Hank On 01/02/2022 06:56, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
I too agree with Denis and Gert but there is no need to accept blame. Denis is not accusing anyone. If anything, we are all to blame for not being as diligent as Denis. Denis has even suggested a way forward:
"it will benefit the RIPE NCC to employ someone qualified or experienced in contract law to review and re-write all the NCC's contracts and agreements so they actually say what they were intended to mean."
Indeed, and I think that this would be the way forward. And I also thank Denis for the excellent analysis that he has done. If this had occurred on my watch then I would have started by pointing the RIPE NCC legal team at Denis' remarks and asking them to do their own analysis. I would also have thanked Denis publicly, whilst noting that his language might have been more temperate. The trouble with the Respect Policy is that it is rather like a machine gun. There are times when it is the weapon of choice: in a case of bullying or ad hominem attack for instance. But where the attack has been against a document, whose authors are lost in the mists of time, it is like using a machine gun against a pea-shooter. And for it to be brought out at the start of a discussion makes one start to very gently wonder if there is maybe more of a case to answer than can be explained by bit-rot, documents not written by native English speakers and internet chat-room lawyers (amongst whom I proudly count myself (although I would claim that my English is probably fair enough)). Finally, I would just like this to be laid to rest. Tempers are rising and the heat may eventually reach the level where the Respect Policy *is* the weapon of choice. I call on everyone, myself included, to calm down, have a cup of tea, and let Hans-Petter get on with the job of getting his legal team to verify (or not) what Denis has said. Yours in Peace ;-) Nigel