Subject: Re: Living the IETF Code of Conduct

From: "Salz, Rich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 13:23:43 +0000

I assume that many chairs have gotten mail from their AD’s (or maybe it was only Sec AD’s?) that emphasized the code of conduct.  We got a PNG slide passed around.  In case it helps, Kirsty Paine sent me her slide covering the same area, and I copied it into the HTTPAPI chair slides. You can see it here if you need it.  https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ThpDhmZVV2fCavk5aOm2YIG3Q9mGnQLgUllF8W-Sxn4/edit?usp=sharing

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 15:28:25 +0100

I did not receive such an email.

I am a bit torn about this. I can imagine that there are WG participants
who do not partake in community discussions on [email-masked], and this
slide might be useful on them.

As someone who does has read those
discussions, i think though that we can only make progress if we do
have more productive discussions about where harrassment does begin
and where not. Eg.: "This is a stupid idea" type "robust" discussions.

I guess this is not considered per-se harassment (because it technically
does not attack the person), but it is what i have heard a lot of
complaints about. So this slide to me looks again like the less
relevant boilerplate part of the discussion.

For example, this slide could be more compressed on the harrassment
part and also add the notion of the Sgts at Arms for [email-masked],
and also (i guess) WG chairs expected to act in similar roles on
WG mailing lists..

Cheers
    Toerless

-- 
---
[email-masked]

---

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 06:56:02 -0800

I had plans to put my swing on summarizing things for the front of a
session, with plans to put it after the note well.

IMHO, the code of conduct has 4 sections with good points, but the real
easy-to-understand suggestions are in the paragraphs within.  So I've put
together two slides:

1. that offers the titles from the 4 sections alone
2. another that adds sub-bullets with important selections from the text
about how to participate
3. A third that really takes those sub-bullets and makes them the primary,
and drops the original titles.

My result is here:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ObkxRS4dMW0uzBBPU95zAL43jw36996wtAwlcEbhvAg/edit?usp=sharing

Personally, I'm likely to use the last as it's designed to be very straight
forward.  It avoids creating a list of "don't"s, which could be good or bad.

-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 16:03:23 +0100

So there is the overall code of conduct, there is specific harrassment
guidance (i think thats not in code of conduct), and then there is
compliance enforcmeent through "moderation"... Is there more thats important ?

-- 
---
[email-masked]

---

From: Marie-Jose Montpetit <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 08:23:52 -0800

I think there should be something about postings on social media (LinkedIn
in particular) because of course a problem that cannot be addressed within
IETF can move to another platform. You cannot control this of course but it
should be discouraged.

Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
[email-masked]

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
Reply: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
Date: November 8, 2021 at 9:57:04 AM
To: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
Cc: WG Chairs <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>, Salz, Rich
<rsalz=[email-masked]> <rsalz=[email-masked]>
Subject:  Re: [irsg] Living the IETF Code of Conduct

My result is here:

-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI