Towards a more inclusive community
Dear all, I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms. I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the process and our ability to execute. A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well being. I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU Kind regards, Job
On 17/10/2019 16:24, Job Snijders wrote:
Dear all,
I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms.
I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting inappropriately in any sort of way. I consider RIPE meetings extremely safe and inclusive, so just paint me clueless as to what the issue is. Regards, Hank
I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the process and our ability to execute.
A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well being.
I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU
Kind regards,
Job
Perhaps you are not the one being harassed and the folks who are haven't told you about their experiences. Leslie On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:57 AM Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
On 17/10/2019 16:24, Job Snijders wrote:
Dear all,
I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms.
I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting inappropriately in any sort of way. I consider RIPE meetings extremely safe and inclusive, so just paint me clueless as to what the issue is.
Regards, Hank
I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the process and our ability to execute.
A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well being.
I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU
Kind regards,
Job
On 17/10/2019 17:00, Leslie wrote: Indeed. I am clueless since I haven't seen a single incident message among the various mailing lists. I would expect that RIPE should name and shame those harassing people at meetings. I am truly speechless that this goes on in 2019. -Hank
Perhaps you are not the one being harassed and the folks who are haven't told you about their experiences.
Leslie
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:57 AM Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
On 17/10/2019 16:24, Job Snijders wrote:
Dear all,
I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms. I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting inappropriately in any sort of way. I consider RIPE meetings extremely safe and inclusive, so just paint me clueless as to what the issue is.
Regards, Hank
I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the process and our ability to execute.
A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well being.
I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU
Kind regards,
Job
On 17/10/2019 16:08, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
On 17/10/2019 17:00, Leslie wrote:
Indeed. I am clueless since I haven't seen a single incident message among the various mailing lists. I would expect that RIPE should name and shame those harassing people at meetings. I am truly speechless that this goes on in 2019. I, too, am speechless.
-Hank
Perhaps you are not the one being harassed and the folks who are haven't told you about their experiences.
Leslie
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:57 AM Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
On 17/10/2019 16:24, Job Snijders wrote:
Dear all,
I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms. I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting inappropriately in any sort of way. I consider RIPE meetings extremely safe and inclusive, so just paint me clueless as to what the issue is.
Regards, Hank
I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the process and our ability to execute.
A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well being.
I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU
Kind regards,
Job
And so if this is indeed something people experience we need to fix it now. Thanks, Melchior On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 4:10 PM Amanda Gowland <agowland@ripe.net> wrote:
On 17/10/2019 16:08, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
On 17/10/2019 17:00, Leslie wrote:
Indeed. I am clueless since I haven't seen a single incident message among the various mailing lists. I would expect that RIPE should name and shame those harassing people at meetings. I am truly speechless that this goes on in 2019. I, too, am speechless.
-Hank
Perhaps you are not the one being harassed and the folks who are haven't told you about their experiences.
Leslie
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:57 AM Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
On 17/10/2019 16:24, Job Snijders wrote:
Dear all,
I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms. I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting inappropriately in any sort of way. I consider RIPE meetings extremely safe and inclusive, so just paint me clueless as to what the issue is.
Regards, Hank
I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the process and our ability to execute.
A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well being.
I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU
Kind regards,
Job
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 04:10:47PM +0200, Amanda Gowland wrote:
On 17/10/2019 16:08, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
On 17/10/2019 17:00, Leslie wrote:
Indeed. I am clueless since I haven't seen a single incident message among the various mailing lists. I would expect that RIPE should name and shame those harassing people at meetings. I am truly speechless that this goes on in 2019. I, too, am speechless.
What always amazes me with these things, whether it's at a ripe level, or as we've seen wider in society. "But I haven't seen it"
Perhaps you are not the one being harassed and the folks who are haven't told you about their experiences.
I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting inappropriately in any sort of way. I consider RIPE meetings extremely safe and inclusive, so just paint me clueless as to what the issue is.
I've been to exactly 1 ripe meeting. Ripe 77. Within 3 minutes of arriving, while in the queue to pick up my badge, the guy behind me in the queue was hitting on me and making me feel uncomfortable. Three. Minutes. Part of what we are dealing with here is the "acting inappropriately in any sort of way". What you consider appropriate behaviour may not be the same as what I consider appropriate. While in the diversity lunch, there was a disagreement between myself and another attendee. Someone who I've been told is known for being a pain. That interaction left me stood outside the room in tears being comforted by one of the approved contact people. I spent the rest of the event trying to avoid being anywhere near that individual. It was suggested by one speaker that people talk to those in minorities about the harrassment we experience both at RIPE and as members of the wider tech community. Don't, if we want to volunteer the information we will. But for most of us, we don't want to. We don't want to have to relive it to tell it every time. I'm sat here at my laptop at home, watching the live stream, writing this, in tears, as I relive the experiences. It hurts even more when people say "I've not seen it, so it can't be happening". It devalues our experience. It's basically gaslighting. I don't want to talk about this shit. I don't want to be the one who has to go to tech conferences and do presentations on how we can make a nicer environment for everyone. But I realise that if I don't speak up, then I'm doing a disservice to those who come after me. You may not have experienced it. You may not have seen it. But its there. Believe us. J -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFdqHth42M0lILkmGIRAlsHAKCO+inrLZqMiuVm+0frOdVZuQO2yQCgrFco GohEUBgA3N2Uzy7ck9bAo2E= =JnLM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 17 Oct 2019, at 15:08, Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
I would expect that RIPE should name and shame those harassing people at meetings.
Naming and shaming may not be the best or most effective way to deal with idiots who behave inappropriately. I wonder too if we are capable of producing a legally watertight definition of harrassment which could underpin a naming and shaming approach. If I feel harrassed by someone (for some definition of harrassed), is that enough to name and shame? IMO shunning/banishing people seems to be more appropriate for a mediaeval cult and I hope we don't go down that path. Can we consider other ways of dealing with behaviour which is wrong?
Jim,
-----Original Message----- From: ripe-list <ripe-list-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Jim Reid Sent: Thursday 17 October 2019 15:47 To: Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> Cc: RIPE List <ripe-list@ripe.net>; diversity@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ripe-list] Towards a more inclusive community
On 17 Oct 2019, at 15:08, Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
I would expect that RIPE should name and shame those harassing people at
meetings.
Naming and shaming may not be the best or most effective way to deal with idiots who behave inappropriately. I wonder too if we are capable of producing a legally watertight definition of harrassment which could underpin a naming and shaming approach. If I feel harrassed by someone (for some definition of harrassed), is that enough to name and shame?
IMO shunning/banishing people seems to be more appropriate for a mediaeval cult and I hope we don't go down that path. Can we consider other ways of dealing with behaviour which is wrong?
Asking someone to leave a meeting or, as an extension of that, asking them to leave and telling them they may not come back for subsequent meetings (whether forever or for a period) is very much at the end of any list of actions anyone wishes to take as part of the enforcement of a CoC. That said, if someone is found to be continually disruptive or problematic, or if their presence is clearly keeping other people away etc. then we should not be afraid of taking that step. It needs to be taken carefully, of course, and at no point should it be something that can be easily or arbitrarily done, but it must be possible, or else we, as a community, are saying that the right of a harmful person to attend a meeting outweighs the right of those they harm to do similar. And in those circumstances I think the community needs to carefully consider what we want more, and what we feel is the best for that community in the short, medium and long terms. Certainly for me the answer is that this tool must exist, to hope to never have to use it, but to know that if it is necessary, then it will be used. And, of course, as Hans Petter points out, it's already in there, v3.0 of the CoC actually gives more clarity around the process for invoking it. 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 21 Oct 2019, at 09:20, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> wrote:
And, of course, as Hans Petter points out, it's already in there, v3.0 of the CoC actually gives more clarity around the process for invoking it.
The “we’ve always done that” argument is not progressive or open-minded or receptive to change. The TF need to consider other options. A range of sanctions are possible. It would be good to know what ones were discussed by the TF and why they were accepted or rejected.
Hello Jim, On 21 Oct 2019, at 10:37, Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
The TF need to consider other options. A range of sanctions are possible.
A range of resolutions (the proposed CoC does not use the term “sanctions”) are already in the document. Perhaps it helps as well if I offer some context. From my personal experience being on several CoC teams, and seeing reports from other teams, over the last several years, I’d say that 80-90% of reports I’ve been involved with are resolved with what the draft calls a private reprimand. We contact the person, tell them that what happened is not acceptable and explain why. They understand, apologise, and don’t do it again (as far as we know). The reporter is almost always happy with that resolution as well, so the situation is resolved. I have dealt with reports where more serious resolutions were decided upon. One form is intentional escalation, where the person continues and escalates their behaviour intentionally. The other common form are reports which are so serious that a more serious resolution is needed. To share a few examples where a more serious action than a simple reprimand was taken: - Someone who was permanently denied participation after behaviour was addressed by a private reprimand, and they continued to escalate up to the point of making death threats to a CoC team member. - Someone who caused several separate incidents due to severely excessive alcohol use, was warned that any further incident would lead to permanently being denied participation to further conferences. That person improved their behaviour and is still an active member of that community. In fact, they were, and continue to be, very grateful that our team forced them to confront a serious drinking problem. - Someone who vandalised a poster with a hateful message calling for genocide on a particular demographic. I would have been strongly in favour of permanently denying participation. Unfortunately the person was never identified. I also can’t say for sure whether that would have been the team’s consensus, as we never progressed to that discussion. - Someone who made death threats against a conference organiser (which was more severe than the first example, as when both parties may be at the conference, the threat has much more credibility). - Someone who made repeated statements to the organisers that they were not planning to follow the CoC, but had not made any serious violations. The person was informed that the CoC was not optional, and that if they felt unable to follow the CoC, they would not be able to participate in the community. However, it was stressed that they were still entirely welcome in the future otherwise. The person indicated they were not interested in participating any further. I don’t know if the ratios in resolutions map to the RIPE community as well, as the other communities in which I’ve done this work had already made much more progress in diversity and inclusivity than the RIPE community. In this context, I continue to be surprised that the idea that someone may be, in theory, denied further participation, appears to be so controversial in this community. Does this community honestly believe that in the cases above, denying participation is excessive? And as Brian and I said in our RIPE79 session, doing nothing will also deny people participation - we’ll just be denying participation to their targets instead. Sasha
I agree with Sasha On Fri, Nov 22, 2019, 20:03 Sasha Romijn <sasha@mxsasha.eu> wrote:
Hello Jim,
On 21 Oct 2019, at 10:37, Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
The TF need to consider other options. A range of sanctions are possible.
A range of resolutions (the proposed CoC does not use the term “sanctions”) are already in the document.
Perhaps it helps as well if I offer some context. From my personal experience being on several CoC teams, and seeing reports from other teams, over the last several years, I’d say that 80-90% of reports I’ve been involved with are resolved with what the draft calls a private reprimand. We contact the person, tell them that what happened is not acceptable and explain why. They understand, apologise, and don’t do it again (as far as we know). The reporter is almost always happy with that resolution as well, so the situation is resolved.
I have dealt with reports where more serious resolutions were decided upon. One form is intentional escalation, where the person continues and escalates their behaviour intentionally. The other common form are reports which are so serious that a more serious resolution is needed.
To share a few examples where a more serious action than a simple reprimand was taken: - Someone who was permanently denied participation after behaviour was addressed by a private reprimand, and they continued to escalate up to the point of making death threats to a CoC team member. - Someone who caused several separate incidents due to severely excessive alcohol use, was warned that any further incident would lead to permanently being denied participation to further conferences. That person improved their behaviour and is still an active member of that community. In fact, they were, and continue to be, very grateful that our team forced them to confront a serious drinking problem. - Someone who vandalised a poster with a hateful message calling for genocide on a particular demographic. I would have been strongly in favour of permanently denying participation. Unfortunately the person was never identified. I also can’t say for sure whether that would have been the team’s consensus, as we never progressed to that discussion. - Someone who made death threats against a conference organiser (which was more severe than the first example, as when both parties may be at the conference, the threat has much more credibility). - Someone who made repeated statements to the organisers that they were not planning to follow the CoC, but had not made any serious violations. The person was informed that the CoC was not optional, and that if they felt unable to follow the CoC, they would not be able to participate in the community. However, it was stressed that they were still entirely welcome in the future otherwise. The person indicated they were not interested in participating any further.
I don’t know if the ratios in resolutions map to the RIPE community as well, as the other communities in which I’ve done this work had already made much more progress in diversity and inclusivity than the RIPE community.
In this context, I continue to be surprised that the idea that someone may be, in theory, denied further participation, appears to be so controversial in this community. Does this community honestly believe that in the cases above, denying participation is excessive? And as Brian and I said in our RIPE79 session, doing nothing will also deny people participation - we’ll just be denying participation to their targets instead.
Sasha
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
Hi Hans, I can tell you that I've been harassed in this RIR and another RIR meetings, both by email and in person, just because I'm contributing. Just because my views in my policy proposal are different than the view of other people. People yelled me in the mic, insulted me by email, but the most terrible thing was trying to scare me with "you will return home in a box" if you keep going this path. Of course, I'm not scared at all, but I'm sure some people could feel scared, not come to meetings and even more, stop contributing in the lists. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 17/10/19 16:09, "ripe-list en nombre de Hank Nussbacher" <ripe-list-bounces@ripe.net en nombre de hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> escribió: On 17/10/2019 17:00, Leslie wrote: Indeed. I am clueless since I haven't seen a single incident message among the various mailing lists. I would expect that RIPE should name and shame those harassing people at meetings. I am truly speechless that this goes on in 2019. -Hank > Perhaps you are not the one being harassed and the folks who are > haven't told you about their experiences. > > Leslie > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:57 AM Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote: >> On 17/10/2019 16:24, Job Snijders wrote: >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and >>> inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms. >> I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any >> incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting >> inappropriately in any sort of way. I consider RIPE meetings >> extremely safe and inclusive, so just paint me clueless as to what the >> issue is. >> >> Regards, >> Hank >> >> >>> I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the >>> process and our ability to execute. >>> >>> A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet >>> engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this >>> diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them >>> to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well >>> being. >>> >>> I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Job >>> >> ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
Dear all, Because it is as good as invisible when it happens. I know stories, One from a RIPE meeting, but also from a private situation that when it happens it can happen in a supposedly safe space under the eyes of other people and them not noticing a thing.
On 17 Oct 2019, at 16:24, Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
I have not been to as many meetings as you but I have never seen any incident, even in the slightest, where the people attending were acting inappropriately in any sort of way.
Hello Job, Thanks for sharing this video with us. You bring up many important points. In the RIPE community plenary on Thursday, Brian and I mentioned that while some community members have concerns about the concept that, in severe cases, people could be made to leave a RIPE meeting, we are currently just as much at risk of scaring people away, and some may have already left, or decided to stay away. The people that silently left or stayed away are, in my experience, also much more likely to be members of already underrepresented groups. In that light, I wanted to share this comment with the list, posted as a comment on your video: "Hm. I've always wanted to visit a ripe meetup, but watching this whole situation from the sidelines has been kind of discouraging. I'm sure if I ask people they're going to tell me it's a great event, but truth is, if it’s anything like the other places I've been where a CoC was controversial, I doubt I'll really feel welcome there. Not sure where I'm going with this but I did want to thank you for your efforts to change things for the better.” Sasha
On 17 Oct 2019, at 15:24, Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> wrote:
Dear all,
I've been observing various efforts towards constructing a safe and inclusive environment both at RIPE meetings and our online platforms. I appreciate these efforts, however, I have some concerns with the process and our ability to execute.
A careful observer may see that the next generation of Internet engineers is not quite like the current establishment. I believe this diversity needs to be acknowledged in our policies. We owe it to them to create an environment that contributes to their comfort and well being.
I recorded some thoughts on my way to RIPE - https://youtu.be/6_dLgcfv8kU
Kind regards,
Job
_______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity
participants (12)
-
Amanda Gowland -
Brian Nisbet -
Hank Nussbacher -
Jim Reid -
Job Snijders -
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ -
Julia Freeman -
Leslie -
Melchior Aelmans -
Ruben van Staveren -
Salam Yamout -
Sasha Romijn