On 10 Nov 2022, at 19:50, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
(Note that the anti-harassment policy is scoped: "IETF participants
must not engage in harassment while at IETF meetings, virtual
meetings, social events, or on mailing lists." Maybe that needs to be
slightly extended to cover other IETF communication media.)
Note that the Anti-Harassment Procedures are part of BCP 25 and define
the actions of the Ombudsteam, not BCP 83 and therefore do not
necessarily apply to communications subject to a PR-Action we are
talking about in this thread. However, to address the bit of ambiguity
in 7776 that Brian refers to, the document says:
...[RFC7154] provides a set
of guidelines for personal interaction in the IETF, and [RFC2418]
and
[RFC3934] give guidelines for how to deal with disruptive behavior
that occurs in the context of IETF working group face-to-face
meetings and on mailing lists.
However, there is other problematic behavior that may be more
personal and that can occur in the context of IETF activities
(meetings, mailing list discussions, or social events) that does not
directly disrupt working group progress but nonetheless is
unacceptable behavior between IETF Participants.
The phrase "in the context of" gets used further down as well:
In general, disruptive behavior that occurs in the context of an
IETF
general or working group mailing list, or happens in a face-to-face
or virtual meeting of a working group or the IETF plenary, can be
dealt with by our normal procedures, whereas harassing behavior is
more appropriately handled by the procedures described here.
However, there are plausible reasons to address behaviors that take
place during working group meetings using these procedures.
When the draft of this document was discussed by the IETF list (in Last
Call and prior), examples given in the discussion included things like
misbehavior in the hotel bar after sessions were done for the day, or in
the hall before or after a meeting, and certainly private email
exchanges that came out of a public WG mailing list exchange.
(References to particular email messages in that discussion can be
provided upon request.) I have always understood "in the context of" to
include such private email messages or after-hours in-person activities,
and I believe that was the understanding of those who discussed it
during Last Call.
But again, this doesn't apply to the BCP 83 discussion on the table.
pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best
