Re: Sergeant-at-arms engagement model

Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> · Fri, 11 Oct 2019 18:55:51 -0400



    On 10/11/2019 12:31 PM, Rob Sayre
      wrote:

    
        On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:54 PM Eric Rescorla
          <ekr@xxxxxxxx>
          wrote:

        
              I see that there are a bunch of open issues in the
                "Unprofessional Commentary" definition. Can you say more
                about how you plan to evolve that?
            
          
          Yeah, the Github page contains a circular definition (one
            instance of "Unprofessional Commentary" is "Unprofessional
            Commentary"...)
          

          What are the boundaries around raising issues that are
            sure to offend some set of people? For example, the IETF's
            use of Github might be objectionable to some:
          https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-10/microsoft-employees-call-to-end-github-ice-contract

          
          I think the rules are pretty clear when someone is
            spamming / swearing / etc.
          

          thanks,
          Rob
        
      
     Please see my commentary on "respectful" "professional" and
      "considerate" at the end of
      https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/2KfRrnvmpra7BDKICXsfQW1G7Rk
      as well as my comments on SAA do's and don'ts at
      https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/pKBtsdVwLY3k8dkml3Wy3oANAJU. 
      You've addressed only 1 of my 9 points (#2)

    
    One of the issues we keep having is what are the  boundaries of
      basically ... (*sigh* translating to PC - it's hard to give up
      idioms that have been OK for most of my life ) calling a
      particular garden tool what is is rather than calling it a shovel.
    Is a truthful statement "unprofessional" in the "profession" of
      the IETF? (cf our recent discussions on tone policing for the wide
      range of thoughts on this).  

    
    I'd like to see something like 

    
         Lying, being disingenuous, 
deflecting, distracting, ignoring are unprofessional; calling out lying, 
disingenuousness, deflection, distraction, and ignoring when there is 
substantial indication of one of these is not only not unprofessional, 
but required in a consensus based community for the community to 
continue to operate.
      
    
    Entered into the discussion of what's unprofessional.
    Lastly, I'd strongly recommend that the SAA be divorced from the
      Chair similar to the way that the Ombudsteam is.  E.g. chair
      appoints, SAA acts on their own without chair input.  Chair can
      replace at any time.   Larger team than is currently there and
      works with the ombudsteam to resolve issues at dispute between the
      community (e.g. not just one person pushing back) and the SAA
      team.
    Later, Mike