Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On 10/5/22 05:32, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:

> I think the real problem is not the attack on one individual (that is 
> a respond not attack), nor is it that the attacker is in power (who is 
> in power should react to make progress), but *the problem* is : that 
> there are many participants are feeling bad (they have 
> private-complains and want works/discussions to progress without many 
> individuals leaving the community) of such behavior in IETF, and there 
> are few happy with such behavior, the IESG as leader has to respond to 
> such request from community to solve *the problem*, the IESG tried 
> alot with the individual but no change for two years, IESG has used no 
> power to attack for two years. Now we need to have the respond from 
> the community.

With respect, I think the problem is that leadership has itself 
contributed to a toxic environment, and is now attacking someone for 
reacting to that toxicity.

I don't know specifically what IESG tried to do to remedy the perceived 
situation with Dan before starting this PR action.   But I know from my 
experience on IESG that almost anything an AD says can be taken as a 
threat, no matter how carefully it's said.   So I'm convinced that IESG 
are not in the right position to address the problem.  I'm not sure if 
any part of IETF is in the right position, because in my experience 
other mechanisms like the ombudsteam and SAAs/moderators seem to lack 
both the independence and the training that I believe are essential to 
resolve situations like this.

I've also observed a definite shift toward toxicity in this organization 
over the past few years (I'd have to look at my notes to see when I 
first noticed it).   What I saw clearly came from the leadership, not 
from ordinary participants.

At least from my perspective, BCP 83 should never have even been 
considered as a remedy for this perceived problem.   Maybe IESG felt it 
was the only tool that they had from existing processes. I appreciate 
that they did follow process, but I think this experience has 
demonstrated that it's not the right tool for this kind of situation.

Keith