[Mod-discuss] Re: Moderator Team Procedures - For Community Input

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

We have running code for this. A particular recent offender did something very similar perhaps fifteen years ago, possibly twenty. So I would argue for a longer memory, not a shorter memory. People who feel entitled to be abusive on IETF mailing lists certainly can change, but history shows that they usually don't, and this has real costs for the IETF. 

On Thu, Oct 22, 2026, at 3:22 AM, Nathanael Ritz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> At first blush, a "rap sheet" with a 5 year memory seems like a long time. However, I don't really have any specific reason why I might suggest something different like 2 years beyond personal feelings. I'm sure this number was discussed at length and hasn't been chosen arbitrarily.
> 
> > Scope
> >
> > These procedures apply to all public online IETF forums, as described in Section 3 of RFC9945: mailing lists, chat groups, and other systems that the IETF or its working groups have chosen to use, such as GitHub repositories, wikis, and issue trackers.
> 
> Are WG chairs expected to moderate GitHub repositories themselves, or would participants expect or be expected to bring up a specific conduct concern on a place like GH to the WG specific chairs' email alias? I ask because I assume that often it would or should be unnecessary to bring up every potential "incident" on the mailing list due to the nature of the communication medium, but I could imagine blind spots are more likely off IETF hosted infra.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nathanael
> _______________________________________________
> Mod-discuss mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>