* IETF Chair wrote: >IETF Anti-Harassment Policy So, someone who is being disciplined under this policy might want to check it out to see how they might appeal such action, or how they can ensure their continued access to the Standards process, or they might simply want to make sure they are being treated fairly and within the bounds of standard procedure. The policy contains nothing to that effect. A chair might find themself in a situation where they have to deal with harassment and check out the policy to see how they should deal with it, whether they should handle the matter on their own, or if they should refer it to an ombudsperson, or whatever. The policy notes the existing power granted to chairs, but then just says harassment "warrants special attention" without elaborating. An ombudsperson might refer to the policy to see how they can deal with harassment problems, or they might want to refer others to it, e.g. to make others aware of their discretion and power, or when taking action against someone, inform them of their rights to defend against actions they find inappropriate. The policy just says "appropriate action will be taken". Instead, the policy goes to excessive lengths telling people they should maintain behavioral norms. I think it is appropriate in such a policy to establish some context, but going at it for too long makes it seem as if something extraordinary is being asked of participants, as if it said "Unlike other organisations, the IETF strives to create and maintain..." I think the prelude should be shortened to be bare minimum, and instead text of the nature discussed above should be added; possibly by way of external references, e.g. if an RFC concerning the rights and responsi- bilities of IETF ombudspersons is forthcoming, a reference to that would address some concerns. I believe this can be done in few sentences. >Harassment is unwelcome hostile or intimidating behavior, in particular speech >and behavior that is sexually aggressive or intimidates based on attributes like >race, gender, religion, age, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, >sexual orientation, or gender identity. Harassment of this sort will not be >tolerated in the IETF. Harassment includes the use of offensive language or >sexual imagery in public presentations and displays, degrading verbal comments, >deliberate intimidation, stalking, harassing photography or recording, >inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention. I strongly object to listing "sexual imagery" here unless accompanied by a much longer list that includes violent imagery, imagery of aggressive or otherwise dangerous animals, death, illness, medical imagery, and whatever else people might find intimidating, say Fort Meade engulfed in lightning in a violent thunderstorm and the eye of Sauron montaged on top of it. I think "use of offensive language" should not be considered harassment without linking it to purpose, intent, and other limiting factors. It is common that people use language considered offensive by some unknowingly e.g. due to cultural differences, limited language skills, or youth. The beginning of this paragraph can also easily be read to suggest that mere "unwelcome hostile speech" falls under the definition without additional qualifiers. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@xxxxxxxxxxxx · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/