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/[email protected]/
[diversity] [ripe-list] Towards a more inclusive community
- Previous message (by thread): [diversity] [ripe-list] Towards a more inclusive community
- Next message (by thread): [diversity] [ripe-list] Towards a more inclusive community
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Oct 21 10:37:59 CEST 2019
> On 21 Oct 2019, at 09:20, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie> wrote: > > And, of course, as Hans Petter points out, it's already in there, v3.0 of the CoC actually gives more clarity around the process for invoking it. The “we’ve always done that” argument is not progressive or open-minded or receptive to change. The TF need to consider other options. A range of sanctions are possible. It would be good to know what ones were discussed by the TF and why they were accepted or rejected.
- Previous message (by thread): [diversity] [ripe-list] Towards a more inclusive community
- Next message (by thread): [diversity] [ripe-list] Towards a more inclusive community
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]