> On Mar 30, 2019, at 7:58 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Sam, > > Many thanks. I had been trying to figure out how best to > respond to Jordi's note but you have covered everything I would > have wanted to say and far better than I could have done so. +1 Thanks to Sam, Brian, and others for your responses. Alissa > > --On Friday, March 29, 2019 22:43 -0400 Sam Hartman > <hartmans-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>>>> "JORDI" == JORDI PALET MARTINEZ >>>>>>> <jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> JORDI> I don't think this is something to be handled >> in private >> JORDI> messages. Those cases should be >> publicly exposed and point >> JORDI> to specific names, so >> the rest of us take our own personal >> JORDI> decisions on >> those folks in addition to IETF actions. > >> Please follow your own antiharassment procedure. As Dave >> Crocker pointed out during the development of the BCP in >> question, there are some (non-addressed) problems with it. >> Still, it's far better than what you propose above. >> >> Victims of harassment often don't want their experience >> dragged through the consensus judgment process of the IETF. >> Theey don't want the details of a difficult and painful >> experience exposed and debated on a public list. Theyalmost >> certainly don't want to face the inevitable victim blaiming >> and debating of whether they or the harasser are more >> reasonable. They don't want to watch the debate about whether >> the harasser is so valuable to the organization that their >> behavior *has to be* accepted. >> >> And speaking from personal experience as a victim, some of the >> time you don't even want to see people dragged through the >> mud. Some of the time people do improve and understand why >> what they are doing is problematic. Or some of the time they >> are your friends and you just don't want to be the one who >> causes that mess to land on them. And yes, you have to >> evaluate your silence against the potential that someone else >> will get hurt, and yes that tradeoff sucks. But people make it >> every day. >> And denying them that option is both inconsistent with your >> policies and with approaching the realities of >> harassment/bullying with compassion. >> >> I'd say that the last time I was tracking the IETF closely, it >> was behind the curve in approaching some of these issues. >> Doubtless things are better now, but it seems inevitable that >> to some degree or another the sorts of problems I raise will >> absolutely come up if details become public. >> Absolutely if victims want to come forward and tell their >> story, they should be able to do so. >> Demanding or expecting that lacks compassion. >> >> I may sound a bit worked up here. Debian has been facing >> similar issues where some names did come forward (at least in >> private) earlier this year. Everything you can imagine >> happened. >> >> Or for another data point take a look at >> https://crystalhuff.com/2018/10/25/why-im-not-at-arisia-anymor >> e-my-rapist-is-president-again/ a frank and well written >> discussion of what happened to one victim who came forward and >> discussed her rape at the hands of one of the officers of a >> local science fiction convention. >> >> Thanks for your consideration,- >> >> --Sam > > > >
