IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Sergeant-at-arms engagement model

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 11 October 2019 19:39 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63EFD120096; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:39:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 fidASwVlWHIQ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) (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 A316A12002E; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id 23so6367079pgk.3; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=YceEqFOG5XU6YHQMTeLIMEYKniPNZ4OBcloQfSvZpNA=; b=PZToaeQyNPe2AyHVMvctWjXWp8dv+ZNt6dPTNwxhudOc3hW29dwz+x7bTcT6YTZdek oa9PJ6PTDH1nCjncG0Nhy+/C9v7ptGLL7WekZeEN5ywxihDlOxcw0D7jdWLHUR0C38Wl iwQY6w7/lcc1k5Iz3VpZd9dloJPygHnnyWIhTFAaYHoJ6rwcq9q7qeuvB9LcIqgYc5en bOEKRWWPtzJ/RvZwVEnH+cgrVfw6chwUNC2BRvWosqUmZB4jpyUv1Gv7vZwQN+CRIozw RDa89lLcwI0sID8/XaFwCDWTuRjDCCqhywhTPVYwGgZglCxrPebqJ4iPRbUXMcfes0da qUjA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=YceEqFOG5XU6YHQMTeLIMEYKniPNZ4OBcloQfSvZpNA=; b=enMzmxNqnZLVy6/rCK4Jwn/WiD+tdoUlDzCNeE3eH6W3+f9VMdGj1Ak24z+I22VmGw L/z5WxEAASYu8UtW4q6m45Yes4colNuZNdxw2Bi2dLWALVQTNGDJJ5j3Ne/ZbmPPNLkY lQu3IkmcWJg5tI2ipImK0Sa9tGjQVNCtDTDgVl1Aj6eODjp9og/YfNFMMhIwW1bRcnqH FVcIbgaRZ1CaJsbT/QdgjQrdCFFg9fDhqUwgVWSk07wxzLe8S8r7hPTsuO9f44nUj+ZU /dO1bihrYXXZJhSATTrmVM0ZhDuKDdbt3UEewQZUCTwWK+WKHkMdQcT2WqdTDAANuggs 1zpA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXYCpwsGQGSJx+visp2txwOL1nY9IhTaktfxWTHxmFBuo3LaktE ZtHdsOX0pNbX/umpOg/jOcvy3D+A
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzWZe6lP7mQ+nN7aGX9UP47EXZGU33aXlMe96PbaVLTpiUpP+MLczlMyHvF59t00XLhn4YDow==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:5c21:: with SMTP id q33mr453175pgb.78.1570822753353; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] (233.148.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.148.233]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p190sm12208158pfb.160.2019.10.11.12.39.10 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:39:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Sergeant-at-arms engagement model
To: IETF Sergeant-at-Arms <saa@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <9CC87E00-FFFD-44C1-ABD8-ED69C07F4561@ietf.org>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d36843ff-950d-34e7-5841-e0301f03c4e2@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 08:39:10 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9CC87E00-FFFD-44C1-ABD8-ED69C07F4561@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/WrvosRy5pHdOfX-UeqgKt3jgYhg>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 11 Oct 2019 19:39:17 -0000

I appreciate this effort, but I do have some doubts about:

> ...file GitHub issues or send us email at < saa@ietf.org <mailto:saa@ietf.org> > with your feedback.

as feedback mechanisms for what is genuinely a topic for everyone on this list. So I prefer to comment here. Also I hope we'll see the final version on the ietf.org site.

There's a basic issue that should probably be recognised somehow in the text: in the end, *all* decisions in this area are subjective. unprofessional-commentary.md attempts to define the subjective term "unprofessional" but relies on various subjective terms:  insulting, excessively hostile (BTW, that implies that some amount of hostility is OK), hurtful, disruptive. I think we already have evidence that people disagree about the threshold for these terms. So like it or not, the judgment is in the end subjective (and that's why, IMHO, it's good that we have an SAA team rather than an individual).

A nit while I'm here: doxxing really isn't a subset of violence. It's a different category of unacceptable.

In sop.md, under "Immediate escalation in egregious cases", I think it should be strengthened to allow immediate escalation to level 2 (an immediate posting ban) in some cases. I'm pretty sure an immediate ban has been used in the past against behaviour that amounted to a DOS against the list. We don't want to unintentionally rule that out.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email