Re: [Unwanted-trackers] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-dult-00-04: (with COMMENT)

[Jessie Lowell <[e-mail]>]

Hi Éric,

I just want to note (as someone who used to work at a program focused on LGBTQ+ intimate partner violence) that the gender-based violence framing doesn’t preclude same-sex couples and other situations with non-women survivors or non-men aggressors. Gender just influences those situations in a different way. For instance, in a couple with two women, one telling the other “Nobody will believe you if you say that a woman did this” or, if she is more feminine than her partner, counting on police to assume that in such a case the more masculine woman must be at fault. Or, regardless of the gender of the abusive person, a man may be targeted for violence and abuse for being perceived as effeminate/not conforming to societal expectations for men, or as an intended attack on his masculinity.

Best,
Jessie

From: Unwanted-trackers <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 8:49 AM
To: Roman Danyliw <[e-mail]>; The IESG <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Unwanted-trackers] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-dult-00-04: (with COMMENT)

Roman, The -05 is indeed much clearer and consistent with detailed intended status. While the main focus on gender-based violence must be kept (perhaps using intra-family wording if it exists in Engli
[cid:image001.png@01DA60BF.680DDD10]

External (evyncke=[e-mail]<mailto:evyncke=[e-mail]>)

[cid:image003.png@01DA60BF.680DDD10]





Roman,



The -05 is indeed much clearer and consistent with detailed intended status.



While the main focus on gender-based violence must be kept (perhaps using intra-family wording if it exists in English to be broader as there are same-sex couples), may I suggest leaving the door open to other source of expertise with "notably" or "mainly" or "first" ?



-éric



On 15/02/2024, 14:29, "Roman Danyliw" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:





Hi Éric!





Thanks for the review. More below.





> -----Original Message-----

> From: Unwanted-trackers <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>> On Behalf Of

> Éric Vyncke via Datatracker

> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 6:53 AM

> To: The IESG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>>

> Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>

> Subject: [Unwanted-trackers] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-dult-

> 00-04: (with COMMENT)

>

> Warning: External Sender - do not click links or open attachments unless you

> recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

>

>

> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for

> charter-ietf-dult-00-04: No Objection

>

> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email

> addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory

> paragraph, however.)

>

>

>

> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dult/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dult/>

>

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> COMMENT:

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> I do not see what "The WG will work with gender-based violence experts

> throughout development of the protocol" has to do in the list of program of

> work; may I suggest to move it at the end at the same place as discussions with

> Bluetooth SIG? Why limiting the interaction to only gender-based violence ?

>

>

> What is the intended status for "Design mechanisms to ensure that devices that

> do not correctly implement..." ?





With the insight of your review, Zahed's and a previous mailing list conversation, it is clear that the numbered list in the program of work caused confusion by mixing deliverables, and cross-cutting review activities and design properties that apply to the multiple bullet points prior. To convey this distinction in the new -05, I kept the text you referenced but removed it from the numbered list; and added text that these two items were broadly applicable to the standards track work described in the earlier text.





Others have commented the text related to coordination with gender-based violence group. I would add that this text and the prominence with which it was added is a direct result of BOF and ML discussions which considered it significant and distinct.





> The informal document in the milestones section does not appear in the

> "program of work", suggest to add it there as well.





Good point. A new item in the program of work has been added in -05.





Regards,

Roman











--

Unwanted-trackers mailing list

[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unwanted-trackers