- diversity - mailman.ripe.net

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

Email to HPH
by Julia Freeman 09 Oct '19

09 Oct '19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At risk of writing an email by commmittee, below is my first draft of the email for HPH. I just wanna double check I've fully understood all the points we're asking before I hit send. Is the below what people had in mind that we should be asking? - ------ 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 legal do an Impact Analysis on the CoC of conduct before it's fully adopted, but we are unclear the exact process required. Please can you advise. Julia Freeman (On behalf of the Ripe Diversity Task Force) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFdnbL342M0lILkmGIRAkYmAJwN7sL5JJCrgRqn6nMSebwIfacRugCfSakO 5+ZhyefOoVuIdaR6X97Ntlc= =WFrz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Survey - "Have you ever experienced or witnessed harrassment, intimidation or any other unwanted behaviour while at a RIPE Meeting?"
by Denesh Bhabuta 08 Oct '19

08 Oct '19

Hi all Gearing up to the discussions we will be having around the new CoC draft (and the CoC Team), we would like to get an idea about the climate of unwanted behaviours our attendees have experienced or witnessed over the years. We have heard a lot of stories from people...but as we've never had a proper reporting channel to investigate/handle reports, it's hard to imagine the scope of the problem. We've also heard many people say "there is no problem." The intention for this survey is to illustrate why this work on the CoC is so important - to make the meetings safer. This is not a reporting tool - we are specifically asking people not to divulge any identifying remarks. Here is the link for the survey (anyone on the TF who would like to share their story may also do so): <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/N6S5SJ3> Regards Denesh

8 10

Re: [diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
by Amanda Gowland 08 Oct '19

08 Oct '19

Oh dear Julia, that is awful!! Sorry to hear that. I will send you Hans Petter's email directly. Amanda On 08/10/2019 14:50, Julia Freeman wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 09:04:24AM +0200, Amanda Gowland wrote: >> Hi Julia, >> >> Are you alright to email HPH on the question(s) about how to proceed? > Yes. I'll send a draft to the mailing list in the next few hours, then if > people are ok with it send it on to HPH. Can you confirm HPH's email > address so I know I'm sending it to the right place? > > I meant to do this yesterday, but crashed my bike on Saturday and spent > yesterday trying not to move. > > J > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFdnIYA42M0lILkmGIRAgXoAKC3p0qSx+bSopaC8GrAaq1dZRPk1QCeJgrF > 4Kgf9/ymCinS74BjpNgv+zo= > =MD5I > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >

1 0

Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
by Amanda Gowland 04 Oct '19

04 Oct '19

Hi all, So, an update... After speaking with RIPE NCC's legal team on next steps for the CoC, they advise that the Chair of this TF (which we don't have afaik) request an impact analysis and legal review of the RIPE CoC 2.0, which Brian shared on the ripe-list last May for comment: https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/ripe-meetings/ripe-meeting-code-o… Could someone (Brian, Shane or Denesh) email legal(a)ripe.net with the link above to request this and cc the TF? Now, prior to this info, I had been working (a lot) on adapting the 2.0 text to address the comments received here. I also felt that there was a lot of overlap between the CoC text and the CoC Team doc, so I merged them for clarity: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yqOUPR02SONuSt812cuOBkk_xnhjYzjdk9qmsJk… This is a version I'd like you to comment on, hopefully we can move forward...I hope we've addressed the concerns about appeals. Happy for your feedback. Kind regards, Amanda

7 16

Relevant reading: The resignation of MIT's Richard Stallman and the danger of not speaking up
by Amanda Gowland 19 Sep '19

19 Sep '19

Hi all, In light of our discussions around the CoC and the Response Team doc (which is being checked by our legal team and I'll have their input by tomorrow FYI), I'd like to share this article that was forwarded to me today...about the resignation of Richard Stallman from CSAIL at MIT: <https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/a-reflection-on-the-departure-of-rms-18…> One line from the author really stood out for me:    "But at the time I didn’t put that together with what it would be like for women who were weirded out or alienated, who felt threatened, etc." ...and I would like to ask that everyone in this community and on this list think on that for a moment. If we don't insist on a safe and inclusive space for *everyone* at RIPE Meetings, we can't have a safe space for *anyone*.   The article references the original 'whistle blowing' article: <  https://medium.com/@selamie/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794> Amanda

1 0

*draft* CoC Team doc
by Amanda Gowland 02 Sep '19

02 Sep '19

Hi all, Please find attached a draft proposal for the CoC Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yqOUPR02SONuSt812cuOBkk_xnhjYzjdk9qmsJk… I used Sasha's draft as the framework for the doc, just adding/editing where necessary. There are some to-be-determined factors, mainly: - How long should a term be for volunteers? - How many people (minimum, maximum) should we aim for? - What is the time-frame for response (e.g. how long would a reporter need to wait for a confirmation of receipt from the team?) Please add your comments. Kind regards, Amanda

12 24

RIPE Code of Conduct 2.0
by Daniel Karrenberg 29 Jul '19

29 Jul '19

Summary: - It is good that the draft gives examples of unacceptable behavior. - It is a real bad idea to create a special enforcement committee. - The draft should encourage anyone in the community to actively intervene when they observe unacceptable behavior. - It would be better to continue the current system of trusted contacts and empower them more. -------- Full disclosure: I have participated in RIPE for 30 years and attended 76 RIPE meetings as well as numerous other meetings organised by our community. During these 30 years there were some times when I have not behaved in an exemplary manner; a few of those times I would have run afoul of this draft code of conduct. With the help of people from this community I have been able to realise my behavior was not appropriate, to apologise and to make amends. Despite these missteps I feel that I have contributed positively to the development and success of the RIPE community. I have also experienced some inappropriate behavior towards myself over the years and dealt with it appropriately, again with the help of people from this community. I welcome the part of this draft that describes examples of inappropriate behavior and states clearly that we as a community do not tolerate it. This is an improvement over the current code. I am very deeply concerned about the part of this draft that creates a very vaguely described 'enforcement committee' without any responsibility to anyone and without any process whatsoever. Adopting this part of the code would be a disaster for the credibility and standing of RIPE all by itself but even more so by inviting our antagonists to use it as a vehicle to harm us. RIPE is not a conference but a community that with a significant governance aspect. We argue in favor of our self governance by pointing to RIPE, its openness and its low threshold to participation. This requires that anyone interested can participate meaningfully in RIPE. Excluding people from RIPE will be very bad; doing so without a clear process and a hearing will be a disaster! We should remove this language from the draft completely. Instead, I suggest to a call on everyone in the community to actively intervene when they observe inappropriate behavior and to help all parties concerned to resolve the situation. The language should make it clear that such interventions are positive and welcomed by the RIPE community. I realise that it requires courage to act. We should encourage people and not give them further excuse to look away by putting emphasis only on a specific formal mechanism. I suggest to maintain the current system of trusted contacts for reporting violations and add that staff and volunteers such as chairs and PC are also available. Where, by the way, is the evidence that this is not sufficient? Maybe the trusted contacts can provide some sort of transparency report to us? Further I recommend to develop a response plan that defines who is responsible to take action in cases where individuals do not stop inappropriate behavior once it is pointed out to them. These responsibilities do exist today within our governance structure. They are shared between RIPE, RIPE NCC and third parties such as the owners/operators of our venues. Maybe this needs to be clarified and we may need to establish roles within these structures that are responsible to follow up on any actions. But let us not create a new committee whose sole purpose is to sanction community members without any process! Before we know it this will lead its own life. We should also make it clear that we do not tolerate any abuse of the code of conduct itself. I realise that can be interpreted as off-putting. However it is an essential part of such a code. In case the TF wishes to act on my suggestions regarding the draft, I am very much willing to help with creating new text. Sincerely! Daniel

7 14

Fwd: [systers] IETF 105 Female Attendance
by Mirjam Kuehne 26 Jul '19

26 Jul '19

Hi, FYI some numbers from the IETF meeting this week. Mirjam -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [systers] IETF 105 Female Attendance Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:49:58 -0400 From: Jasmine Magallanes <jmagallanes(a)amsl.com> To: systers(a)ietf.org Hello Systers, As requested, please see the female to male ratio below for IETF 105. Please note that not everyone fills out the gender field on their registration. Here is the best information we have to date. Female onsite attendance: 125 Male onsite attendance: 864 Overall, about 11% of our community identified as female this meeting. Thank you! Regards, Jasmine Magallanes Project Coordinator Direct +1 510-492-4086 Fax +1 510 492-4001 --------- Association Management Solutions Forum Management, Meeting and Event Planning Website: http://www.amsl.com _______________________________________________ systers mailing list systers(a)ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/systers

1 0

Article on RIPE Labs re: Neurodiversity (and Slido)
by Amanda Gowland 26 Jun '19

26 Jun '19

Hi all, I wanted to share some background behind our motivation to pilot Slido at RIPE 78: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/agowland/the-microphone-is-the-devil-some-kno… And also, if you appreciated/support that we continue to use such a tool, now is the last chance to submit feedback on the RIPE 78 Feedback Survey: https://ripe78.ripe.net/feedback/ Many thanks, Amanda

5 5

Article on "Trying to be a better man"
by Mirjam Kuehne 25 Jun '19

25 Jun '19

Hi, I came across this article: https://medium.com/@rafi0t/on-trying-to-be-better-men-227d2aad6670 It's already from 2017, but still quite timely. FYI, here is the code of conduct of a security conference I attended last week: https://www.first.org/about/policies/code-of-conduct I don't think they have a team to enforce this. It's done by the FIRST board. Mirjam

1 0

Exposing the Bias Embedded in Tech - NYTimes
by Amanda Gowland 18 Jun '19

18 Jun '19

Hi all, There was a great article in the NYTimes yesterday and this quote pretty much sums up why we're doing what we're doing: “But what I always think the way to turn anything around is to shine a light on it. You keep the light on there until the data surfaces, and then you have to find a way to fix it. It’s not a ‘check the box and move on, everyone take unconscious bias training and we’re all good now.’ You have to keep at it, keep at it, keep at it.” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/business/artificial-intelligence-bias-te… <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/business/artificial-intelligence-bias-te…>

1 0

RIPE 78 Diversity Podcast on Spotify
by Amanda Gowland 14 Jun '19

14 Jun '19

Hi all, Paula Gould from Men and Mice and I were interviewed for a podcast on diversity...you can have a listen here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2xkCaYDrqI2n9wf9laEwAI?si=mW8Edyz5Rq2qv08f… Warm regards, Amanda

1 0

Re: [diversity] [Ext] Re: RIPE Code of Conduct 2.0
by Leo Vegoda 13 Jun '19

13 Jun '19

On 6/13/19, 3:01 AM, "diversity on behalf of Rob Evans" <diversity-bounces(a)ripe.net on behalf of Rob.Evans(a)jisc.ac.uk> wrote: [...] > As Trusted Contacts, our primary responsibility is confidentiality of > the report to us. Our training was as a "vertrouwenspersoon," although > fortunately for me that was the only part of the training that took > place in Dutch. > > This makes the production of reports somewhat difficult as above all we > do not want those who have reported an issue to us to feel they could be > identified through that report -- or that in future they do not report > an issue for fear of being identified (the simple act of writing down > the report is even something to consider). It's obviously important that trends for the frequency of reports, the type of incident reported, and other relevant factors are monitored. But it might not be necessary for those numbers to be published in a report. Nonetheless, a key goal is to help people feel safe, so that they can obtain the maximum benefit from the meeting. For that reason, it might make sense to commit to measuring people's feelings in a survey and include a few of the most important perception indicators in a report. This could help show whether the process is achieving that result without risking its confidentiality. Kind regards, Leo Vegoda

1 0

Diversity in RIPE Meeting leadership
by Amanda Gowland 12 Jun '19

12 Jun '19

Hi all, I read this and wanted to pass it on: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613320/ais-white-guy-problem-isnt-going-… The research they cite recommends: "The researchers offer several recommendations for improving workplace diversity in a more comprehensive way. These include measures aimed at closing the pay and opportunity gap, increasing diversity at the leadership levels across departments, and changing the incentive structures for company executives to hire and retain workers from underrepresented groups." ...which leads me to think this: What is the TF doing to address the extreme lack of diversity in the RIPE community leadership, eg: RIPE PC, RIPE WG Chair Collective? In the RIPE PC, we have two women and 11 men and almost no racial diversity. In the RIPE WG collective, we have 28 WG Chairs - 4 women. Same as ^ for racial diversity. Tackling diversity in the community leadership is key for us to acheive our goals of increasing D&I at RIPE Meetings. Interesting to note...I've been spending some time doing some data gathering to see if there's any correlation between the # of female presenters in a WG when there's a female WG Chair. I'll report back when I'm finished (it's a lot of manual work). Anyways - curious to get a dialogue started on this. Thanks, Amanda

2 1

neuro diversity observations post RIPE 78
by Ruben van Staveren 31 May '19

31 May '19

Hi, Just want to chime in that as an reasonbly introverted person with autistic treats (yes, it is true but I think I mask it pretty well) I saw two things that made me especially happy this event: * The piloting of slido for getting more questions than the speakers, than just besides the mic. I tried the mic once and I had eh, startup problems. No worries though * I also think the decorating the badge is a splendid idea, as it makes it definitely easier to break the ice amongst attendees for talking abouit subjects If you haven’t seen it, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fD2BvS3Aqw (Nerd Wrangling 101 from SHA2017) is a good talk about the subject of neurodiversity. I also enjoyed being a mentor, I had doubt at first that my knowledge about the community was still current after being out for ±10 years. It seems my mentee also enjoyed it and gave him a good head start in the community. With regard to feedback from that area, he mentioned that during one of the main room sessions there was a strange sound that gave him the impression of having tinnitus, I also repeatedly got distracted by people’s phones and laptop sometimes making sound. Can happen of course, but sometimes it made you almost wonder to have a tech talk on “how to set my device on mute” ? Best Regards, Ruben

2 2

Mail to RIPE LIst on CoC 2.0
by Brian Nisbet 27 May '19

27 May '19

Folks, I'm going to send the email to the RIPE List I should have sent last week, sorry about that. I'll be explicitly asking interested parties to join the Diversity TF list to discuss the CoC rather than discussing it on that list. Malcolm, you raised some going points during the LT on Tuesday, so it would be great if you could post them here soon. Thanks, 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

RIPE attendee gender trend: Update for RIPE 77 and RIPE 78
by Shane Kerr 24 May '19

24 May '19

Hello all, I don't think that I published and update of the earlier work done tracking trends of gender of RIPE meeting attendees. Here's one including RIPE 77 and RIPE 78. Basically we look at first name and country and try to guess the attendee's gender based on that. You can see the repository on GitHub which explains the approach, and how to use it yourself. I have a separate branch that I'll merge into the main page when the meeting is over, which will give final statistics: https://github.com/shane-kerr/ripemtggender/tree/ripe78 For RIPE 78, we have a relatively lot of names that the underlying genderize.io tool can't even make a guess about: 26 in all, compared to 16 at RIPE 77 in Amsterdam and 18 at RIPE 76 in Dubai. 12 of these are Icelandic names. I'm happy to hard-code these to the correct values if anyone wants to help me with that (I don't know about Tryggvi, Kristbergur, or Örvar, for example). As for the overall trends, the trend of more women attending does continue but there does not seem to be any sharp increase. I don't think we can see a strong signal from when the diversity task force started working, although of course the data is very messy, it was not too long ago, and the actual numbers depend on a huge number of factors (city the meeting is held, quality of the guesses, hard disk prices, and so on). I pushed the date out to find when we might have 50% women attendees at the meeting, and using the current eyeballed polynomial match it's 2026 or so. While that seems not too horrible, I doubt we will follow that trend line and I think that 2026 is a best case. But we remain ever hopeful. As a bonus, I also went through the membership of the RIPE Programme Committee since it's inception (I think), as well as the chairs of RIPE working groups in roughly the same period. (I used the historical RIPE meeting site for PC membership, and slides from the opening plenary with pictures of the WG chairs for the WG chair membership.) This picture looks bad, since it seems like women are under-represented compared to RIPE meeting attendees. This strikes me as an area requiring special attention, and it can be done; for example the IETF has taken specific efforts to ensure enough diversity in their leadership positions. Anyway, I've attached a few charts so you can see for yourself. Cheers, -- Shane

6 6

Fwd: Diversity Deep Dive: Why train multiple Code of Conduct enforcers?
by Vesna Manojlovic 23 May '19

23 May '19

Hi, this comes in at the convenient time, when we are discussing exactly that topic! It's a bit different from the RIPE community.. because it speaks more about _smaller_ communities & _smaller_ events, but some of the principles are still applicable... I hope this helps! Regards, Vesna https://otter.technology/blog/2019/05/23/why-train-multiple-code-of-conduct… -------- Forwarded Message -------- Reply-To: Otter Tech <sharp(a)otter.technology> Diversity Deep Dive: Why train multiple Code of Conduct enforcers? Why train multiple Code of Conduct enforcers? When an community decides to adopt a Code of Conduct, one of the first things they should ask is “Who will enforce this Code of Conduct?” For most events and online communities, enforcement falls to one person. Typically the person is an event organizer, or a leader in the online community. It’s someone who cares deeply about making the event or community a welcoming place. They want to do things “right” but aren’t sure whether they need to have more people involved. It’s important that every event or online community, no matter how small, has at least two people who enforce a Code of Conduct. Here’s why. Conflicting Roles When you’re an event organizer, you rarely get to enjoy your own event. Most of your time is spent helping others, ensuring the event stays on track, and dealing with last minute fires. It can be hard if you’re an event organizer and you’re the only point of contact for people to make a Code of Conduct report. You’re running from place to place, talking quickly to other people, and you look… busy. Someone who wants to make a Code of Conduct report may decide that they don’t want to bother you. It can be helpful to have two event volunteers whose only job is to take Code of Conduct reports. You can have one incident responder available in a fixed location, while the second incident responder walks around event space, ready to take a report on the spot. Conflicts of interest If you’re involved in Code of Conduct enforcement in an online community, it’s typically because you care deeply about the community. You want to make the community a welcoming place. You probably know a lot of the community members. Unfortunately, it can cause problems if you’re a leader of an online community and you’re the only person enforcing the community Code of Conduct. If one of your long-time friends in the community were reported, you would be biased towards them when you evaluate the report. If your online community includes your clients or co-workers, you also have a bias towards them. Having two to three people involved in online community Code of Conduct enforcement allows the committee to address conflicts of interest. If one committee member has a platonic, romantic, or employment relationship with a reported person, there are two other people who can evaluate and follow up on the report. Bias Whether you run an event or an online community, you shouldn’t have only one person who evaluates Code of Conduct reports. Why? Because that one person has a specific life experience. The one person in charge of the Code of Conduct may not have experienced discrimination based on race, gender identity, or disability. They may face marginalization because of one part of their identity, but have privilege in other parts of their life. It can be hard for them to understand the impact of harassment or microaggressions if they’ve never experienced that type of discrimination before. Having multiple committee members evaluate a Code of Conduct report means everyone can contribute their lived experience. Having a diverse set of people enforcing a Code of Conduct is key to making a welcoming community for all people. Train Enforcers Whether you have one, two, or ten people taking Code of Conduct reports, it’s important to train them! Otter Tech provides online training for Code of Conduct enforcement. Our Incident Response workshop teaches people how to take a Code of Conduct report, how to evaluate a report, and how to follow up with a reported person. If you’re adding a new Code of Conduct committee member, now is the time to get them trained. *Attend our next online Code of Conduct Incident Response workshop on either **June 19* or **July 17* /Copyright © 2017 Otter Tech LLC, All rights reserved./

1 0

Slides For LT Today, Tuesday 21st
by Brian Nisbet 21 May '19

21 May '19

Folks, I've attached the slides for the LT this afternoon (almost the last thing today in the plenary, it's the 3rd LT in the 16:00 GMT Plenary session, so likely on around 17:20 plus or minus). Please let me and Amanda know if you have any comments, warnings, inclusions or exclusions. Thanks, 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

2 3

LT @ RIPE78
by Brian Nisbet 20 May '19

20 May '19

Folks, So, assuming HPH comes back with useful wisdom, do we want to announce the draft to the community next week? If so, we can do this either as an LT or by asking for some time in the final session, both are possibilities right now. Sadly I don't think the Friday session will be as well populated as we'd like, given the flights home from Iceland (a lot of people have already told the PC they won't be there), but the alternative is Tuesday, when we may not be ready. I'm happy to work on this with people, of course. I continue to maintain that a cis white man is not the right person to stand solo on a stage to present these things. 😊 What do we all think? We don't *have* to do this, of course, if we don't feel we're ready 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

5 6

CoC Draft & Action Items
by Brian Nisbet 16 May '19

16 May '19

Folks, I'm just wondering, where do we, collectively, believe the action item (or similar) lies at present with the draft for the new CoC. >From my reading there was an amount of feedback provided, but is the draft at a point where it can be officially shared with HPH, other stakeholders and the community, or is there more work to do? We have under two weeks before RIPE78 begins and I worry that we aren't in a good place to share our work (while absolutely noting that people might be waiting for me to do something?). Thanks, 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

4 14

Draft CoC and response guide
by Sasha Romijn 10 May '19

10 May '19

Hello all, Closely based on the work I did for Write the Docs, with some adjustments to fit the RIPE community, I put together a draft for a CoC and for a response guide. CoC: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IAJj9UjW2zroz5v6XQYgYEYotfZlV4Trk2vRdao… Response guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gaLo4axYDRTpQnhUJyG92EHBmEIkxSDN8Urmy-z… I went with Google docs for now, as it’s quite accessible. You can leave comments and suggest changes, and we can discuss broader topics on the mailing list. There are a few parts about structure still to be filled in, but let’s start here. We haven’t really spoken about any of the details, other than a general “this can be a starting point”, so I don’t know what kind of discussions other people would like to bring up. Sasha

11 23