Re: On harassment at IETF

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[e-mail]>]

Hi Sam, 
 

El 30/3/19 3:44, "ietf en nombre de Sam Hartman" <[e-mail] en nombre de [e-mail]> escribió:

    >>>>> "JORDI" == JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet=[e-mail]> writes:
    
        JORDI>    I don’t think this is something to be handled in private
        JORDI> messages.  Those cases should be publicly exposed and point
        JORDI> to specific names, so the rest of us take our own personal
        JORDI> decisions on those folks in addition to IETF actions.
    
    Please follow your own antiharassment procedure.  As Dave Crocker
    pointed out during the development of the BCP in question, there are
    some (non-addressed) problems with it.  Still, it's far better than what
    you propose above.

I'm not saying that, it was responding to an specific email, not as a general procedure.
    
    Victims of harassment often don't want their experience dragged through
    the consensus judgment process of the IETF.  Theey don't want the
    details of a difficult and painful experience exposed and debated on a
    public list.  Theyalmost certainly don't want to face the inevitable

The point is that if someone else was writing the email, it was clear to me that some people, not the victims necessarily, have that information, so they can expose it publicly in addition to the IETF procedure.

    victim blaiming and debating of whether they or the harasser are more
    reasonable.  They don't want to watch the debate about whether the
    harasser is so valuable to the organization that their behavior *has to
    be* accepted.
    
    And speaking from personal experience as a victim, some of the time you
    don't even want to see people dragged through the mud.  Some of the time
    people do improve and understand why what they are doing is
    problematic.  Or some of the time they are your friends and you just
    don't want to be the one who causes that mess to land on them.  And yes,
    you have to evaluate your silence against the potential that someone
    else will get hurt, and yes that tradeoff sucks.  But people make it
    every day.

I know, because when I was a kid, needed to take that decision as well in many occasions, and my take was I prefer to avoid "future issues to others even if this means more problems for me now".

    And denying them that option is both inconsistent with your policies and
    with approaching the realities of harassment/bullying with compassion.

Just to make it clear. I didn't denied anyone any option.
    
    I'd say that the last time I was tracking the IETF closely, it was
    behind the curve in approaching some of these issues.  Doubtless things
    are better now, but it seems inevitable that to some degree or another
    the sorts of problems I raise will  absolutely come up if details become
    public.
    Absolutely if victims want to come forward and tell their story, they
    should be able to do so.
    Demanding or expecting that lacks compassion.

I'm sorry if I was interpreted that way, but I didn't mean they MUST do it. One think that has a lot of difficulties for non-native English speakers is that the way we think and make our sentences is not always the perfect one for the native ones. I will love if the participants have this consideration at all the time. 
    
    I may sound a bit worked up here.  Debian has been facing similar issues
    where some names did come forward (at least in private) earlier this
    year.  Everything you can imagine happened.
    
    Or for another data point take a look at
    https://crystalhuff.com/2018/10/25/why-im-not-at-arisia-anymore-my-rapist-is-president-again/
    a frank and well written discussion of what happened to one victim who
    came forward and discussed her rape at the hands of one of the officers
    of a local science fiction convention.
    
    Thanks for your consideration,-
    
    --Sam
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.