[diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0

Yay, thanks all. And thank you Julia for stepping forward.

If I can be of any help in formulating emails etc, please let me know.

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amanda Gowland <agowland at ripe.net>
> Sent: Friday 4 October 2019 12:55
> To: Mirjam Kuehne <mir at ripe.net>; Rob Evans <Rob.Evans at jisc.ac.uk>;
> Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie>
> Cc: diversity at ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the
> RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
> 
> All,
> 
> Thank you for all of eyeballs on this list - it helps a lot.
> 
> I think we all agree - we need clarity on the process. I guess the good thing is
> we're trailblazers!
> 
> Rob -- I think it's not either or, but both. We need clarity on what the right
> way forward is for these kinds of 'governance' documents outside the PDP
> (and hopefully this prompts the documentation or formalisation of that
> procedure) AND I think we need him to advise on our recommendation to
> have legal review the 3.0 version (which merges two documents both
> reviewed and commented by community members).
> 
> As for how and if the IA comes into play, that's unclear.
> 
> Job -- agreed, this shouldn't be held up.
> 
> Julia -- thank you for offering to help. Yes, if you could email HPH noting the
> requests above, that would be great.
> 
> Two steps forward, one step back...but still forward all the same and we
> learn as we go. Better for everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> a On 04/10/2019 13:47, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > As Daniel already indicated: we (the community) might need a more formal
> > process for agreeing on procedures and documents that are not policy.
> > Rob calls them "parallel activity" below. Hans Petter referred to them
> > as "Community Governance" at some point.
> >
> > So no, I don't think anyone is expecting to apply the full PDP to the
> > code of conduct, but since we don't have another clear process right
> > now, maybe we can borrow some aspects from the PDP for now (such as
> the
> > impact analysis).
> >
> > I am not sure we really need to ask Hans Petter to ask the RIPE NCC to
> > do an impact analysis. I think the task force can do that directly. But
> > maybe I misunderstood and all the task force wants to get is clarity
> > about the process from Hans Petter - which is probably something we'll
> > have to develop as a community, but I assume Hans Petter has some ideas
> > about it.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mirjam
> >
> >
> > On 04/10/2019 11:19, Rob Evans wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> What do other people think?
> >> I’m not really surprised.  Other non-policy documents have gone through
> the largely the same procedure.  I suppose a heads-up would have been
> useful, but this could just be a mismatch of expectations — those in the NCC
> expect us to be using the PDP, we thought this was a parallel activity.
> >>
> >> When the only hammer you have is the PDP, every document looks like a
> policy. :-)
> >>
> >> I suspect getting consensus on v3 and getting the IA on that is the most
> likely way forward, in my limited understanding anyway.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Rob
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> diversity mailing list
> >> diversity at ripe.net
> >> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > diversity mailing list
> > diversity at ripe.net
> > https://mailman.ripe.net/
>