- diversity - mailman.ripe.net

CoC v3.0 and RIPE List Email
by Brian Nisbet 16 Oct '19

16 Oct '19

Malcolm, In regard to the email you've just sent to the RIPE List, honestly, I'm gobsmacked. I see Hans Petter has also clarified on the list, but I think we need more than that. You are on the Diversity TF, you have the ability to interact with the conversation around the CoC and you will have seen that Julia has been talking to HPH about how best to proceed. There is, as you should be aware, zero intention of asking the Plenary to approve the CoC tomorrow. We absolutely need to circulate v3.0 for discussion and, as referenced, speak to the NCC about an Impact Analysis. I'm not even going to get into my frustrations around this whole process, because that's not the point of this email. I believe you need to immediately reply to your own mail and say that you were mistaken and that the new version CoC will be presented to the Community by the Diversity TF, a version that has taken into account the feedback received both within and without the TF. We will then be speaking to the NCC about an IA and will take that into account as well. Currently you are spreading fear and trying to undermine the TF, which is not what I would have ever expected from you. Brian Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

1 0

Clarification re: RIPE NCC & survey
by Amanda Gowland 14 Oct '19

14 Oct '19

Hi list, To clarify on the one-question survey that Denesh emailed to the list earlier this week: The RIPE NCC has no involvement in this survey - including collecting or analysing the survey data or presenting the results. Thanks, Amanda (sent as a woman at the RIPE Meeting and member of the Diversity TF only)

1 0

[FWD: CoC Impact assessment]
by Julia Freeman 14 Oct '19

14 Oct '19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Forgot to cc the mailing list when I sent this to HPH. I only had one reply to my draft from Job, folded in their feedback, and sent the email. I will forward HPH's response when I get it. Thanks Julia - ----- Forwarded message ----- From: Julia Freeman <> To: <hph> Subject: CoC Impact assessment Dear Hans Peiter, I am writing on behalf of the diversity task force regarding the proposed improvements to the Ripe Code Of Conduct. There has been some confusion as to the next steps we need to take, and were hoping you could provide guidance on what should happen next. We have a draft version 3.0 of the CoC, based on feedback from various parties to a version 2.0 that was sent to ripe mailing lists in May. This version is below. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yqOUPR02SONuSt812cuOBkk_xnhjYzjdk9qmsJk… It has been suggested that perhaps we should have RIPE NCC legal do an Impact Analysis on the code of conduct before it's fully adopted, but we are unclear the exact process required. Please can you advise, and if appropriate, request RIPE NCC Legal do an impact analysis on our proposed code of conduct. Yours Sinceerly Julia Freeman (On behalf of the Ripe Diversity Task Force) - ----- End forwarded message ----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFdpAZh42M0lILkmGIRAvZ+AJ9YsTAHiIixOn2Hb8/5W3Fw90c7fACgm/rw /9FlobSIFhzmWbKfezyVops= =9udy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Email to HPH
by Julia Freeman 09 Oct '19

09 Oct '19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At risk of writing an email by commmittee, below is my first draft of the email for HPH. I just wanna double check I've fully understood all the points we're asking before I hit send. Is the below what people had in mind that we should be asking? - ------ Dear Hans Peiter, I am writing on behalf of the diversity task force regarding the proposed improvements to the Ripe Code Of Conduct. There has been some confusion as to the next steps we need to take, and were hoping you could provide guidance on what should happen next. We have a draft version 3.0 of the CoC, based on feedback from various parties to a version 2.0 that was sent to ripe mailing lists in May. This version is below. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yqOUPR02SONuSt812cuOBkk_xnhjYzjdk9qmsJk… It has been suggested that perhaps we should have ripe legal do an Impact Analysis on the CoC of conduct before it's fully adopted, but we are unclear the exact process required. Please can you advise. Julia Freeman (On behalf of the Ripe Diversity Task Force) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFdnbL342M0lILkmGIRAkYmAJwN7sL5JJCrgRqn6nMSebwIfacRugCfSakO 5+ZhyefOoVuIdaR6X97Ntlc= =WFrz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

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

08 Oct '19

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

8 10

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

08 Oct '19

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

1 0

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

04 Oct '19

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

7 16

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

19 Sep '19

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

1 0

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

02 Sep '19

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

12 24

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

29 Jul '19

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

7 14