- diversity - mailman.ripe.net

Fwd: [ripe-list] Code of Conduct 3.0
by Hans Petter Holen 20 Oct '19

20 Oct '19

Malcolm raises some issues in his email to the ripe-list. How can theese be addressed? Even under the current CoC with trusted contacts this is not defined. I personally does not have an answer to how to handle this. There was an incident in 2016 that may be used as a case study to better understand the complexity: https://omblog.icann.org/ ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Malcolm Hutty <Malcolm(a)linx.net> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 14:25 Subject: [ripe-list] Code of Conduct 3.0 To: ripe-list(a)ripe.net <ripe-list(a)ripe.net> Dear all, I understand that on Thursday afternoon the RIPE Plenary will be invited to adopt “Code of Conduct v3.0”. Unfortunately I must leave Rotterdam at lunchtime, so I am writing to share with you my reasons for believing it should not be approved. Code of Conduct v3.0 proposes the creation of a new entity, the “CoC Team” who will be invested with the power to hear allegations of breach of the Code of Conduct and decide what sanctions, if any, to apply to the community member in violation. Planned sanctions include, amongst other things, 1. Not allowing someone to participate further in RIPE Meetings and/or other RIPE community spaces, for a set period or an indefinite period 2. A public reprimand 3. Requiring that a public apology is made Denying someone the opportunity to participate in RIPE is clearly a serious step. Issuing a public reprimand, or requiring a public apology (i.e. admission of guilt) is potentially seriously damaging to a person’s reputation. Since a public reprimand might make reference to the purposes of the Code, including the prevention of sexual harassment and racist abuse, and assert that the person was found to have violated the Code, but not necessarily say what the individual is alleged to have actually done, a public reprimand from the CoC team could have lasting impact on a person’s career prospects. It is therefore a matter of great importance to every member of this community that if such sanctions are ever applied, the most scrupulous process is used. Unfortunately, in my view the process set out in Code of Conduct 3.0 is very far from fit for purpose. For a start, given the gravity of the intended sanctions, I am stunned to see that the Code neither requires nor suggests that the CoC Team should attempt to speak to the accused individual to get their side of the story. Indeed, there is no requirement that the accused person is even informed of the details of the allegation against them. A public reprimand could be the first the subject hears of the matter. The right to be heard before being punished is not an obscure legalistic procedural device. It is fundamental to basic fairness. Granted, a right of appeal has been added to the Code (thank you Daniel Karrenberg for your urgent intervention!), but I do not think appeal after the fact is sufficient correction to a basically abusive process. Although the most egregious, that is far from the only flaw with Code of Conduct 3.0. It positively encourages anonymous complaints. Complaints are also encouraged not only from alleged “victims”, but also from “witnesses” The Code promises that the identity of the complainant will not be disclosed to the subject of the complaint, potentially making it impossible to understand the circumstances or provide an explanation. The person submitting a complaint is not disqualified under the Code from sitting as a member of the CoC Team adjudicating the complaint. Given that the Code also invites witness reports and assures witnesses that their reports will not be viewed less favourably because they have made multiple reports, it would be entirely consistent with the Code for the CoC Team to also act as as a Code of Conduct patrol, making reports of violations and then sitting in judgement on their own allegations. Thanks to anonymity, nobody outside the CoC team would even know if this were occurring. There are other problems, but this message is already too long. Throughout the Code, the emphasis is consistently on the CoC Team’s responsibility to the reporter. There is no such recognition of a responsibility to the person ‘under investigation’ – by which I mean, the person who is the subject of the complaint; there is actually no expectation set in the Code that the CoC Team would actually conduct an investigation, rather than proceeding directly to judgement on the basis solely of the information contained in the allegation. I have described some serious flaws, but in my view, it is not worth trying to rescue this proposal with patches to each of them. The document as a whole is riddled with bias, and should be abandoned. The Diversity Taskforce has demonstrated that it is not an appropriate body to be undertaking this work. Any serious attempt to create a process for enforcement of a Code of Conduct should be predicated on the basis that a grievance and disciplinary process (which is what this is) owes a serious duty of fairness to all parties, not only to one side. Malcolm. -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | web: www.linx.net London Internet Exchange | London Internet Exchange Ltd Monument Place, 24 Monument Street London EC3R 8AJ <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Monument+Place,+24+Monument+Street+Londo…> Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA -- -- Hans Petter Holen Mobile +47 45 06 60 54 | hph(a)oslo.net | http://hph.oslo.net

3 2

Re: [diversity] [comms-circle] [ripe-list] Towards a more inclusive community
by Julia Freeman 17 Oct '19

17 Oct '19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 06:12:09PM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote: > On 17/10/2019 17:32, Julia Freeman wrote: > > Julie, at no time did I say it is not happening. I just said that > *I *am clueless about it since I didn't see it or hear about it. > Now that you have come forward as well as Jordi, hopefully people > will be kinder and more importantly, if you see such behavior being > imposed on someone else, and you are a bystander, then you should > say something - not only the victim. Yes, people witnessing things should be doing more. The whole issue of the bystander effect could fill whole dissertations. Not every CoC violation is easily witnessed. The problem is, everytime someone says "I've not seen it", it is interpreted by people as "it's not happening". We shouldn't have to go into detail of what happened for people to believe us that harrasssment and CoC violations are happening. And my name is Julia not Julie. J -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFdqIfe42M0lILkmGIRAtBoAJ9y+A9gespRoD4ux5djECc69AnziwCgto5Y 2cOtLUfVKwDFziaS5k2+vIg= =KIuK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Community Plenary Presentation
by Brian Nisbet 17 Oct '19

17 Oct '19

Folks, Amanda, Denesh, Sasha and I have put this presentation together for the community plenary this afternoon. It is forthright, but we definitely feel that it needs to be so. We are going to make it clear that we're still accepting comments on v3.0, but also still looking at having this in place for RIPE 80 if at all possible. I know I and others present in Rotterdam have got some really good further feedback. And, of course, as with all things, whatever CoC we have is never set in stone, it's always changeable as situations change. Thanks for everyone's input on this so far! Brian Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

6 8

Suscribe
by laura kaplan 17 Oct '19

17 Oct '19

Hello I would like to be suscribe to this list please. Thank you Laura

3 2

Community Plenary Presentation
by Brian Nisbet 17 Oct '19

17 Oct '19

Folks, Amanda, Denesh, Sasha and I have put this presentation together for the community plenary this afternoon. It is forthright, but we definitely feel that it needs to be so. I tried to send it to the list earlier, but it was caught in moderation, so you can see it here: https://ripe79.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/ripe-community/ We are going to make it clear that we're still accepting comments on v3.0, but also still looking at having this in place for RIPE 80 if at all possible. I know I and others present in Rotterdam have got some really good further feedback. And, of course, as with all things, whatever CoC we have is never set in stone, it's always changeable as situations change. Thanks for everyone's input on this so far! Brian Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

1 0

Re: [diversity] CoC Impact assessment
by Hans Petter Holen 16 Oct '19

16 Oct '19

Julia, & task force memebers. On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 at 07:21, Julia Freeman <ripe-diversity(a)quixotic.eu> wrote: > I am writing on behalf of the diversity task force regarding the proposed > improvements to the Ripe Code Of Conduct. There has been some confusion as > to the next steps we need to take, and were hoping you could provide > guidance on what should happen next. Strictly speaking we do not have a process for adopting RIPE Community governance documents. Lacking this I try to follow the PDP where relevant. If there is consensus in the Task force on the latest version I think you should publish the version so it can be moved from discussion phase to review phase. When all concerns has been addressed in the review phase, a call for consensus can be made. > We have a draft version 3.0 of the CoC, based on feedback from various > parties to a version 2.0 that was sent to ripe mailing lists in May. This > version is below. > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yqOUPR02SONuSt812cuOBkk_xnhjYzjdk9qmsJk… Great. Has this updated draft been published yet? Is there consensus in the task force? <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yqOUPR02SONuSt812cuOBkk_xnhjYzjdk9qmsJk…> > It has been suggested that perhaps we should have RIPE NCC legal do an > Impact Analysis on the code of conduct before it's fully adopted, but we > are unclear the exact process required. In the PDP there is a step for the RIPE NCC to do an impact asessment at the end of the discussion phase before moving to the review phase. > > Please can you advise, and if appropriate, request RIPE NCC Legal do an > impact analysis on our proposed code of conduct. I am happy to do so if you can confirm that there is consensus in the task force on the document, and the latest draft has been published. Hans Petter > > -- -- Hans Petter Holen Mobile +47 45 06 60 54 | hph(a)oslo.net | http://hph.oslo.net

2 2

RIPE Community plenary - Presentation of the latest version of the code of conduct
by Hans Petter Holen 16 Oct '19

16 Oct '19

Hi, I have put Code of Conduct on the agenda for discussion in the Community plenary tomorrow. It would be great if the chair, or a task force representative could present the latest published version of the code of conduct. Please let me know who will present and upload your presentation into the presentation system. Hans Petter -- -- Hans Petter Holen Mobile +47 45 06 60 54 | hph(a)oslo.net | http://hph.oslo.net

3 2

CoC v3.0 and RIPE List Email
by Brian Nisbet 16 Oct '19

16 Oct '19

Malcolm, In regard to the email you've just sent to the RIPE List, honestly, I'm gobsmacked. I see Hans Petter has also clarified on the list, but I think we need more than that. You are on the Diversity TF, you have the ability to interact with the conversation around the CoC and you will have seen that Julia has been talking to HPH about how best to proceed. There is, as you should be aware, zero intention of asking the Plenary to approve the CoC tomorrow. We absolutely need to circulate v3.0 for discussion and, as referenced, speak to the NCC about an Impact Analysis. I'm not even going to get into my frustrations around this whole process, because that's not the point of this email. I believe you need to immediately reply to your own mail and say that you were mistaken and that the new version CoC will be presented to the Community by the Diversity TF, a version that has taken into account the feedback received both within and without the TF. We will then be speaking to the NCC about an IA and will take that into account as well. Currently you are spreading fear and trying to undermine the TF, which is not what I would have ever expected from you. Brian Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

1 0

Clarification re: RIPE NCC & survey
by Amanda Gowland 14 Oct '19

14 Oct '19

Hi list, To clarify on the one-question survey that Denesh emailed to the list earlier this week: The RIPE NCC has no involvement in this survey - including collecting or analysing the survey data or presenting the results. Thanks, Amanda (sent as a woman at the RIPE Meeting and member of the Diversity TF only)

1 0

[FWD: CoC Impact assessment]
by Julia Freeman 14 Oct '19

14 Oct '19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Forgot to cc the mailing list when I sent this to HPH. I only had one reply to my draft from Job, folded in their feedback, and sent the email. I will forward HPH's response when I get it. Thanks Julia - ----- Forwarded message ----- From: Julia Freeman <> To: <hph> Subject: CoC Impact assessment Dear Hans Peiter, I am writing on behalf of the diversity task force regarding the proposed improvements to the Ripe Code Of Conduct. There has been some confusion as to the next steps we need to take, and were hoping you could provide guidance on what should happen next. We have a draft version 3.0 of the CoC, based on feedback from various parties to a version 2.0 that was sent to ripe mailing lists in May. This version is below. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yqOUPR02SONuSt812cuOBkk_xnhjYzjdk9qmsJk… It has been suggested that perhaps we should have RIPE NCC legal do an Impact Analysis on the code of conduct before it's fully adopted, but we are unclear the exact process required. Please can you advise, and if appropriate, request RIPE NCC Legal do an impact analysis on our proposed code of conduct. Yours Sinceerly Julia Freeman (On behalf of the Ripe Diversity Task Force) - ----- End forwarded message ----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFdpAZh42M0lILkmGIRAvZ+AJ9YsTAHiIixOn2Hb8/5W3Fw90c7fACgm/rw /9FlobSIFhzmWbKfezyVops= =9udy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0