On 01/02/2022 00:09, Nigel Titley wrote:
On 31/01/2022 21:15, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 08:58:22PM +0100, Hans Petter Holen wrote:
I will not comment on your email right now, now but I will, however, point you to the RIPE Code of Conduct.
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-766 <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-766>
I read your characterisations of the document, as "This is probably one of the worst»
as well as numerous others characterisations I will refrain from quoting, though out the document as completely unnecessary.
They are not helping everyone to feel safe and included.
I find the use of the Code of Conduct as a tool to suppress criticism *on documents* very much inappropriate.
This is not making *me* feel "safe and included".
Denis has explained well enough why he thinks that many of these documents are not in a good shape, singling out the one he thinks is the worst of these as a starting point to get the work started to improve them.
I'm afraid that I agree with Gert. Denis was not attacking a person. He was attacking a document. His language might not have been as temperate as it might have been but he makes a number of very valid, well reasoned points. The appropriate response would have been to start a discussion with the aim of fixing the problems he has found (and they seem at face value to be substantial). And as much of this occurred on my watch as Chairman of the EB I accept a degree of blame.
Nigel
Nigel, 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." Regards, Hank