At 10:35 AM 3/20/2015, John C Klensin wrote: >In that sense, an "applicable law" provision changes nothing >because its presence or absence does not restrict the issues >that can be raised. I want to nit this a bit. The problem with the applicable law provision is that it blurs the line between what's important to the IETF (e.g. directed harassment of pretty much any color that affects the standards process) with a whole lot of things that can "legally" be considered harassment depending on time, place and participant(s). If it affects the IETF process, we raise it internally and we resolve it with the remedies at hand (mediation, separation and exclusion). If its also (or only) a "legal" issue, we direct the affected participants to engage elsewhere and keep our mitts out of that part of it. I would say that John's example is pretty much the definition of directed harassment affecting the standards process. However, the mere fact that participant A insults participant B is not necessarily an IETF issue (and I'm glad of this or many of us on this list would have already been excluded). Doing so in a manner that prevents B from fully participating in the IETF probably is. Mike