IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 09 March 2015 21:00 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 981651ACD57 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 14:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 C_QTEM39WbG1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 14:00:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x236.google.com (mail-pa0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 020471ACD55 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 14:00:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pabrd3 with SMTP id rd3so51535821pab.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Mar 2015 14:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=pIcAaYSGajb83eeKwB3/NUB1vmDnlVOrR70br7OK6Jg=; b=BZ7bBy57rHAAzes3XVi0aKRcSKcHHbFEoPO4wNYqGma+8e36aiwKeZaVwAHWkV9saf kv+6w2Rr3NUlAsB5mPD1nn7abHxFCqszjgxaeN070cSl4Y2Kv+7eCSjjQa1Sp8x9YtWz SQnyydSZ6tB14wa30J7+W5cOHQFO8XiXAd1lK9VgVFnA5OAl9KB1+G4ye9134QyX9i3J a+RWy1kiX/PNq7g7YIfDYohLo7kaFT5fOH3/vWqtZMTSJTfrZ8/U/29Fbw5jznxHKvgN 61CVl64bkxzh5gmFyt3X1X5KFlAYPEHn8Zi1REXbBW5aop8t4B0/DUvWwr8LcBNTVSTN OHEg==
X-Received: by 10.66.218.168 with SMTP id ph8mr57795718pac.95.1425934810648; Mon, 09 Mar 2015 14:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.1.9.163] ([103.23.18.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id s4sm20633748pdc.61.2015.03.09.14.00.05 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Mar 2015 14:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <54FE09D7.90806@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:00:07 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice
References: <20150116152211.25947.49086.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAK3OfOib=YwpW3sM04Wg0+vf3m+eykO1H2Kwxa_rRvnmdym=Ww@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK3OfOib=YwpW3sM04Wg0+vf3m+eykO1H2Kwxa_rRvnmdym=Ww@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/MnyaqDwJZ6I5FY3ERcQkqCDGZJA>
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: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 21:00:12 -0000

On 10/03/2015 09:36, Nico Williams wrote:
> Have there been harassment cases in the IETF, using the definition
> given in the I-D?

We'll never know, because there was no procedure in place to handle them.
I have certainly heard anonymous stories of unpleasant behaviour.

On 10/03/2015 09:42, Michael StJohns wrote:
> It would be useful to distribute that written assessment from the 
> insurance and liability folks to the list or at least publish it.

In general I am all for such transparency. But actually, I don't
think it would serve the IETF well in this case to publish the
analysis of hypothetical litigation - it would simply feed free
legal advice to hypothetical litigators.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email