[diversity] RIPE Code of Conduct 2.0

In addition to echoing Sasha's views here, I would also like to say that 
in principle, yes, all community members should intervene when they see 
CoC violations.

However, in my own personal experience attending 20 RIPE Meetings over 
the past ten years, I have been groped more times than I'd like to 
count, asked for sex more times that I care to recall, and even at the 
last meeting, had a well-known and 'visible' community member make 
inappropriate sexual innuendos to my face.

I remember in Madrid, when someone (who had previously been harassing 
women in Copenhagen) grabbed my wrist and dragged me off the dance floor 
and tried to convince he to leave with him (he didn't, I knew who he was 
and told him where to go). I told my male colleague about it the next 
day, who was right beside me the entire time and had no idea what had 
happened. He was totally shocked that this kind of stuff happens - which 
is something I've heard from a lot of men who I've spoken to over the years.

I also told my manager what had happened the next day, he shrugged and 
replied "Well, what do you want me to do about it?" in front of 
colleagues. I quickly learned that the processes we had in place were 
woefully inadequate.

So, no, expecting fellow attendees to intervene is not a solution, it's 
an ideal we should hope to aspire to one day. In the meantime, we need 
to ensure a safe space for all attendees and hard consequences for those 
who threaten that space.

Amanda

On 05/06/2019 12:20, Sasha Romijn wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> Thanks for your extensive response.
>
> Unless I’ve overlooked it, we did not include a mention of the proposed
> CoC response guide in the mail to ripe-list, which answers some of
> your questions, and I’ve responded to more things below.
>
> The most recent draft of the response guide is on:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gaLo4axYDRTpQnhUJyG92EHBmEIkxSDN8Urmy-zn9nQ/edit?usp=sharing
>
>> 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.
>
> Although this is a good message in general, it is in my experience
> unlikely to have much effect. Speaking up, even if you are not the
> person directly affected by the incident, is a big step. It always 
> involves
> some danger, especially when the person creating harm is in a position
> of power. The bystander effect also comes into play.
>
> I would definitely be unlikely to speak up, because it’s usually too 
> risky,
> and has too little chance to make a difference. Especially at a RIPE
> meeting right now, due to lack of an effective CoC process.
>
> Also, “helping all parties to resolve the situation” is risky language,
> as it places a responsibility on the person being harmed to contribute
> to resolving the situation. In some incidents this may be appropriate,
> but in CoC teams I’ve been a part of, a fundamental point of all the
> process is that we place as little burden on the reporter as possible.
>
>> 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?
>
> Well, currently I wouldn’t consider reporting a CoC incident at a RIPE
> meeting, because why would I? None of the people you list are actually
> empowered to take any action, other than offer sympathies.
>
> And how will these people make decisions? If I make a CoC report, will
> it be discussed by the entire PC, all chairs, and trusted contacts 
> together?
> That is way too many people, and introduces many problems.
>
> If you empower these people to actually take action, up to the unusually
> rare action of immediate removal from the conference, how does it solve
> the concerns you raise about a CoC team?
>
> On a sidenote, this would also involve a requirement for training all PC
> members, WG chairs, and trusted contacts at CoC incident response.
>
>> 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.
>
> Are you saying that people should always, in every incident, first have
> the behaviour pointed out, then re-violate, before more serious action
> can be taken?
>
>> 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.
>
> I’d argue that the current CoC process has way too many people kind of
> responsible, and therefore in the end nobody responsible. In the current
> situation, nobody has sufficient power, is able to act with sufficient 
> speed,
> provide sufficient confidentiality, and has expertise, to deal with 
> incidents.
>
> As an example, I reported a CoC incident about 7 months ago now, and
> have still not received a response other than a number of apologies for
> not sending a response. This is exactly due to the lack of process and
> clear responsibility.
>
>> But let us not create a new committee whose
>> sole purpose is to sanction community members without any process!
>
> I think this is partially addressed by the response guide linked above,
> which we should have published along with the CoC process. Perhaps
> this needs amendments. But the new proposal has much more process
> behind it than the current setup.
>
>> 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.
>
> Do you have a suggested wording for this? I have intentionally avoided
> this in the past, because it risks discouraging reports, and getting
> people to report incidents is one of the hardest parts.
>
> Sasha
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity at ripe.net
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/diversity/attachments/20190605/25812f5d/attachment.html>