Dear Denis, all, Thank you for your response, Denis. I recognise the positive intent. Criticism delivered in the right way is always welcome and helps to keep us pointed in the right direction.
With your first mail, I find myself asking if it would be acceptable for me to critique a community member’s work in a similar tone. I am convinced that it would not, and I suspect there wouldn’t be many objections if someone referred me to the code of conduct in response. That being said, your second message encapsulates what I believe this community should be all about - open, friendly, acknowledging potential mistakes and willing to address them constructively. So again, my thanks for turning that around. One of the reasons to have the code of conduct is to encourage an open and respectful exchange of ideas. It provides a clear framework for how we should interact and have our discussions, and staying within the bounds of the CoC is important if we want to be an open community where people feel safe to voice their opinions. I belive we all sould bring each others attention to the code of conduct when we feel the need to do so. Encouraging the positive behaviour described in the code of conduct should in my opinion be seen as contributing to improving the community. If we have a code of conduct but are noafraid reference it, then I think we still have serious problems to solve. And I would add that to point people to the code of conduct is not to apply or invoke it but to remind people of the expectations it contains. Having said that, an obvious concern is that we as the RIPE NCC might be tempted to use the CoC as an excuse to avoid difficult questions. I like to think we are better than that as a company, and I hope the community will challenge me if this is ever something we are doing. As for the substantive issue that Denis raises, I will send a separate mail on that topic because it is one worth discussing and I prefer not to conflate several issues in one mail. Sincerely Hans Petter Holen Managing Director, RIPE NCC > On 1 Feb 2022, at 16:57, denis walker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Colleagues > > Can we all take a deep breath and enjoy that cup of tea Nigel suggested. > > I would like to thank people for their support, but also apologise if > I have caused a major incident. That was never my intention. I have > been a part of this community for a long time. Those of you who have > also been around for a while will know that I have an emotive style of > writing. I am naturally an emotional person. I have touched on this > issue before and no one really picked up on it. So I thought by > identifying the problems with one document it would show there is an > issue here to be sorted. Incidentally it didn't take me many hours, it > took me about 2 months. My concentration levels are not what they used > to be :) > > My goal was to be positive in moving this matter forwards. The > problems I have identified can be easily fixed. These documents have > been written over a long period of time. Inconsistencies can build up. > It is now time for a review. Maybe that should be done by the legal > team who then report back to the mailing list or perhaps set up a Task > Force to work with the legal team to review the full set of policy and > procedure documents and make recommendations. At the end of the > exercise we will have a more solid foundation for this industry to > move forwards. > > cheers > denis > co-chair DB-WG >
-- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
