Harald echoes my original email
Just to show diversity, I agree with Bjoern and disagree with Patrik.
I think that AB's 2119 MUST is far too strong.
I think that Patrik's requirement that the archives retain everything posted is
too rigid.
In the I-D, Pete and I have tried to devolve such decisions (on other things) to
the Ombudsperson on the grounds that we want consistency of application, and
reasonable assessment of what should be removed.
I believe that for legal reasons, the original email must be retained in a
non-public place that can be accessed by the Secretariat.
Can we leave this, that the authors will add a line to the document noting that
this is an action the Ombudsperson may consider? Then we can all move on to
making the Internet better.
Adrian
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Harald
Alvestrand
Sent: 09 March 2014 19:41
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Removing stuff from archives (Re: Anti-harassment procedures - next
version)
On 03/09/2014 01:40 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
* Patrik Fältström wrote:
On 2014-03-07 16:15, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
AB/ text suggest/add/
If there is any remaining harassment message or record (which is
publicly evidence) after the reported attack and the decision made by
IETF, then the related harassment object MUST be removed/destroyed from
IETF public access and MAY be saved in private data base of the IETF.
I object strongly.
What has been visible on an IETF mailing list must also be visible in
the archives.
That might sound nice in principle but there are all sorts of overriding
interests where content should be removed, like wholly illegal content,
copyright violations, and certainly also content violating personality
rights. If, for instance, somebody is being harassed by having images of
them posted to IETF mailing lists, and the victim wants them removed, I
think such a request should be given very serious consideration.
We have been through this before. Last time we had this discussion, it
was centered around I-Ds, but I don't think the principles need to be
much different.
The policy for removal of I-Ds has been in place at least since 2012,
and is found here:
https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/removal-of-an-internet-draft.html
Basically, the IESG decides when we have a real case to decide on; if
possible, we will make sure it's obvious from the archives that stuff
has been removed. Until then, we don't remove anything.
I think that's an appropriate policy.