[diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items
- Previous message (by thread): [diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items
- Next message (by thread): [diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Amanda Gowland
agowland at ripe.net
Thu May 16 15:07:12 CEST 2019
And should I get the latest version from Google Docs and put it on the website so it's easier to circulate? On 16/05/2019 15:06, Amanda Gowland wrote: > +1 to getting this circulated today > > On 16/05/2019 15:03, Brian Nisbet wrote: >> >> Sasha, >> >> We absolutely don’t want people nit picking and wordsmithing by >> committee just about works, it doesn’t by community. >> >> I think we can put it out there and solicit a response, but it will >> have to be framed as something that is happening, and while it will >> be an open discussion, nor will every point be addressed, but we as a >> TF (it’s absolutely not all on you at all!) need to be able to >> justify our decisions. >> >> So a lot of it will be, “Please provide any feedback, which will be >> considered and possibly included in a 2^nd draft.” I’m happy to lead >> that process on the mailing list, as others may be? >> >> For me, the mandate will come from a general consensus of the >> community. The accountability… to the RIPE Chair and (soon to exist) >> Vice-Chair? Or to the Exec Board? I’m hoping others might have some >> thoughts here as well. >> >> There does have to be some appeal (and the groups above might work, >> with the Vice-Chair position in existence it might cover some of the >> problems with a potential Chair being in violation of the CoC?), but >> I haven’t got anything better than the existing structures and all of >> them have some issues, so which are the least bad. >> >> I’m very worried, given it’s the Friday before the meeting, that >> really presenting this at RIPE78 is going to be difficult. But given >> there were no objections, I think what I can do today is formally >> present the text as is to HPH and see what he reckons. (It doesn’t >> have to be me, at all, but I’m happy to do it.) >> >> Thanks, >> >> 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 at heanet.ie www.heanet.ie >> >> Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 >> >> *From:*diversity <diversity-bounces at ripe.net> *On Behalf Of *Sasha Romijn >> *Sent:* Tuesday 14 May 2019 19:51 >> *To:* diversity at ripe.net >> *Subject:* Re: [diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items >> >> Hi Brian, >> >> I think these are good next steps. I am a bit concerned about how to >> handle the response from the wider community. We indeed don’t want >> dozens of e-mails nitpicking every word, and this is a document where >> that risk is more significant than your average RIPE document. Also >> because there is a limited amount of time and energy I can put into >> responding and explaining things - responding to comments from 8 >> people on this list is still quite doable, but if there’s going to be >> 40 people commenting on the RIPE list, there’s limits to what I can >> and will do. Unless someone starts funding my work. >> >> So, some thought in advance about how we could smoothen this process >> would be useful. I have no ideas. >> >> Regarding the CoC team structure, mandate, process, etc., there will >> be questions if we circulate the text without this covered, so we’d >> need to explain that work on that is still ongoing. I expect this may >> be a more controversial point for the community, because it creates a >> new power structure that does not entirely fall under existing >> structures. >> >> Someone also raised, in the google doc comments, concerns about an >> option for reconsideration of a decision by different people, if >> someone feels the decision of the CoC team was unjustified. >> >> As I said in my recent e-mail, I have some early ideas about the team >> layout - those are in no way fixed. But I don’t really have any ideas >> on mandate, accountability, and at the same time guaranteeing >> independence, preventing excessive bureaucracy or fights on ripe-list >> about every CoC decision. We do need to start working on this to have >> any chance of putting something into operation by RIPE79. >> >> Sasha >> >> >> >> On 10 May 2019, at 10:51, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie >> <mailto:brian.nisbet at heanet.ie>> wrote: >> >> So, my thoughts on how we should proceed on all of this. These >> are just thoughts btw. >> >> * Present the full text to the RIPE Chair and discuss next steps >> * Circulate the text to the community >> * Possible LT at RIPE78 >> * Further input from the community >> * Into operation for RIPE79 >> >> What I certainly don’t want is wordsmithing by the community, nor >> would I expect the WG Chairs or the PC to be the CoC team. >> >> This is all pretty high level, but it’s a notion? I think we >> would need Mirijam or Amanda to make sure that HPH has some >> cycles to look at this over the next few days, without rushing him? >> >> 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 >> >> +35316609040brian.nisbet at heanet.ie >> <mailto:brian.nisbet at heanet.ie>www.heanet.ie <http://www.heanet.ie/> >> >> Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 >> >> *From:*Sasha Romijn <sasha at mxsasha.eu <mailto:sasha at mxsasha.eu>> >> *Sent:*Tuesday 7 May 2019 14:43 >> *To:*Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie >> <mailto:brian.nisbet at heanet.ie>> >> *Cc:*diversity at ripe.net <mailto:diversity at ripe.net> >> *Subject:*Re: [diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items >> >> Hi, >> >> The draft is waiting for me to merge some more suggested changes >> and fix some things raised in the thread. >> >> If all goes well, I can wrap that up this week. >> >> Based on the responses on the draft, we seem to mostly agree on >> it otherwise. >> >> As Amanda said, there is still the question of the CoC team, >> which handles CoC incidents, and how they get a mandate. I have >> some*_rough_*thoughts on that. >> >> As I’ve argued before, I think this role should not rest with the >> WG chairs or with the RIPE chair. The best option is likely a >> specific CoC team. Considering the structure of this community >> with a mix of online spaces and conferences, my first thought is >> one team, of which at least 4 people should be present and >> available at any RIPE meeting. Attending (all) RIPE meetings >> should not be a requirement, as RIPE meetings are not accessible >> to all, so it would be exclusionary. Having a single team helps >> some continuity, ongoing development, and consistency. >> >> I’m not sure whether we should retain the trusted contacts as a >> separate team. I guess that could be very confusing. >> >> The team needs to have an independent mandate, which includes >> measures like banning of a person from a conference, or >> terminating an ongoing talk. >> >> Regarding who should be in it, I’m not sure how to work that out >> within the governance models of the RIPE community. In Django, >> the first CoC committee was formed ages ago, and mostly consisted >> of people involved in introducing the CoC at the time. The >> committee self-governs, asking for new volunteers when needed. >> The committee has a mandate from the board of the Django Software >> Foundation, and is also accountable to them. That board is in >> turn elected by the membership of that foundation. So in general >> there is self-management and delegation of mandate, but with >> accountability and reporting. The board can intervene if needed. >> I believe the Python Software Foundation has or is working on a >> similar model. >> >> CoC team members also need to know what they’re getting into, and >> ensure they have sufficient availability. Especially on-site at a >> meeting, action may need to happen fast. Which means being >> reachable and able to change plans suddenly. Also, CoC work can >> be emotionally intense. Sometimes it’s really hard to decide >> whether it’s a violation and what should be done, sometimes >> incidents occur that are very serious and have a heavy impact. A >> lot of empathy work is involved. It also means your own behaviour >> is under the heaviest scrutiny of pretty much anyone at the >> conference, because as a team member you set the example of what >> is acceptable. This extends to every interaction related to the >> conference. It means you absolutely can not get a bit drunk at >> the party and blurt out a few sexist jokes - if we fail to set an >> example, the process falls apart (the #1 reason for me not to >> report incidents is because I don’t trust the response team). >> And, not everyone will like every decision you make, so >> especially team members from minority groups are at an increased >> risk of abusive behaviour from others. >> >> For training my first choice: >> https://otter.technology/code-of-conduct-training/ >> >> I have not followed this training myself yet, but I have >> universally heard good things about it. >> >> (And CoC team members should not be required to pay out of pocket >> for this, as that would be exclusionary.) >> >> So, a big question is: within the processes of the RIPE >> community, how does a CoC response team get a mandate? To whom is >> it accountable and how? Can it self-manage members? >> >> And also essential: we should prevent the CoC team from being >> dragged into months of discussion for every decision, just >> because one or two people who don’t like it stir up discussion on >> a mailing list - I do see this as a potential risk in the RIPE >> community due to its structure. Also, no process may depend on a >> single person. >> >> (I will not be attending RIPE78 btw) >> >> Sasha >> >> >> >> >> On 7 May 2019, at 15:00, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie >> <mailto:brian.nisbet at heanet.ie>> wrote: >> >> Folks, >> >> I'm just wondering, where do we, collectively, believe the >> action item (or similar) lies at present with the draft for >> the new CoC. >> >> From my reading there was an amount of feedback provided, but >> is the draft at a point where it can be officially shared >> with HPH, other stakeholders and the community, or is there >> more work to do? We have under two weeks before RIPE78 begins >> and I worry that we aren't in a good place to share our work >> (while absolutely noting that people might be waiting for me >> to do something?). >> >> Thanks, >> >> 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 >> +35316609040brian.nisbet at heanet.ie >> <mailto:brian.nisbet at heanet.ie>www.heanet.ie >> <http://www.heanet.ie/> >> Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity at ripe.net <mailto:diversity at ripe.net> >> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity at ripe.net <mailto:diversity at ripe.net> >> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity at ripe.net >> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20190516/2ab9c733/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items
- Next message (by thread): [diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]