RE: "professional" in an IETF context

[Andrew Campling <[e-mail]>]

On 10/31/21 17:45, Keith Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Lately I've been asking myself how I would define "professional" in an IETF context.  What I've come up with so far is (no particular order):
> 
> 1. Be competent and well-prepared.
> 2. Let people with appointed roles do their jobs.  It's okay to publicly and respectfully object when you believe they've not done their jobs properly, and there are various remedies like appeals that can also be used.   But it's not ok to try to prevent them from doing their jobs.
> 3. Follow the Guidelines For Conduct.
> 4. Treat fellow participants as equals in technical discussions (while respecting any appointed roles they have in IETF), regardless of their day jobs (or lack thereof) or who they work for.
> 5. Whatever you’re working on, try to help build consensus or craft or find a compromise that can attract broad support.  Again you’re free to withhold support or to point out problems with a proposal, you’re free to offer alternative proposals, and/or to appeal formal decisions, but not to obstruct discussion. State/log your objections and move on (But you should have a reasonable expectation that such objections will not be forgotten and be reviewed again at last call time).

These points seem like a helpful way to expand on "civil", using that as a better option than "professional" - you could add "be kind" as a sixth point.

> As for ethics, I'm reminded that when I earned an engineering degree I was encouraged to take a solemn oath to always act with regard for public safety.   In the Internet context I might argue that there's a duty to act with regard for the security and privacy needs of the public.

A reference to RFC 8890, the Internet is for End Users, never goes amiss, especially with its comments about multistakeholder engagement etc.  IMHO end users seem to be absent from many (most?) discussions; their needs and the impact on them of any proposals ought to be a required section in Internet Drafts and given as much attention as, for example, security considerations.


Andrew