[address-policy-wg] RIPE Code of Conduct and discussion on this list

Dear Leo Vegoda/ List Members!

I can only speak to my perception of the situation, however i would ask 
you to please consider the content of this email:

While the communication from dennis was certainly not in line with the 
code of conduct, i do see that he is very passionate about the topic.

I am not sure if the proposers of 2023-04 would agree, but i do belive 
there is currently a very important discussion going on.

This is about how the policy/language in it is interpreted and the 
resulting implications. Certainly, discussions can be heated, and i 
would also like denis to understand that there are acceptable and 
non-acceptable ways to communicate.
At the same time, it feels very wrong to "cut" him out of the discussion 
at this point, by suspending his ability to post.

Please note that i hold opposing views to his, but i would still like to 
hear/read his inputs, if he can manage to communicate it in a more 
constructive way going forward.

So is there any alternative course of action that allows this discussion 
to move forward with dennis being able to participate at the current stage?

That said,  I fully agree and support the descision to extend the 
disucssion deadline by 4 Weeks!

Kind Regards

Sebastian


On 1/11/24 14:42, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> Dear Working Group,
>
> Earlier, Denis sent a message that contained multiple ad-hominem
> attacks on the proposers of 2023-04 (Add AGGREGATED-BY-LIR status for
> IPv4 PA assignments). This is in conflict with our Code of Conduct. We
> will not tolerate breaches of the Code of conduct.
>
> As a reminder, our Code of Conduct urges us to "be open, considerate,
> and respectful." Further, "Aggressive communication" such as "Calling
> people offensive names" is not allowed.
>
> Denis has previously had a private warning. As this is his second
> breach in a discussion of this proposal, we will instruct the RIPE NCC
> to stop him from posting to the list for 30 days.
>
> Also, as the discussion has derailed, we will extend the Review Phase
> by four weeks. We encourage everyone to focus comments on the proposal
> and its potential impact. Do not comment on individuals, their
> characteristics, or motivations.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Leo Vegoda, for the Address Policy WG co-chairs
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0xCB3F9792B5ACD96C.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3935 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20240111/d12d340b/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20240111/d12d340b/attachment.sig>