IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Mon, 09 March 2015 19:50 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 7CF581AC3DF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 12:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 WBrfnoURT7jo for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 12:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E051AC3CE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 12:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66DE2CFF5; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 21:50:18 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lstRsKHEoi0D; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 21:50:18 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0882CFC9; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 21:50:18 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9851A252-DF7E-418E-BB09-94841ED8BF33"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <20150117174430.9A0471ACE15@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 21:50:18 +0200
Message-Id: <275BDAE9-2855-44E8-852D-009A15CE8892@piuha.net>
References: <20150116152211.25947.49086.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150117174430.9A0471ACE15@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/UOle-JiS1CQ0cTDki7SwcN32Ze0>
Cc: 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: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 19:50:23 -0000

Hi Mike,

> Has either or both of the ISOC and IETF trust lawyers reviewed this, especially section 5?

We have asked for and received from outside counsel and the ISOC insurance folks a risk assessment. 

For what it is worth, we’ve been told that there’s probably also (more) risk associated with not having this procedure in place :-)

In any case, after a discussion and feedback we revised some of the text in Section 2 and 5.1. From my perspective we are ready to move forward.

Jari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email