I suspect if it was just about appointing and training some ombudsperson(s), who could talk to the people involved after someone feels harassed, and the first couple of situations were resolved to the satisfaction of all involved, I'm sure no one will complain. However, it's said that hard cases make bad law, and the potential problem will come when someone claims harassment, and objective outsiders either feel that it clearly wasn't harassment, or it was at best borderline, and in the worst case, the person who claims harassment attempts to try the case in the court of public opinion, and demands that, per the policy, that the claimed offender be banned from all IETF activities going forward. It will be at that point, where the IESG gets asked to enforce sanctions, where the lack of predefined processes could end up turning this into a huge mess. I'm sure that we all hope that we don't end up in this corner case. But hopefully, the IESG has thought about how it would plan to respond in cases where a quick intervention and discussion with the affected parties from the ombudsperson isn't sufficient to resolve the dispute. - Ted