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

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 11 March 2015 13:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
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 EB1071A92A9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 j_np0EF4nYuF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:41:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com (mail-wi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]) (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 D4DDB1A9245 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:41:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wiwl15 with SMTP id l15so39100873wiw.4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:41:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=+0VK2IMvD3kJ7YnGGPCbNWvdjkytYPYiGPcq+hbRnx0=; b=cVWo+/QzP5TBpfxV9/l5vhGmMmgs4Tr7VWwCGFjhOmbrJRp6lO89H3KmEGfW+RWWvb I/3M0Cfyd/dyArxl07FlR1vX2ADU2sYxNvJI2VNlHSc7EjMdc/+AM3yUjl2JidVNpdtj BeDW3ZjscM1GqnywVyGVdXijmK6RGhicUm/3hT9Wkt9b5E9gncqbfJldeMr7QScHVXmJ o/2aIAH0szpFS24Jd78qvH9f9bKxrqFu+BE0mXp4hNE9J6YAbg1H+66pZ5b9eS8sNnMZ DSG+A4ic1da25wyx+CqQ2bwtff3MkTQERBvFRPgU3pGBwgQJ9X7O114xoaelBU7fA4xL xwEA==
X-Received: by 10.180.81.7 with SMTP id v7mr9577781wix.27.1426081300614; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:41:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.24.249.226] (dyn32-131.checkpoint.com. [194.29.32.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 17sm5467727wjt.45.2015.03.11.06.41.39 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <55000EB7.40905@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 15:41:36 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B5A69EA7-E30E-4036-855E-27EAE410198C@gmail.com>
References: <20150116152211.25947.49086.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150117174430.9A0471ACE15@ietfa.amsl.com> <275BDAE9-2855-44E8-852D-009A15CE8892@piuha.net> <54FEAF51.4060807@cisco.com> <CADhXe53QecMRgxwe9x7RbMZUk9ec90WU_3G1Xc1qX_fB4UFUkA@mail.gmail.com> <021201d05b78$70c13de0$5243b9a0$@olddog.co.uk> <3740BE65-0C21-4120-B9A4-EAE93E57F8E9@piuha.net> <55000EB7.40905@cisco.com>
To: stbryant@cisco.com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/hwg2yt6r_TiYqty0kknT3Cei5jI>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk, 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: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:41:45 -0000

> On Mar 11, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> On 10/03/2015 21:59, Jari Arkko wrote:
>> I wanted to say that I’m in agreement with Adrian on this. Ultimately,
>> no list will be complete, some judgment needs to apply, and I
>> think we’ve covered this in the text better than if we attempted
>> to expand the list.
>> 
>> (And I am, of course, in agreement with Stewart that things that
>> he lists are definitely important and certainly should not be misused
>> in any professional discussion.)
>> 
>> Jari
>> 
> Jari
> 
> I fail to see why the IETF which has no significant expertise
> in this area has chosen to make up its own list rather than
> using one put together by professionals.
> 
> I did not just think up those additional items, they are part
> of a list that experts on the subject put together for
> example:
> 
> http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

This kind of list is always based on bad experience. Such lists never include blood type or hair color for the simple reason that these attributes have not been used as a basis for discrimination or harassment (dumb blonde jokes aside). 

This particular list is based on the experience in Europe, perhaps even more specifically in the UK. The experience within the IETF may be far different.

Is there age discrimination in the IETF? Does age need to be a protected characteristic? I could honestly ask the same question for most of the other characteristics in that list.On the other hand that list does not include characteristics such as employment and nationality that are very likely to come up in the IETF.

We’ve had a call to remove a chair in the IRTF based on his employer last year, and people are often judged based on how “cool” their employer is (Google and Cisco are cool. Microsoft? Not so much) as well as based on their country (Russia is not cool right now. Finland always is)

So I don’t think that list is appropriate for us.

Yoav