Dave, you continue to lump together willful harassment and bullying with
behavior that has unintended effects. You even use the words willful and
intent in your draft. A "misbehavior" (your word) is not necessarily
malicious. If it was we would have a lot of evil two-year-olds in the world.
You can take cases of true bullying to a public court of justice, but there
will be a long period of training in the IETF where most issues that arise
are due either to simple ignorance or lack of communication skills. Think
about this crowd, and what percent of them act with malicious intent. This
is also what Stewart tried to say to you the other day, that you apparently
didn't understand. What I said about ombudsperson is straight from
ombudsperson training.
On Mar 17, 2014 8:18 PM, "Dave Crocker" <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:
On 3/17/2014 5:06 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
An ombudsperson tries not to bring a situation to "justice" or any other
public exposure (to start with), and from what I've seen most cases can
be worked out without. Are you getting advice from professionals on how
to structure this?
The pressures towards keeping things private are quite strong and
understandable.
The conflicting requirement is to ensure a public sense that harassment
and bullying will not be tolerated.
To the extent that public mis-behaviors are not seen to be countered
aggressively, the public perception therefore is one of tolerance.
This is issue is especially important when changing from a culture that
actively tolerated or encouraged the problematic behavior.
So... how will the IETF community come to understand that the behaviors
will not be tolerated (any longer)?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net