IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D.farrresnickel-harassment - timebomb

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 20 March 2015 03:38 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 8216C1B2AF7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:37 -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 z3hClZ8kpNCK for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:36 -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 CF48D1A1A87 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a110.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a110.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45292005E809 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:36 -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=HPxAV1XEjGd1/4r1WWtk Ys2Rmr4=; b=r0r77oG3c0682Z57P7/jSM7U9VeKMG2we0KZ2a6JDad6+6qwZ716 iDOe+hWrfrJ31WjhhUbVpIaKlLPA+UCQkFFUmcaszXlMXL/Ro2OKQlxNRxOPYGiw Z1mteCc106CE9c9xmh0pJ4xYykGlDWobKTWsZd6yy/Fk3DqIbeXZ0KY=
Received: from mail-ig0-f177.google.com (mail-ig0-f177.google.com [209.85.213.177]) (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 928FA2005E807 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by igbud6 with SMTP id ud6so43180272igb.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.36.104 with SMTP id p8mr1909059igj.16.1426822716223; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.130.66 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <550B9409.5080002@gmail.com>
References: <20150319195418.9718E1A8846@ietfa.amsl.com> <550B4046.3060900@qti.qualcomm.com> <9dc66f0de071c3d8f46b731eed539b17.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <550B4A90.7000206@joelhalpern.com> <6933DA1BE3550428786D874C@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <20150320025340.GH21267@localhost> <550B9409.5080002@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 22:38:36 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOjC4r6E62HfhA2h7oV+s86bbM3AwZi9=QRtpvbO9b2RUg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: I-D.farrresnickel-harassment - timebomb
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/SCWkeqgAJXuuRn5v5Sr9Bqsf_YE>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <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 03:38:37 -0000

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nico,
>
> On 20/03/2015 15:53, Nico Williams wrote:
> ...
>> There must be better ways to draft text to obtain such protection.
>
> IANAL. As far as I know, YANAL. So I don't see how either of us
> could really make that assertion. If there's a jurisdiction where
> accusing somebody of not being a lawyer is considered to be harassment,
> a way of keeping the matter out of the courts of that jurisdiction
> is for the person who's been accused of not being a lawyer to
> invoke the Ombudsteam. This works regardless of geography.

Elsewhere I explain that we must be able to judge the lawyers' output.
We cannot simply take it, no questions asked.

An IETF process is insufficient for keeping a harassment case out of
the courts if the IETF process itself produces a controversy such as
might cause one to file a civil lawsuit.  A process with the faults I
listed is not confidence inspiring.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email