On Saturday, February 22, 2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
Hi KeithMy comments below,On Saturday, February 22, 2014, Keith Moore wrote:On 02/21/2014 08:19 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry wrote:
In my view, a successful harassment policy needs to do two things:
1) Clearly establish what is unacceptable behavior.
2) Clearly indicate whom to go to for help.
Section 4 satisfies (2) adequately. This statement, however, indicates that you are punting on (1).
IMHO the Requirement 1 is a must, to give good reasons for some penalties.While I understand the desire to do (1), in my experience with discussing harassment policies in other organizations it has been a rathole, or at least a slippery slope.Yes, but only because societies still don't solve it when interacting with other cultures or minorities. Usually organisations should build a strong culture related to its vision and policies. In countries, organisations, universities, etc. they encourage establishing of clubs/societies to make people interact under social goals or activities (do we have social societies in IETF?) I think that is missing or I am not aware because was remotely working.
IETF has engineering reasoning goal in its decisions and it should not allow any type of clubs that may try to influence decisions against IETF visions.
I know that there is a social event in meetings and hopefully will try to join if I get availability time in this meeting.While it's not too hard to identify a few obviously harassing or abusive behaviors, it can be very hard to draw a bright line between acceptable and unacceptable behaviors in general.Yes it is very hard for engineers, so we need external advise which is very good for this best practice work.
The IETF already is organised to guide its processes to the best of its visions and goals, so if small clubs interfere that vision signal and goal channel, then the IETF should guide those clubs socially.
AB