This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/diversity@ripe.net/
[diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
- Previous message (by thread): [diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
- Next message (by thread): [diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
dfk at ripe.net
Fri Oct 4 15:51:55 CEST 2019
There are no real ‘pits of bureaucrazy’ here. Just some questions on the proper process which are valid considering the sanctioning of violators in the document. There is nothing that prevents the task force to discuss the latest draft with the community in Rotterdam either. Daniel --- Sent from a handheld device. > On 4. Oct 2019, at 13:36, Job Snijders <job at instituut.net> wrote: > > > Folks, indeed, let’s get a move on. It would be a shame if this effort strands in the pits of bureaucracy! > > Julia, thank you for stepping forward. > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity at ripe.net > https://mailman.ripe.net/
- Previous message (by thread): [diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
- Next message (by thread): [diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]