[diversity] CoC Draft & Action Items

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://mailman.ripe.net/
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     diversity mailing list
>>     diversity at ripe.net <mailto:diversity at ripe.net>
>>     https://mailman.ripe.net/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> diversity mailing list
>> diversity at ripe.net
>> https://mailman.ripe.net/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/diversity/attachments/20190516/2ab9c733/attachment.html>