On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf(_at_)mit(_dot_)edu>
wrote:
However, reading this draft, I'm filled with sadness, disappointment and
worry when I think about some of the details. I do not think this draft
is ready and I think we have some more work to do. I don't support the
idea that what we have is good enough and we should run with it and
incrementally improve later. Also, after reading Dave Crocker's review
and discussing with him off-list, I think he has points that critically
need to be considered. In particular, Dave's point about distinguishing
interpersonal difficulty from harassment and not focusing on asking
subjects to act differently in the case of harassment seems important.
Yes, this. Harassment is the sort of thing that's difficult to be
objective about in every case. I hope we don't formalize this too
much, else it will be too easy to ostracize good people who
unintentionally offended someone.
Regarding confidentiality, I'll simply point out that at the limit,
when a legal process is involved and discovery is triggered (and
testimony) there is no confidentiality. We shouldn't promise that
which we can't deliver. This should be pretty obvious, I'd think.
As to removal, as long as there is a process for removal, whether the
ombusteam itself decides it or not is not that important to me.
Cheers,
Nico
--