Draft CoC and response guide
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/1IAJj9UjW2zroz5v6XQYgYEYotfZlV4Trk2vRdaoP... Response guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gaLo4axYDRTpQnhUJyG92EHBmEIkxSDN8Urmy-zn... 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
Sasha, The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode: - normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma /david writing solely on his personal behalf On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu> wrote: 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1IAJj9UjW2zroz5v6XQYgYEYotfZlV4Trk2vRdaoPaP4_edit&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=sy8t_T8v902B5ESqiOxzVnu6ezEWJaYUIsfScYJuvyY&e= Response guide: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1gaLo4axYDRTpQnhUJyG92EHBmEIkxSDN8Urmy-2Dzn9nQ_edit&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=tLYhKXwOC4CmhGYH2JhF4h-Qy6XZgbV4ujIJt5XPyus&e= 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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
I agree, excellent work! I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide. John Springer acting solely on my own behalf On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" < diversity-bounces@ripe.net on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu> wrote:
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:
Response guide:
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Sasha, THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit. Warm regards, Amanda On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote:
I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Hi Sasha, hi all, Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft! Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings." What do you think? Cheers, Gergana On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote:
Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote:
I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Taskforce, the mandate of the taskforce... On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote:
Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote:
Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote:
I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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:
Response guide:
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net>
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Hi Gergana, It's a good question. But seeing as the ENOG and MENOG and SEE Meetings have their own PCs, I think it's probably something that they would need to adopt on their own accord. Certainly, it would be simple to just adapt one for the RIPE Meeting but it's not within the scope of the TF to do that. thx, Amanda On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote:
Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote:
Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote:
I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Thanks Amanda! I can certainly bring this up with the relevant PCs for the regional meetings. But, just for my info - is the RIPE PC going to be approving the CoC? I wasn't aware they have to. They are responsible for the plenary program, but not the meeting itself. So for example all day Wednesday and Thursday have nothing to do with them. Here is their Charter for more info: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-600). I thought the CoC is more a question of the RIPE community's agreement/concensus (basically this taskforce's mailing list, which include the people from the RIPE Community interested on this topic). Similar to the way WGs work. Anybody from RIPE PC can shed light on this? Brian? I hope I'm not creating a mess. Cheers, Gergana On 08/04/2019 16:35, Amanda Gowland wrote:
Hi Gergana,
It's a good question. But seeing as the ENOG and MENOG and SEE Meetings have their own PCs, I think it's probably something that they would need to adopt on their own accord. Certainly, it would be simple to just adapt one for the RIPE Meeting but it's not within the scope of the TF to do that.
thx,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote:
Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote:
Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote:
I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Hi Gergana and all, I think you are correct. Speaking now for myself, not the PC collective, a suggestion might be to ask the RIPE chair, PC and the WG chairs collective for a first reading and approval (not sure this is the right wording), and next for community consensus of the CoC on the RIPE mailing list (not the TF mailing list). But for sure, our RIPE chair knows how to proceed in the proper way. Best, — Benno — Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
Op 8 apr. 2019 om 17:18 heeft Gergana Petrova <gpetrova@ripe.net> het volgende geschreven:
Thanks Amanda! I can certainly bring this up with the relevant PCs for the regional meetings.
But, just for my info - is the RIPE PC going to be approving the CoC? I wasn't aware they have to. They are responsible for the plenary program, but not the meeting itself. So for example all day Wednesday and Thursday have nothing to do with them. Here is their Charter for more info: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-600).
I thought the CoC is more a question of the RIPE community's agreement/concensus (basically this taskforce's mailing list, which include the people from the RIPE Community interested on this topic). Similar to the way WGs work.
Anybody from RIPE PC can shed light on this? Brian? I hope I'm not creating a mess.
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 16:35, Amanda Gowland wrote: Hi Gergana, It's a good question. But seeing as the ENOG and MENOG and SEE Meetings have their own PCs, I think it's probably something that they would need to adopt on their own accord. Certainly, it would be simple to just adapt one for the RIPE Meeting but it's not within the scope of the TF to do that. thx, Amanda
On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote: Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote: Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote: I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Hi Gergana, Benno, Benno has it right. We talked about this in the last TF meeting - the minutes were circulated a few weeks ago or so. If we follow the typical TF protocol for work output, it's basically: - Present to the community - Ask for feedback from community - TF reiterates if needed - RIPE Chair declares consensus But since there isn't the equivalent of HPH in the other regional communities, I would imagine this would fall to the respective PCs...well, I'm not sure but I think that sounds right? thx, Amanda On 08/04/2019 18:20, Benno Overeinder wrote:
Hi Gergana and all,
I think you are correct.
Speaking now for myself, not the PC collective, a suggestion might be to ask the RIPE chair, PC and the WG chairs collective for a first reading and approval (not sure this is the right wording), and next for community consensus of the CoC on the RIPE mailing list (not the TF mailing list).
But for sure, our RIPE chair knows how to proceed in the proper way.
Best,
— Benno
— Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
Op 8 apr. 2019 om 17:18 heeft Gergana Petrova <gpetrova@ripe.net> het volgende geschreven:
Thanks Amanda! I can certainly bring this up with the relevant PCs for the regional meetings.
But, just for my info - is the RIPE PC going to be approving the CoC? I wasn't aware they have to. They are responsible for the plenary program, but not the meeting itself. So for example all day Wednesday and Thursday have nothing to do with them. Here is their Charter for more info: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-600).
I thought the CoC is more a question of the RIPE community's agreement/concensus (basically this taskforce's mailing list, which include the people from the RIPE Community interested on this topic). Similar to the way WGs work.
Anybody from RIPE PC can shed light on this? Brian? I hope I'm not creating a mess.
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 16:35, Amanda Gowland wrote: Hi Gergana, It's a good question. But seeing as the ENOG and MENOG and SEE Meetings have their own PCs, I think it's probably something that they would need to adopt on their own accord. Certainly, it would be simple to just adapt one for the RIPE Meeting but it's not within the scope of the TF to do that. thx, Amanda
On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote: Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote: Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote: I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
First off, Sasha, this is great, thank you so much! Secondly, I think any CoC has to apply to all RIPE Community events and online interactions. I don't think restricting it to just RIPE meetings would be a good idea. Now, maybe there has to be something iterative here, but certainly the aim should be to have the same, or as close to the same, bearing in mind the diversity of the service region, CoC across anything RIPE is running. Even if we started with the main meeting and the mailing lists, that would be a good thing, but I'd really like to see it spread further than that. 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@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 ________________________________ From: diversity <diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Amanda Gowland <agowland@ripe.net> Sent: Tuesday 9 April 2019 09:36 To: diversity@ripe.net Subject: Re: [diversity] [Ext] Draft CoC and response guide Hi Gergana, Benno, Benno has it right. We talked about this in the last TF meeting - the minutes were circulated a few weeks ago or so. If we follow the typical TF protocol for work output, it's basically: - Present to the community - Ask for feedback from community - TF reiterates if needed - RIPE Chair declares consensus But since there isn't the equivalent of HPH in the other regional communities, I would imagine this would fall to the respective PCs...well, I'm not sure but I think that sounds right? thx, Amanda On 08/04/2019 18:20, Benno Overeinder wrote:
Hi Gergana and all,
I think you are correct.
Speaking now for myself, not the PC collective, a suggestion might be to ask the RIPE chair, PC and the WG chairs collective for a first reading and approval (not sure this is the right wording), and next for community consensus of the CoC on the RIPE mailing list (not the TF mailing list).
But for sure, our RIPE chair knows how to proceed in the proper way.
Best,
— Benno
— Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
Op 8 apr. 2019 om 17:18 heeft Gergana Petrova <gpetrova@ripe.net> het volgende geschreven:
Thanks Amanda! I can certainly bring this up with the relevant PCs for the regional meetings.
But, just for my info - is the RIPE PC going to be approving the CoC? I wasn't aware they have to. They are responsible for the plenary program, but not the meeting itself. So for example all day Wednesday and Thursday have nothing to do with them. Here is their Charter for more info: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-600).
I thought the CoC is more a question of the RIPE community's agreement/concensus (basically this taskforce's mailing list, which include the people from the RIPE Community interested on this topic). Similar to the way WGs work.
Anybody from RIPE PC can shed light on this? Brian? I hope I'm not creating a mess.
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 16:35, Amanda Gowland wrote: Hi Gergana, It's a good question. But seeing as the ENOG and MENOG and SEE Meetings have their own PCs, I think it's probably something that they would need to adopt on their own accord. Certainly, it would be simple to just adapt one for the RIPE Meeting but it's not within the scope of the TF to do that. thx, Amanda
On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote: Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote: Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote: I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
In principle, yes...but it's a grey area in terms of the RIPE Chair's scope...technically, SEE and ENOG and MENOG are not governed by RIPE. I think once we have the RIPE CoC up and running, we can then push the respective PCs to adopt or amend to their needs while keeping the spirit/key points as close to ours as possible. On 10/04/2019 14:59, Brian Nisbet wrote:
First off, Sasha, this is great, thank you so much!
Secondly, I think any CoC has to apply to all RIPE Community events and online interactions. I don't think restricting it to just RIPE meetings would be a good idea.
Now, maybe there has to be something iterative here, but certainly the aim should be to have the same, or as close to the same, bearing in mind the diversity of the service region, CoC across anything RIPE is running.
Even if we started with the main meeting and the mailing lists, that would be a good thing, but I'd really like to see it spread further than that.
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@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* diversity <diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Amanda Gowland <agowland@ripe.net> *Sent:* Tuesday 9 April 2019 09:36 *To:* diversity@ripe.net *Subject:* Re: [diversity] [Ext] Draft CoC and response guide Hi Gergana, Benno,
Benno has it right.
We talked about this in the last TF meeting - the minutes were circulated a few weeks ago or so. If we follow the typical TF protocol for work output, it's basically:
- Present to the community - Ask for feedback from community - TF reiterates if needed - RIPE Chair declares consensus
But since there isn't the equivalent of HPH in the other regional communities, I would imagine this would fall to the respective PCs...well, I'm not sure but I think that sounds right?
thx,
Amanda
Hi Gergana and all,
I think you are correct.
Speaking now for myself, not the PC collective, a suggestion might be to ask the RIPE chair, PC and the WG chairs collective for a first reading and approval (not sure this is the right wording), and next for community consensus of the CoC on the RIPE mailing list (not the TF mailing list).
But for sure, our RIPE chair knows how to proceed in the proper way.
Best,
— Benno
— Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
Op 8 apr. 2019 om 17:18 heeft Gergana Petrova <gpetrova@ripe.net> het volgende geschreven:
Thanks Amanda! I can certainly bring this up with the relevant PCs for the regional meetings.
But, just for my info - is the RIPE PC going to be approving the CoC? I wasn't aware they have to. They are responsible for the plenary
I thought the CoC is more a question of the RIPE community's
agreement/concensus (basically this taskforce's mailing list, which include the people from the RIPE Community interested on this topic). Similar to the way WGs work.
Anybody from RIPE PC can shed light on this? Brian? I hope I'm not
creating a mess.
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 16:35, Amanda Gowland wrote: Hi Gergana, It's a good question. But seeing as the ENOG and MENOG and SEE
Meetings have their own PCs, I think it's probably something that they would need to adopt on their own accord. Certainly, it would be simple to just adapt one for the RIPE Meeting but it's not within the scope of the TF to do that.
thx, Amanda
On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote: Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote: Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone
On 08/04/2019 18:20, Benno Overeinder wrote: program, but not the meeting itself. So for example all day Wednesday and Thursday have nothing to do with them. Here is their Charter for more info: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-600 <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-600>). through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
> On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote: > I agree, excellent work! > > I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide. > > John Springer > acting solely on my own behalf > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman
<david.huberman@icann.org <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
> > Sasha, > > The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a > copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode: > > - normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of > behavior were changed to behaviour) > - removed contractions > - fixed a few typos > - enforced consistent paragraph spacing > - enforced the Oxford comma > > /david > writing solely on his personal behalf > > On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" > <diversity-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on > behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote: > > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1IAJj9UjW2zroz5v6XQYgYEYotfZlV4Trk2vRdaoPaP4_edit&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=sy8t_T8v902B5ESqiOxzVnu6ezEWJaYUIsfScYJuvyY&e= > > Response guide: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1gaLo4axYDRTpQnhUJyG92EHBmEIkxSDN8Urmy-2Dzn9nQ_edit&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=tLYhKXwOC4CmhGYH2JhF4h-Qy6XZgbV4ujIJt5XPyus&e= > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e= > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ripe.net <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Amanda, Well, it’s not just the RIPE Chair’s scope, ofc, I mean, the ideal is for this to include RIPE NCC training courses and the like. But for the first phase I shall be content with RIPE Meetings and mailing lists. 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@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 From: Amanda Gowland <agowland@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday 11 April 2019 10:45 To: Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie>; diversity@ripe.net Subject: Re: [diversity] [Ext] Draft CoC and response guide In principle, yes...but it's a grey area in terms of the RIPE Chair's scope...technically, SEE and ENOG and MENOG are not governed by RIPE. I think once we have the RIPE CoC up and running, we can then push the respective PCs to adopt or amend to their needs while keeping the spirit/key points as close to ours as possible. On 10/04/2019 14:59, Brian Nisbet wrote: First off, Sasha, this is great, thank you so much! Secondly, I think any CoC has to apply to all RIPE Community events and online interactions. I don't think restricting it to just RIPE meetings would be a good idea. Now, maybe there has to be something iterative here, but certainly the aim should be to have the same, or as close to the same, bearing in mind the diversity of the service region, CoC across anything RIPE is running. Even if we started with the main meeting and the mailing lists, that would be a good thing, but I'd really like to see it spread further than that. 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@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> www.heanet.ie<http://www.heanet.ie> Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 ________________________________ From: diversity <diversity-bounces@ripe.net><mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Amanda Gowland <agowland@ripe.net><mailto:agowland@ripe.net> Sent: Tuesday 9 April 2019 09:36 To: diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [diversity] [Ext] Draft CoC and response guide Hi Gergana, Benno, Benno has it right. We talked about this in the last TF meeting - the minutes were circulated a few weeks ago or so. If we follow the typical TF protocol for work output, it's basically: - Present to the community - Ask for feedback from community - TF reiterates if needed - RIPE Chair declares consensus But since there isn't the equivalent of HPH in the other regional communities, I would imagine this would fall to the respective PCs...well, I'm not sure but I think that sounds right? thx, Amanda On 08/04/2019 18:20, Benno Overeinder wrote:
Hi Gergana and all,
I think you are correct.
Speaking now for myself, not the PC collective, a suggestion might be to ask the RIPE chair, PC and the WG chairs collective for a first reading and approval (not sure this is the right wording), and next for community consensus of the CoC on the RIPE mailing list (not the TF mailing list).
But for sure, our RIPE chair knows how to proceed in the proper way.
Best,
— Benno
— Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
Op 8 apr. 2019 om 17:18 heeft Gergana Petrova <gpetrova@ripe.net><mailto:gpetrova@ripe.net> het volgende geschreven:
Thanks Amanda! I can certainly bring this up with the relevant PCs for the regional meetings.
But, just for my info - is the RIPE PC going to be approving the CoC? I wasn't aware they have to. They are responsible for the plenary program, but not the meeting itself. So for example all day Wednesday and Thursday have nothing to do with them. Here is their Charter for more info: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-600).
I thought the CoC is more a question of the RIPE community's agreement/concensus (basically this taskforce's mailing list, which include the people from the RIPE Community interested on this topic). Similar to the way WGs work.
Anybody from RIPE PC can shed light on this? Brian? I hope I'm not creating a mess.
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 16:35, Amanda Gowland wrote: Hi Gergana, It's a good question. But seeing as the ENOG and MENOG and SEE Meetings have their own PCs, I think it's probably something that they would need to adopt on their own accord. Certainly, it would be simple to just adapt one for the RIPE Meeting but it's not within the scope of the TF to do that. thx, Amanda
On 08/04/2019 16:30, Gergana Petrova wrote: Hi Sasha, hi all,
Just want to join in with thanking you for this excellent CoC draft!
Just a general question, as I am not sure if the mandate of the Transforce covers this. The CoC mentions "Where does the Code of Conduct apply?" - RIPE meetings. I was wondering if we can include "RIPE meetings and other events organised by the RIPE NCC such as ENOG, MENOG, SEE and other regional meetings."
What do you think?
Cheers, Gergana
On 08/04/2019 10:48, Amanda Gowland wrote: Sasha,
THANK YOU for contributing such a stellar draft! I've gone through and made some edits, some more British spelling-isms + putting some of the goals in active tense. I also made the scope (in terms of who it applies to) a bit more explicit.
Warm regards,
Amanda
On 08/04/2019 10:36, John Springer wrote: I agree, excellent work!
I have suggest some minor edits of the Response guide.
John Springer acting solely on my own behalf
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org<mailto:david.huberman@icann.org> <mailto:david.huberman@icann.org>> wrote:
Sasha,
The draft CoC is quite excellent. Nice work! I have completed a copyediting pass in "suggesting" mode:
- normalized words to British English spellings (3 instances of behavior were changed to behaviour) - removed contractions - fixed a few typos - enforced consistent paragraph spacing - enforced the Oxford comma
/david writing solely on his personal behalf
On 4/5/19, 7:32 AM, "diversity on behalf of Sasha Romijn" <diversity-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> <mailto:diversity-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of sasha@mxsasha.eu<mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu> <mailto:sasha@mxsasha.eu>> wrote:
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.
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 _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.ripe.net_mailman_listinfo_diversity&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=iTOW7nSt3tBCc5xNiHfQNhFilU9Ki9_nVAHGfa3QG5w&m=ag_h5GXVGbSsDgGW59YleMXVaOJnV4ga6CJcCIfZ38A&s=BARWpiMNfao6C_dqEoTNumUx0AVYtnpFY2CTnE4YmwA&e=
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> <mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net<mailto:diversity@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 13:31:55 +0200 Sasha Romijn <sasha@mxsasha.eu> wrote:
Hello all, Hi 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/1IAJj9UjW2zroz5v6XQYgYEYotfZlV4Trk2vRdaoP...
Response guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gaLo4axYDRTpQnhUJyG92EHBmEIkxSDN8Urmy-zn...
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.
Writing here as I am a newbie in CoC writing, so my comments may be naive, and English is not my primary language. So I dont feel confident making the changes directly in the document. In the beginning listing "... moderators, organisers, and volunteers." is there a reason it doesnt end in an "open ended": moderators, organisers, volunteers, and others. In the principles section I would like to have "patient" added somehow. We often have a situation with newcomers not having the same experience and So I suggest changing "Be welcoming" to "Be welcoming and patient" Be welcoming. We strive to be a community that welcomes and supports people of all backgrounds and identities. This includes, but is not limited to, members of any race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, color, immigration status, social and economic class, educational level, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age, size, family status, religion, and mental and physical ability. Mvh/Best regards Henrik — Henrik Lund Kramshøj, Follower of the Great Way of Unix internet samurai cand.scient CISSP hlk@kramse.org hlk@zencurity.dk +45 2026 6000
Hi all, Sasha, thanks for the comprehensive drafts!! This is my input, speaking as an individual member of the community, and based on my personal experience, not as RIPE NCC staff: On 05/04/2019 13:31, Sasha Romijn wrote:
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.
My comments are mostly about the "ordering" of the parts of the document; so I prefer to send my suggestions to the list, rather then reshuffling the whole online document. 1. I think that the most important parts are *practical* instructions to the person who should be reporting the incident, and therefore, I would like to see that these sections are *moved up*: (just after "Principles") * What to do in case of violations? * Guidelines for reporting incidents * Other assistance * (& Reporting and contact information, which, IMO, should be folded into "Other assistance") The other sections can follow later: - Where does it apply (folding in "Sponsors, exhibitors..) - What can happen - (And special case) "reports against team member" 2. (in both documents) I believe that in the "resolutions" or "Actions" that can be taken, one is missing -- giving a warning -- and the others need to be given in a different order of importance: from the most reassuring (or frequent) to the least -- and therefore I have moved the "no action" to the bottom of the list, in the document itself. 3. The document "guidelines for response" should add: * who is in the team? how are they chosen? * the NAMING of the "team member", "contact", "staff member" etc should be consistent - it's confusing who-is-doing-what * the "sections" can use some reshuffling, e.g. "conflicts of interest" can be moved the the back of the document... 4. What is the role of, or relation to, the existing "trusted contacts"? (disclaimer - I am one of the "trusted contacts" now, and so I am directly involved in handling reports right now) I see several outcomes - that this role is considered as one of the "other assistance" options; that it disappears; or that it is included in the CoC-enforcement-Team... and I am open to all these, or any new, outcomes. 5. Finally, we will - practically - need a short version too, for the printing, one reference web page, etc -- with links to longer versions. Regards, Vesna
Sasha, On 05/04/2019 13.31, Sasha Romijn wrote:
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/1IAJj9UjW2zroz5v6XQYgYEYotfZlV4Trk2vRdaoP...
Like everyone else, I think this is really well done. One question about reporting. I have read of several cases where after reporting an incident, event organizers had the reporter meet with the people they are reporting about. It is hard for me to even imagine why anyone would consider this a good idea, but I can think of at least two cases that I read about where this happens so it must be somewhat common. Does it make sense to somehow be clear that the reporter is not expected to be involved with any actions taken, and that there is no idea that someone will "face their accuser"? (Apologies if it's already there and I missed it!) Cheers, -- Shane
Hi all, I merged all suggestions made in Google Docs, with some text tweaks where needed to make everything fit. For comments made on the list here, see below - I merged most of them. Thanks for all the feedback! As far as I’m concerned, the document is now ready to be presented to others, unless any other members would like to comment. Sasha
One question about reporting. I have read of several cases where after reporting an incident, event organizers had the reporter meet with the people they are reporting about.
Entirely agree. There was something in there about this, but I clarified it.
1. I think that the most important parts are *practical* instructions to the person who should be reporting the incident, and therefore, I would like to see that these sections are *moved up*: (just after "Principles") * What to do in case of violations? * Guidelines for reporting incidents * Other assistance * (& Reporting and contact information, which, IMO, should be folded into "Other assistance”)
Agreed and done. Folded Reporting and Contact information into the Guidelines for reporting, because it only had a single paragraph now.
2. (in both documents) I believe that in the "resolutions" or "Actions" that can be taken, one is missing -- giving a warning -- and the others need to be given in a different order of importance: from the most reassuring (or frequent) to the least -- and therefore I have moved the "no action" to the bottom of the list, in the document itself.
Agreed, already merged.
3. The document "guidelines for response" should add:
* who is in the team? how are they chosen?
This is a discussion we still need to have, I think, as noted in my other mail.
* the NAMING of the "team member", "contact", "staff member" etc should be consistent - it's confusing who-is-doing-what
Agreed, I think this is sufficiently clarified now.
* the "sections" can use some reshuffling, e.g. "conflicts of interest" can be moved the the back of the document…
I kind of like it where it is, as it is an important step in the process. Unresolved conflicts of interest can erode trust in the process.
In the beginning listing "... moderators, organisers, and volunteers." is there a reason it doesnt end in an "open ended": moderators, organisers, volunteers, and others.
I think that looks a bit strange grammatically, in the context of that paragraph. I did change “including” to “including, but not limited to” - I think that covers it.
So I suggest changing "Be welcoming" to "Be welcoming and patient”
We seem to have it in the first bullet point of that part already. Not sure when we added that, but it’s in there now. Sasha
On 9/5/19 21:52, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback! As far as I’m concerned, the document is now ready to be presented to others, unless any other members would like to comment.
Just a comment from the peanut gallery. How do the organisers derive their authority to take actions, especially those that deprive the violator of something, such as exclusion from an event without a refund, and how well will this stack up against the appropriate law? Regards, Mark.
Mark,
-----Original Message----- From: diversity <diversity-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Mark Prior Sent: Thursday 9 May 2019 13:36 To: Sasha Romijn <sasha@mxsasha.eu>; diversity@ripe.net Subject: Re: [diversity] Draft CoC and response guide
On 9/5/19 21:52, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback! As far as I’m concerned, the document is now ready to be presented to others, unless any other members would like to comment.
Just a comment from the peanut gallery.
How do the organisers derive their authority to take actions, especially those that deprive the violator of something, such as exclusion from an event without a refund, and how well will this stack up against the appropriate law?
Article 4.7 of the RIPE Meeting Terms & Conditions ( https://www.ripe.net/about-us/legal/ripe-meeting-registration-terms-and-cond... ) states: "4.7 The Registrant acknowledges, understands and agrees that at the Meeting people from different experiences, backgrounds and views exchange ideas in a respectful manner and it is expected from all participants, including the Registrant, to demonstrate tolerance and respect to everyone. If the Registrant fails to act accordingly, the RIPE NCC reserves the right to exclude the Registrant’s attendance from the Meeting, without being liable to pay any refund of the price of the Ticket or any other damages." So that's pretty clear. It can be easily amended to specifically mention the CoC when we get to that point. 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@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
On 10/5/19 18:07, Brian Nisbet wrote:
Mark,
-----Original Message----- From: diversity <diversity-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Mark Prior Sent: Thursday 9 May 2019 13:36 To: Sasha Romijn <sasha@mxsasha.eu>; diversity@ripe.net Subject: Re: [diversity] Draft CoC and response guide
On 9/5/19 21:52, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback! As far as I’m concerned, the document is now ready to be presented to others, unless any other members would like to comment.
Just a comment from the peanut gallery.
How do the organisers derive their authority to take actions, especially those that deprive the violator of something, such as exclusion from an event without a refund, and how well will this stack up against the appropriate law?
Article 4.7 of the RIPE Meeting Terms & Conditions ( https://www.ripe.net/about-us/legal/ripe-meeting-registration-terms-and-cond... ) states:
"4.7 The Registrant acknowledges, understands and agrees that at the Meeting people from different experiences, backgrounds and views exchange ideas in a respectful manner and it is expected from all participants, including the Registrant, to demonstrate tolerance and respect to everyone. If the Registrant fails to act accordingly, the RIPE NCC reserves the right to exclude the Registrant’s attendance from the Meeting, without being liable to pay any refund of the price of the Ticket or any other damages."
So that's pretty clear. It can be easily amended to specifically mention the CoC when we get to that point.
I would still see a need to tie the people saying someone has breeched the T&C's and this is their penalty to the "RIPE NCC". It could be just saying that the organisers are acting on behalf of the RIPE NCC. Mark. PS I was an organiser at AusNOG and some of the board took the "nuclear" CoC option and went to a lawyer to craft one. I didn't agree with that approach but the concern was ensuing the legal position was strong.
Hi Mark, There is already text in the RIPE Meeting T&C that says: 4.7 The Registrant acknowledges, understands and agrees that at the Meeting people from different experiences, backgrounds and views exchange ideas in a respectful manner and it is expected from all participants, including the Registrant, to demonstrate tolerance and respect to everyone. If the Registrant fails to act accordingly, the RIPE NCC reserves the right to exclude the Registrant’s attendance from the Meeting, without being liable to pay any refund of the price of the Ticket or any other damages. I can discuss with our legal team if the wording here needs to be more explicit around the CoC here. Thanks, Amanda On 10/05/2019 10:49, Mark Prior wrote:
On 10/5/19 18:07, Brian Nisbet wrote:
Mark,
-----Original Message----- From: diversity <diversity-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Mark Prior Sent: Thursday 9 May 2019 13:36 To: Sasha Romijn <sasha@mxsasha.eu>; diversity@ripe.net Subject: Re: [diversity] Draft CoC and response guide
On 9/5/19 21:52, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback! As far as I’m concerned, the document is now ready to be presented to others, unless any other members would like to comment.
Just a comment from the peanut gallery.
How do the organisers derive their authority to take actions, especially those that deprive the violator of something, such as exclusion from an event without a refund, and how well will this stack up against the appropriate law?
Article 4.7 of the RIPE Meeting Terms & Conditions ( https://www.ripe.net/about-us/legal/ripe-meeting-registration-terms-and-cond... ) states:
"4.7 The Registrant acknowledges, understands and agrees that at the Meeting people from different experiences, backgrounds and views exchange ideas in a respectful manner and it is expected from all participants, including the Registrant, to demonstrate tolerance and respect to everyone. If the Registrant fails to act accordingly, the RIPE NCC reserves the right to exclude the Registrant’s attendance from the Meeting, without being liable to pay any refund of the price of the Ticket or any other damages."
So that's pretty clear. It can be easily amended to specifically mention the CoC when we get to that point.
I would still see a need to tie the people saying someone has breeched the T&C's and this is their penalty to the "RIPE NCC". It could be just saying that the organisers are acting on behalf of the RIPE NCC.
Mark.
PS I was an organiser at AusNOG and some of the board took the "nuclear" CoC option and went to a lawyer to craft one. I didn't agree with that approach but the concern was ensuing the legal position was strong.
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
haha - double-posted. Literally had just hit "send" when I saw Brian's response come through. Great minds think alike and all that ;) On 10/05/2019 10:53, Amanda Gowland wrote:
Hi Mark,
There is already text in the RIPE Meeting T&C that says:
4.7 The Registrant acknowledges, understands and agrees that at the Meeting people from different experiences, backgrounds and views exchange ideas in a respectful manner and it is expected from all participants, including the Registrant, to demonstrate tolerance and respect to everyone. If the Registrant fails to act accordingly, the RIPE NCC reserves the right to exclude the Registrant’s attendance from the Meeting, without being liable to pay any refund of the price of the Ticket or any other damages.
I can discuss with our legal team if the wording here needs to be more explicit around the CoC here.
Thanks,
Amanda
On 10/05/2019 10:49, Mark Prior wrote:
On 10/5/19 18:07, Brian Nisbet wrote:
Mark,
-----Original Message----- From: diversity <diversity-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Mark Prior Sent: Thursday 9 May 2019 13:36 To: Sasha Romijn <sasha@mxsasha.eu>; diversity@ripe.net Subject: Re: [diversity] Draft CoC and response guide
On 9/5/19 21:52, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback! As far as I’m concerned, the document is now ready to be presented to others, unless any other members would like to comment.
Just a comment from the peanut gallery.
How do the organisers derive their authority to take actions, especially those that deprive the violator of something, such as exclusion from an event without a refund, and how well will this stack up against the appropriate law?
Article 4.7 of the RIPE Meeting Terms & Conditions ( https://www.ripe.net/about-us/legal/ripe-meeting-registration-terms-and-cond... ) states:
"4.7 The Registrant acknowledges, understands and agrees that at the Meeting people from different experiences, backgrounds and views exchange ideas in a respectful manner and it is expected from all participants, including the Registrant, to demonstrate tolerance and respect to everyone. If the Registrant fails to act accordingly, the RIPE NCC reserves the right to exclude the Registrant’s attendance from the Meeting, without being liable to pay any refund of the price of the Ticket or any other damages."
So that's pretty clear. It can be easily amended to specifically mention the CoC when we get to that point.
I would still see a need to tie the people saying someone has breeched the T&C's and this is their penalty to the "RIPE NCC". It could be just saying that the organisers are acting on behalf of the RIPE NCC.
Mark.
PS I was an organiser at AusNOG and some of the board took the "nuclear" CoC option and went to a lawyer to craft one. I didn't agree with that approach but the concern was ensuing the legal position was strong.
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Thanks Sasha, On 09/05/2019 14:22, Sasha Romijn wrote:
I merged all suggestions made in Google Docs, with some text tweaks where needed to make everything fit. For comments made on the list here, see below - I merged most of them.
Thanks for all the feedback! As far as I’m concerned, the document is now ready to be presented to others, unless any other members would like to comment.
I have added two comments in the Google Doc. Feel free to remove or ignore them. Sorry for the late comments, -- Benno -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
Hi Benno, On 9 May 2019, at 14:39, Benno Overeinder <benno@NLnetLabs.nl> wrote:
I have added two comments in the Google Doc. Feel free to remove or ignore them.
Regarding required vs expected in the first paragraph - yes, required is a stronger term, but that’s on purpose? I don’t think we’d want to weaken how binding the CoC is. It’s not a “please try to follow this”, it is a “you must follow this if you want to participate”. Regarding "Pushing a person to drink alcohol when they don’t want to drink, or deceiving someone into drinking alcohol.”, I added that intentionally for WTD in recent drafts. I imagine more questions might be asked about it, so I wanted to explain it in some detail. The reason I added it is that tech has a fairly heavy alcohol drinking culture. Excessive alcohol use is a major instigator for serious CoC incidents, and this is increased by the peer pressure of drinking alcohol. By making events more pleasant for people who don’t drink, can’t drink, or don’t want to drink more, the event becomes more welcoming to all and overall alcohol use reduces, reducing risk of CoC violations. I personally routinely also hear that people who can’t or don’t drink at all don’t want to attend social events, because they think they’ll be hassled or pressured about not drinking. It is normal for me to leave social events early because most of the attendees are drunk to a level that I don’t want to be myself, and it’s just no fun, and less safe for me. The part about deceiving people about alcohol use does also happen. People to whom alcohol is very normal and even expected to be “fun” do not always realise that deceiving someone into drinking is potentially life- threatening in some people. It doesn’t happen often, but it is part of the drinking culture, and the impact can be very severe - so that’s why I added it so explicitly. As an example, last year I was at a conference and warned them about their setup being likely to cause excessive alcohol use. They ignored my concerns, and I decided to leave the party when I saw one attendee nearly breaking their neck in reckless behaviour which organisers did not intervene in, and an attendee trying to set another attendee’s clothes on fire with a lighter. I don’t think I’ll ever go back to that event. (I’m not aware of anything this bad happening at RIPE meetings.) I wrote more about alcohol culture here: https://medium.com/@mxsash/how-to-build-a-better-alcohol-culture-at-your-tec... <https://medium.com/@mxsash/how-to-build-a-better-alcohol-culture-at-your-tech-conferences-and-events-9e1cce7179c0> Sasha
participants (11)
-
Amanda Gowland -
Benno Overeinder -
Brian Nisbet -
David Huberman -
Gergana Petrova -
Henrik Lund Kramshøj -
John Springer -
Mark Prior -
Sasha Romijn -
Shane Kerr -
Vesna Manojlovic