Re: Sam's text and way forward on the last call of draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt

[George Michaelson <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
> I'm going to agree strongly with Elliot and highlight something:
>
> "The COMMUNITY needs to be able to hold people accountable...."   This
> means, that its just not the Chair, the IESG or the IAOC's wheelhouse, but
> the rest of us get a say, especially if the Chair, IESG or IAOC is
> excluding itself from applicability.
>
> I made a suggestion elsewhere - I'm going to make it again.  We, as
> techies, are not even remotely qualified to be given the power of "life"
> and "death" in terms of excluding people from participation ("it may impact
> people's livelihood")  and adhoc training will not rectify this.
>
> Please, can we hire professionals?  Set the parameters, set the penalties
> (and have them apply to all); let the professionals deal with any issues
> that come up within those parameters; not involve the membership in any
> accusations of cross company, cross country, cross culture bias; and avoid
> internal witch hunts.
>
> Mike
>
> I agree with Michael. My early posts on this topic in previous years were
to the same sentiment: all kinds of bodies in the public eye have
harassment process, and I believe they go to competent agents who
specialise in this field, and get clue.

Why do we always pretend the IETF process is the best process for
everything? I'm pretty sure when we stop doing emails and critique of
drafts, we do things which engage with real-world activity which depend on
competent professionals. I do it all the time. I don't expect to be able to
fix every problem by invoking some ritualized process simply because I have
that process.

We need to stop recursing over this and get skills in.

-George