 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5503BF22.5020902@gmail.com>
References: <20150116152211.25947.49086.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150117174430.9A0471ACE15@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150306163724.GA32205@verdi> <tsl385im2yp.fsf@mit.edu> <781553AA-EA2C-4057-9888-491C80A780DA@piuha.net> <54FE045D.3080606@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslr3sxep1l.fsf@mit.edu> <54FE6297.4090008@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslzj7i2wid.fsf@mit.edu> <55019E72.4090004@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslfv9a2t6p.fsf@mit.edu> <36671C44-DE53-4AC9-B8EA-465BF97B2FDB@piuha.net> <tsly4n0zo6g.fsf@mit.edu> <550350C4.9040201@qti.qualcomm.com> <5503914A.7060209@gmail.com> <5503BF22.5020902@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:44:00 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOjw+_PDqpy_TbDL1fBFi+4ALdnf58gijr+FDLknjLeb=w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/FQG_qLlrlBaVYnrczStw15PO14g>
Cc: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, IETF Discussion List <ietf@ietf.org>
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 19:44:02 -0000

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> For the recallable positions, the situation is much more tricky
> because a recall petition needs 20 signatories and is announced.
> Let's get real : if that happens, the confidentiality *will* be
> breached.

Thanks for noticing this.  We can't promise much confidentiality when
outcomes are public.  We should promise no more confidentiality than
we're required to by applicable law or than would be afforded by a
legal proceeding, except in the case where outcomes can be kept
private (mainly: successful mediation).  Due process too limits the
degree to which we can promise confidentiality.

As I see it, if I complain about harassment to the Ombudsteam then
they owe me confidentiality for my complaint if mediation succeeds.
Respondent may not get all the details and might be enjoined to afford
me confidentiality as well to avoid more public outcomes.  Beyond that
is a slippery slope that ends with all laundry in public at the most
extreme (legal discovery).

Nico
--