Re: BCP 83 PR actions and new media

[Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>]

I do not see how the IETF can take any role or position regarding 
private communication.  One can argue that private communication may be 
relevant evidence for judging public behavior, but that is very tricky.

Yours,

Joel

On 11/10/2022 5:11 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
> On 11/10/22 03:25, Lars Eggert wrote:
>
>> PR actions per BCP 83 can only be used in response to on-list 
>> behavior. I agree this is far from ideal as our participation 
>> channels have multiplied.
> Right, I was asking about what "should" be the case, since there seems 
> to be some interest in revising BCP 83.   I'm not sure what I 
> personally believe should be the case, since I think there's some 
> utility in people being able to speak their minds freely, and private 
> communications are less likely to be disruptive than public 
> communications.   On the other hand, in recent years it has seemed 
> that sometimes people collaborate to pressure or even harass people 
> via private email, and on occasion this practice even seems to have 
> been driven by management.   If nothing else such a practice lacks 
> transparency.
>
>> If you feel you are being harassed as an IETF participant in general 
>> and/or in ways other than on mailing lists, please see the IETF 
>> Anti-Harassment Policy [1], i.e., contact the IESG or - if privacy is 
>> a concern - the ombudsteam [2].
>
> I'm aware of those mechanisms, but in my limited experience with them 
> they've worked rather poorly, and (at least at that time) were clearly 
> not operated independently of IETF management.
>
> Keith
>
>