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

[Dan Harkins <[e-mail]>]

On 10/1/22 9:37 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
> The systemic tragedy is that we've somehow reached a point where he 
> AND OTHERS feel that they have some kind of permission (or at least 
> entitlement) to abuse people trying to get work done in the IETF.

   What is this work that I objected to? I have never criticized any WG 
formation
to try and get work done. Please get work done! None of these "problematic"
emails are over anyone trying to do any technical work in the IETF.

   Every single issue raised by Lars has to do with other people either 
calling
someone racist, or saying that there is a systemic problem in the IETF 
wrt to
race, or ridiculous statements that the KKK is the biggest issue facing 
the IESG.
One was that the charter of a WG should discuss issues about race! All 
of this
stuff is far far away from the Internet or Engineering. I'm objecting to 
this
introduction of non-technical issues into the IETF.

   The problem is that many people think we've reached the point where they
feel it's OK (they feel entitled) to bring this racial nonsense into a 
technical
standards body. *That* is the problem.

   Dan.

> On 9/29/22 06:15, IETF Chair wrote:
>> Following community feedback after various incidents, as documented 
>> below, the
>> IESG has initiated a posting rights (PR) action that would restrict 
>> the posting
>> rights of Dan Harkins, as per the procedures found in BCP 83 (RFC 3683).
>> Specifically, his posting privileges to these lists would be suspended:
>>
>> * admin-discuss
>> * gendispatch
>> * ietf
>> * terminology
>>
>> In the IESG's opinion, this individual has a history of sending 
>> emails that are
>> inconsistent with the IETF Guidelines for Conduct (RFC 7154) and thereby
>> "disrupt the consensus-driven process" (RFC 3683). Among these are 
>> contributions
>> that:
>>
>> * Express racism in the form of denying, belittling, and ridiculing 
>> anti-racist
>>    sentiment and efforts
>>
>> * Are rude and abusive, and often amount to insulting ridicule
>>
>> (Links to examples of such emails sent to the lists above during the 
>> last two
>> years are provided at the end of this email.)
>>
>> Multiple attempts have been made to enter into a private discussion 
>> with this
>> individual, both by IESG and community members, to communicate 
>> disquiet with his
>> conduct on the lists. These attempts to restore respectful and 
>> courteous conduct
>> on the lists have been rebuffed with communication that can be 
>> considered both
>> antagonistic and hostile, and the pattern of behavior observed has 
>> continued.
>>
>> The IESG also notes that the following actions have already been 
>> taken in
>> response to the individual's actions:
>>
>> * Two I-Ds were removed from the public archive due to their 
>> offensive nature:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-les-white-intersectional-dots
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-les-white-tls-preferred-pronouns
>>    (following these links displays the tombstone notice explaining 
>> their removal)
>>
>> * His posting rights were restricted on the admin-discuss mailing list:
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/admin-discuss/ZANH2VPN-U8VMvvOWLb5l03FdCs/
>>
>> * A final public warning was issued on the gendispatch mailing list:
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/68a4amMa1aiaRUPzPGgXdiY9gHg/
>>
>> None of the attempts to discuss his participation style or warn the 
>> individual
>> have led to any improvements. The IESG therefore believes that a PR 
>> action is
>> the correct response to his continued problematic behavior across a 
>> number of
>> different lists.
>>
>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits 
>> final
>> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>> [e-mail] mailing lists by 27 October 2022. Exceptionally, 
>> comments may
>> be sent to [e-mail] instead. If sending private feedback to the 
>> IESG,
>> please indicate if you would be open to having your comments 
>> anonymized and
>> shared in a summary.
>>
>> Please note: Comments should be limited to the criteria described in 
>> BCP 83,
>> notably on whether the individual in question has engaged in postings 
>> that are
>> "unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject" in a 
>> manner
>> disruptive enough to warrant this action.
>>
>> Lars Eggert
>> IETF Chair, on behalf of the IESG
>> –-
>>
>> Examples of problematic emails during the last two years include:
>>
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/zdq3F0PV40Cyw5ooj0orOWaYyUw/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/i-d7HlWgrkmrVlC7JZQSXDwIJCQ/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/YhPI9zZ_3xfidt5V-ORRnET36yY/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/B33zk8VfOYt4b4Cj-kIHXG3AXdg/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/d3iDS4WNkCJA3aMFnX2HjP4tsps/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/-On8AHrdnnCMlJOOyb1M1nlYMpk/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/n6UMvDuYLKmmvpP1ajICFvf634M/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/QCdjDbokmlARcwVqQ1TV3Rlz7eQ/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/X6OF0MBKAzyLhYaAfAxS6srXRNw/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/idJhG1MsLmKHyRlaAafcW2JF6Z8/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/LoGSVatZ4EsYRq4K52rmvRZTndk/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/pl2lVqhtF4Z-0YuTjhCOmdyi1qE/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/DFgnF_j8py_eMBGI1IUFdMahTKw/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/T3oCpY3BbTNLXWAWsCnFvahRLUQ/
>> * 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/admin-discuss/xLuz4WTCm5ibIiMVN5ID8OWsCI0/
>>
>

-- 
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to
escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius