Subject: On harassment at IETF

From: "Dr. Pala" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 00:30:59 +0100

Dear IETF-ers,

tonight I had a very interesting conversation with some lovely people 
that shocked me. What I have been told, is that it is well known that 
there are some participants at the IETF that do behave less than 
professionally when it comes to harassment - especially toward women.

I am sorry to use strong language, but this is an issue that I have been 
exposed to in the past and that I find COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. I do not 
know what the policy is at the IETF, but I think there should be ZERO 
tolerance for such behavior. And if you are one the people that think 
this community will tolerate your behavior maybe because you are a 
well-known figure in the Industry, be sure of one thing: I will fight to 
make sure that (a) your behavior is publicly exposed, and (b) you get 
shamed and BANNED from IETF. The behavior, I think, should also be 
reported to the HR department of the organization that sent that 
individual for further actions.

I was appalled when I learned that such behavior has happened in this 
community.

As a man and a believer in the community, I am ashamed that such 
individuals are still allowed to attend IETFs.

I would urge women AND MEN that have been targeted or that know of such 
behavior to come forward - so that the community will know. I wonder why 
there is the tendency to hide these type of things - transparency and 
support is paramount to eradicate this awful behavior. Sometimes I hear 
"Oh, I can handle those individuals." - please think about who can not 
and might be the next target: how would you feel if something happens 
because you did not think about this ? I know it is not easy, but 
reporting the issue is really important.

I hope that this e-mail will have some effect - in my heart I could not 
stay silent and not bring the issue at the attention of the whole 
community... I feel, like many here, that the IETF is and should be a 
leading community: this means not only technically, but morally.

I did not know that this problem even existed at the IETF, and I urge 
the leadership to be more vocal about it - we need to make sure that 
people are vigilant and, if something like this happens, strong and 
resolute actions are taken: I would NOT expect anything less. Let me 
rephrase: NOBODY should expect anything less.

And now I have so many questions in my head:

      * But how can this happen ? Nobody knows about it or am I very naive ?
      * Are there any statistics about how much this phenomenon has been
        going on ?
      * If this is a well-known problem, why nobody talks about it ?

I know I am a man, but not all men (despite what it seems) are bad - 
unfortunately, some of the good ones are also blind to the problem as 
this is something that they would not think it is possible. If you are 
one of those, like I was, wake up! If you know anything or have seen 
anything, please speak out. Be bold, and make sure this does not happen.

This is my personal position and views.

Please reply privately.

-- 
Best Regards,
Massimiliano Pala, Ph.D.
OpenCA Labs Director
OpenCA Logo

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:22:04 +1300

Hi,

I notice that you suggested private replies, but I think everyone
needs to be aware of the link below, if they aren't already.

On 30-Mar-19 12:30, Dr. Pala wrote:
> Dear IETF-ers,
> 
> tonight I had a very interesting conversation with some lovely people that shocked me. What I have been told, is that it is well known that there are some participants at the IETF that do behave less than professionally when it comes to harassment - especially toward women.
> 
> I am sorry to use strong language, but this is an issue that I have been exposed to in the past and that I find COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. I do not know what the policy is at the IETF, 

Please see https://www.ietf.org/contact/ombudsteam/ and follow the link there to the policy.

> but I think there should be ZERO tolerance for such behavior. 

That's exactly why there is a policy! Please have a look through it
and of course comment if appropriate.

Regards
    Brian Carpenter (writing only as an ordinary member of the community)

And if you are one the people that think this community will tolerate your behavior maybe because you are a well-known figure in the Industry, be sure of one thing: I will fight to make sure that (a) your behavior is publicly exposed, and (b) you get shamed and BANNED from IETF. The behavior, I think, should also be reported to the HR department of the organization that sent that individual for further actions.
> 
> I was appalled when I learned that such behavior has happened in this community.
> 
> As a man and a believer in the community, I am ashamed that such individuals are still allowed to attend IETFs.
> 
> I would urge women AND MEN that have been targeted or that know of such behavior to come forward - so that the community will know. I wonder why there is the tendency to hide these type of things - transparency and support is paramount to eradicate this awful behavior. Sometimes I hear "Oh, I can handle those individuals." - please think about who can not and might be the next target: how would you feel if something happens because you did not think about this ? I know it is not easy, but reporting the issue is really important.
> 
> I hope that this e-mail will have some effect - in my heart I could not stay silent and not bring the issue at the attention of the whole community... I feel, like many here, that the IETF is and should be a leading community: this means not only technically, but morally.
> 
> I did not know that this problem even existed at the IETF, and I urge the leadership to be more vocal about it - we need to make sure that people are vigilant and, if something like this happens, strong and resolute actions are taken: I would NOT expect anything less. Let me rephrase: NOBODY should expect anything less.
> 
>       * Are there any statistics about how much this phenomenon has been going on ?
> I know I am a man, but not all men (despite what it seems) are bad - unfortunately, some of the good ones are also blind to the problem as this is something that they would not think it is possible. If you are one of those, like I was, wake up! If you know anything or have seen anything, please speak out. Be bold, and make sure this does not happen.
>

---

From: Ross Finlayson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:43:25 +1300

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 01:58:31 +0100

I don’t think this is something to be handled in private messages.

Those cases should be publicly exposed and point to specific names, so the rest of us take our own personal decisions on those folks in addition to IETF actions.

Regards,

Jordi

El 30/3/19 0:31, "ietf en nombre de Dr. Pala" <[email-masked] en nombre de [email-masked]> escribió:

Dear IETF-ers,

I am sorry to use strong language, but this is an issue that I have been exposed to in the past and that I find COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. I do not know what the policy is at the IETF, but I think there should be ZERO tolerance for such behavior. And if you are one the people that think this community will tolerate your behavior maybe because you are a well-known figure in the Industry, be sure of one thing: I will fight to make sure that (a) your behavior is publicly exposed, and (b) you get shamed and BANNED from IETF. The behavior, I think, should also be reported to the HR department of the organization that sent that individual for further actions.

·         But how can this happen ? Nobody knows about it or am I very naive ?

·         Are there any statistics about how much this phenomenon has been going on ?

·         If this is a well-known problem, why nobody talks about it ?

Please reply privately.

-- 

Best Regards, 

Massimiliano Pala, Ph.D.
OpenCA Labs Director

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 22:43:07 -0400

>>>>> "JORDI" == JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet=[email-masked]> writes:

    JORDI>    I don’t think this is something to be handled in private
    JORDI> messages.  Those cases should be publicly exposed and point
    JORDI> to specific names, so the rest of us take our own personal
    JORDI> decisions on those folks in addition to IETF actions.

Please follow your own antiharassment procedure.  As Dave Crocker
pointed out during the development of the BCP in question, there are
some (non-addressed) problems with it.  Still, it's far better than what
you propose above.

Victims of harassment often don't want their experience dragged through
the consensus judgment process of the IETF.  Theey don't want the
details of a difficult and painful experience exposed and debated on a
public list.  Theyalmost certainly don't want to face the inevitable
victim blaiming and debating of whether they or the harasser are more
reasonable.  They don't want to watch the debate about whether the
harasser is so valuable to the organization that their behavior *has to
be* accepted.

And speaking from personal experience as a victim, some of the time you
don't even want to see people dragged through the mud.  Some of the time
people do improve and understand why what they are doing is
problematic.  Or some of the time they are your friends and you just
don't want to be the one who causes that mess to land on them.  And yes,
you have to evaluate your silence against the potential that someone
else will get hurt, and yes that tradeoff sucks.  But people make it
every day.
And denying them that option is both inconsistent with your policies and
with approaching the realities of harassment/bullying with compassion.

I'd say that the last time I was tracking the IETF closely, it was
behind the curve in approaching some of these issues.  Doubtless things
are better now, but it seems inevitable that to some degree or another
the sorts of problems I raise will  absolutely come up if details become
public.
Absolutely if victims want to come forward and tell their story, they
should be able to do so.
Demanding or expecting that lacks compassion.

I may sound a bit worked up here.  Debian has been facing similar issues
where some names did come forward (at least in private) earlier this
year.  Everything you can imagine happened.

Or for another data point take a look at
https://crystalhuff.com/2018/10/25/why-im-not-at-arisia-anymore-my-rapist-is-president-again/
a frank and well written discussion of what happened to one victim who
came forward and discussed her rape at the hands of one of the officers
of a local science fiction convention.

Thanks for your consideration,-

--Sam

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 02:58:39 -0400

Sam,

Many thanks.  I had been trying to figure out how best to
respond to Jordi's note but you have covered everything I would
have wanted to say and far better than I could have done so.

--On Friday, March 29, 2019 22:43 -0400 Sam Hartman
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>>>>>> "JORDI" == JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
>>>>>> <jordi.palet=[email-masked]> writes:
> 
>     JORDI>    I don't think this is something to be handled
> in private 

> Please follow your own antiharassment procedure.  As Dave
> Crocker pointed out during the development of the BCP in
> question, there are some (non-addressed) problems with it.
> Still, it's far better than what you propose above.
> 
> Victims of harassment often don't want their experience
> dragged through the consensus judgment process of the IETF.
> Theey don't want the details of a difficult and painful
> experience exposed and debated on a public list.  Theyalmost
> certainly don't want to face the inevitable victim blaiming
> and debating of whether they or the harasser are more
> reasonable.  They don't want to watch the debate about whether
> the harasser is so valuable to the organization that their
> behavior *has to be* accepted.
> 
> And speaking from personal experience as a victim, some of the
> time you don't even want to see people dragged through the
> mud.  Some of the time people do improve and understand why
> what they are doing is problematic.  Or some of the time they
> are your friends and you just don't want to be the one who
> causes that mess to land on them.  And yes, you have to
> evaluate your silence against the potential that someone else
> will get hurt, and yes that tradeoff sucks.  But people make it
> every day.
> And denying them that option is both inconsistent with your
> policies and with approaching the realities of
> harassment/bullying with compassion.
> 
> I'd say that the last time I was tracking the IETF closely, it
> was behind the curve in approaching some of these issues.
> Doubtless things are better now, but it seems inevitable that
> to some degree or another the sorts of problems I raise will
> absolutely come up if details become public.
> Absolutely if victims want to come forward and tell their
> story, they should be able to do so.
> I may sound a bit worked up here.  Debian has been facing
> similar issues where some names did come forward (at least in
> private) earlier this year.  Everything you can imagine
> happened.
> 
> https://crystalhuff.com/2018/10/25/why-im-not-at-arisia-anymor
> e-my-rapist-is-president-again/ a frank and well written
> discussion of what happened to one victim who came forward and
> discussed her rape at the hands of one of the officers of a
> local science fiction convention.
>

---

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 08:24:12 +0100

> On Mar 30, 2019, at 7:58 AM, John C Klensin <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Sam,
> 

+1

Thanks to Sam, Brian, and others for your responses. 

Alissa

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 11:02:45 +0100

Hi Sam, 

    

I'm not saying that, it was responding to an specific email, not as a general procedure.

The point is that if someone else was writing the email, it was clear to me that some people, not the victims necessarily, have that information, so they can expose it publicly in addition to the IETF procedure.

I know, because when I was a kid, needed to take that decision as well in many occasions, and my take was I prefer to avoid "future issues to others even if this means more problems for me now".

Just to make it clear. I didn't denied anyone any option.

I'm sorry if I was interpreted that way, but I didn't mean they MUST do it. One think that has a lot of difficulties for non-native English speakers is that the way we think and make our sentences is not always the perfect one for the native ones. I will love if the participants have this consideration at all the time. 

    
    
    --Sam

---

From: "Dr. Pala" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 12:15:17 +0100

Hi Ross,

I understand your point of view and - on the surface, at least - it 
might appear like I am advocating for the same behavior that we are 
trying to prevent. I actually think that if you dig a little deeper, the 
two are very different. I am sorry about the fact that this may have 
come across very strong and lacking compassion - that was not my 
intention. I tend to be very strict when it comes to unjust behavior, 
and the fact that I do really care about this topic does not justify me 
being too harsh or suggest policies/solutions.

One very important aspect I would like to further explain is that in my 
message, in any way, I wanted to imply that people that have experienced 
this issue, should come forward if they do not feel like doing it (for 
absolutely ANY reason) - It is extremely difficult (and requires a lot 
of courage) to speak out. The first priority, I think, as a community, 
is to provide compassion and support to help the individuals to handle 
the situation. And maybe there could be means to allow who reports 
anything to be involved and have their saying about how to handle the 
situation - it could be that no official action is requested, but at 
least we might understand (in an anonymous form even) how widespread 
this issue is.

I do not have the answers - it is a very complex problem. However, as a 
Community I think we need to continue to work on this and strive for a 
safer and happier environment. We try and we might succeed or we might 
fail... and if the latter happens, we just look at why we failed, where 
we can improve, how we can provide a better support network - until we 
finally eradicate this fowl behavior. And if we fail again, we work 
together to improve again.

After all, if this is still going on, maybe we shall think about new 
ways to address this issue.

In my opinion, there is also the possibility for an even harder target. 
Although, I understand that we might not change the world in a day, but 
we could provide a model that could be brought back home to our 
companies and our communities around the world. We might not solve this 
problem around the world, but if we do not even try... what does it say 
about us ?

I thank everybody who replied and I hope this discussion inspired deep 
introspection in each and every one of us: awareness is not a solution, 
but, I think, a good start. Many good points have been raised, and I 
hope that the conversation will continue.

I would be happy to further explore solutions with the ombusteam 
(https://www.ietf.org/contact/ombudsteam/) - if there is an interest to 
continue the conversation in a more appropriate venue (now that, I 
think, we raised a bit the level of awareness in our great Community).

Cheers,
Max

-- 
Best Regards,
Massimiliano Pala, Ph.D.
OpenCA Labs Director
OpenCA Logo

---

From: "Dr. Pala" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 12:22:06 +0100

Hi all,

small (but important) distinction: let me re-write one of the sentences 
here (I do not want to be mistaken). When I wrote:

    " in my message, in any way, I wanted to imply that people that have
    experienced this issue, should come forward if they do not feel like
    doing it (for absolutely ANY reason) - It is extremely difficult
    (and requires a lot of courage) to speak out."

I mean that "/in my message I NEVER WANTED to imply that people... /" - 
I just wanted to clarify the point because while I was re-reading the 
e-mail I realized that what I wrote might not convey what I wanted to say.

Best,
Max

On 3/30/19 12:15 PM, Dr. Pala wrote:
> trying to prevent. I actually think that if you dig a little deeper, 
> the two are very different. I am sorry about the fact that this may 
> have come across very strong and lacking compassion - that was not my 
> and the fact that I do really care about this topic does not justify 
> me being too harsh or suggest policies/solutions.
>
> One very important aspect I would like to further explain is that in 
> my message, in any way, I wanted to imply that people that have 
> experienced this issue, should come forward if they do not feel like 
> doing it (for absolutely ANY reason) - It is extremely difficult (and 
> requires a lot of courage) to speak out. The first priority, I think, 
> as a community, is to provide compassion and support to help the 
> individuals to handle the situation. And maybe there could be means to 
> allow who reports anything to be involved and have their saying about 
> how to handle the situation - it could be that no official action is 
> requested, but at least we might understand (in an anonymous form 
> even) how widespread this issue is.
>
> I do not have the answers - it is a very complex problem. However, as 
> a Community I think we need to continue to work on this and strive for 
> a safer and happier environment. We try and we might succeed or we 
> might fail... and if the latter happens, we just look at why we 
> failed, where we can improve, how we can provide a better support 
> network - until we finally eradicate this fowl behavior. And if we 
> fail again, we work together to improve again.
>
> In my opinion, there is also the possibility for an even harder 
> target. Although, I understand that we might not change the world in a 
> day, but we could provide a model that could be brought back home to 
> our companies and our communities around the world. We might not solve 
> this problem around the world, but if we do not even try... what does 
> it say about us ?
>
> introspection in each and every one of us: awareness is not a 
> solution, but, I think, a good start. Many good points have been 
> raised, and I hope that the conversation will continue.
>
> (https://www.ietf.org/contact/ombudsteam/) - if there is an interest 
> to continue the conversation in a more appropriate venue (now that, I 
-- 
Best Regards,
Massimiliano Pala, Ph.D.
OpenCA Labs Director
OpenCA Logo

---

From: Kyle Rose <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 12:45:23 +0100

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 12:31 AM Dr. Pala <[email-masked]> wrote:

> tolerance for such behavior. And if you are one the people that think this
> community will tolerate your behavior maybe because you are a well-known
> figure in the Industry, be sure of one thing: I will fight to make sure
> that (a) your behavior is publicly exposed, and (b) you get shamed and
> BANNED from IETF. The behavior, I think, should also be reported to the HR
> department of the organization that sent that individual for further
> actions.
>

Many of us observe a clear distinction between taking official action via
established channels against those who have violated IETF policies on
harrassment, and advocating mob justice. I am in favor of the former. I am
against the latter.

Kyle

---

From: "Theodore Ts'o" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 10:57:27 -0400

> harrassment, and advocating mob justice. I am in favor of the former. I am

I think it's important to remember that if there are calls for mob
justice, that might be a sign that the offical, establish channels
have failed in some way.  If people chose not to come forward, but are
only willing to engage in unoffical conversations with people who
might official roles, but who are unwilling to file a formal complaint
because they feel unsafe in doing so --- that there might be
consequences for the target of harassment making a formal report, or
because they don't believe it will be taken seriously or will be
addressed, and then they keep their mouths shut.

And then several years later, when several people come forward within
a short space of time with credible stories, and the mob shows up
demanding resignations or they will leave the organization, and urge
sponsors to stop funding things, etc. --- and the people with official
hats on wring their hands and say, but.... they refused to file a
formal complaint, so our hands were tied, and it's the target's fault,
not ours....  does it really matter whether or not the mob justice was
justified or right or something we should approve of?

This is essentially what happened at Arisia last year.  The public
complaint, followed up with other women declaring that they had
similar things happen to them, with little to know followup from the
incident response teams, and volunteers declaring they would cease work
and withdraw their membership until there was was substantial change
from the top, guests of honor withdrawing or declining to participate
in future years --- was that mob justice?  And does it matter?

Whether or not it was "mob justice", and whether or not the targets
"should" have followed the official channels (some did, with no
satisfaction), the end result was the president and most of the board
was forced to resign as a result of the wide outcry from their
community, and the conference went through a near-death experience.

This is why all organizations need to have a very robust process;
because if it fails, the alternative will be mob justice, whether we
like it or not.  And when the mob shows up, and alternative is give
them satisfaction or let the organization die, they're not going ask
for your approval first.

					- Ted

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 21:41:46 +0100

On Mar 30, 2019, at 15:57, Theodore Ts'o <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> if there are calls for mob
> have failed in some way. 

Or they may simply be indications that people like to get excited if they think they are morally “in the right”.

A surprisingly large percentage of the problems on earth are caused by people that think they are “in the right”, then think that being angry for a good reason justifies abandoning all thinking about the consequences of one’s actions — they are “in the right” after all?

I wish this anti-pattern of human behavior were taught in school.

Grüße, Carsten

(I like the rest of Ted’s post; I’m just reacting to the first sentence, which may be supported by the anecdote given, but often is not — it is important to see both sides of this coin.)

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 20:52:24 -0000

Hey Ted,

Just to pick a bit of your thoughtful email...

> If people chose not to come forward, but are

The current IETF anti-harassment procedures were crafted with this in mind.

It is a hard one to resolve, but the ombudsteam will both entertain
third-party reports, and will talk to the subject in complete confidence to
determine whether there is a way forward.

A careful browse of RFC 7776 may prove useful to all on this thread.

Ciao,
Adrian

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 01:09:40 -0700

Dear Dr. Pala,

I read the emails which you sent about the topic.  I was somewhat 
surprised by the initial email as there are procedures specified in 
RFC 7776 [1] to address the topic.  It is expected that those 
procedures are well-advertised so that a person who encountered such 
a problem can contact someone who can help him/her.  Written 
communication is not the ideal means of communication to understand 
what happened.  It could also be awkward for the person to do 
that.  I hope that you have already received a positive response from 
the person(s) responsible for the RFC 7776 procedures.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7776.txt