Re: Proposed IETF Anti-Harassment Policy

Bjoern Hoehrmann <> Wed, 23 October 2013 17:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B0F011E813A for <>; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 10:52:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.118
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.119, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Eklc1yyK3CB8 for <>; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 10:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1E511E8145 for <>; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 10:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from netb.Speedport_W_700V ([]) by (mrgmx102) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0M5r89-1VtKVh3hY9-00xoO7 for <>; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 19:52:13 +0200
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <>
To: Theodore Ts'o <>
Subject: Re: Proposed IETF Anti-Harassment Policy
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 19:52:14 +0200
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:2wQG8B11eX3dQl4ugi4NFFEeyq+tISjXt0+noBLu2mqqYuCujLC Pg5UpA0YkG+KS0vTkJheiKaHfXoDhcLsB0E0ZR+YduO7BM4GDk03ctLUeXfPG0P8cPlFZ4t 0CeRYQfMTmfZBuYbPPU0blfJUiGydjQUI6fj94GiSHBO05yyQycCAfkHRelXoywSgSF1qB6 Dan4qcKkz7RUBlD/sUt+Q==
Cc: "<>" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 17:52:18 -0000

* Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>What about a slide presentation in a wg discussion in perpass which
>included the following image?
>Bjoern Hoehrmann has already asserted he believes it would be
>considered harassment.

I think that people can legitimately feel personally threatened and
disturbed, to the point where they require protection, by imagery.

An example would be decorating the perpass meeting room with graphic
posters of extrajudicially killed surveillance victims which might
induce fear in some participants and effectively censor them. It is
fair to regulate that to ensure proper debates are possible, though
I do not think it is necessary or useful to specifically call out
imagery in this sense, and the image above obviously doesn't qualify.

The problem is that the proposed policy does not call out violence,
disease, death, poisonous animals or other things that are harmful
to people, it only mentions "sexual imagery". For the United States that
may be normal and I can live with including it in such a policy, but
certainly not in a way that suggests sexual imagery deserves special
Björn Höhrmann · ·
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 ·
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 ·