I didn't realize before most of the points that Malcolm is raising and fully 
agree with his inputs.

No explanation from the CoC? No right to defense or explain? Guilty unless you 
prove otherwise? Anonymous?

Really shameful if that's all correct. So please, the CoC should respond to 
each of those points to verify if is that way or it is being misunderstood.


Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 14/9/22, 13:45, "diversity en nombre de Malcolm Hutty" 
<[email protected] en nombre de [email protected]> escribió:

    I will briefly reiterate my view that this process is unfair to the subject 
of a complaint and potentially a means of abuse in its own right.

    This has not changed since the previous version, so I shall not elaborate 
in detail. However I shall summarise some key problems that the complaint 
subject may face.

    The sanctions the CoC team are authorised to apply include those that would 
be devastating to the reputation and career of the accused, such as loss of 
office, publicly labelling them a racist or a sex attacker, or formally barring 
them from the RIPE community. It is therefore alarming to recognise:

    * The CoC team are not required to even explain the nature or circumstances 
of the complaint to the accused person. This is both unfair to the accused, and 
undermines any potential the process has to act in a corrective, rather than 
punitive, fashion.

    * The CoC team are not required to give the person who is the subject of 
the complaint an opportunity to explain themselves, or to deny, justify or 
excuse their actions, or to provide necessary context. This is inherently 
unfair and will undoubtedly lead to unjust and insupportable outcomes.

    * The complaint may be made anonymously. In itself this is unfair to the 
subject, who may well be unable to understand or recognise the incident 
referred to without this information, and who certainly will be deprived of the 
opportunity to identify abusive and malicious complaints.

    * The CoC team are not required to render a reasoned decision, only an 
outcome. So the accused may never know either what he was accused of, or what 
the CoC team believed or disbelieved.

    * The process does not impose any duty of fair treatment, honesty 
impartiality or independence on the CoC investigators

    * Because the complaint is made anonymously, and there is no duty of 
independence on the CoC team, the CoC team investigating a complaint and 
rendering a decision may include the person who raised the complaint, and 
without even realising this.

    * The process does not adopt a standard of proof, and leaves the CoC team 
free to adopt a "guilty until proven innocent" standard - and in a context 
where the accused doesn't even have the opportunity to prove themselves 
innocent because they might never be consulted or even contacted before a final 
decision is rendered.

    * The process does not adopt a standard for assessing the gravity of 
complaints, and leaves the CoC team free to adopt arbitrary standards and apply 
them inconsistently between one complaint and another.

    These features alone make this process entirely unfair and inappropriate 
for a procedure that may have serious professional, social and reputational 
consequences for the person who is the subject of the complaint. I expect that 
with further study additional serious deficiencies could be identified. It 
reads like a procedure for a preliminary triage of less serious and informal 
complaints that will be resolved amicably, not for a process that could bar 
someone from the community and potentially end their career. 

    I do not believe any person could feel "safe and included" in a community 
that applies such a process. I certainly do not.

    My recommendation would be that this process is immediately rescinded, and 
RIPE NCC Legal are invited to draft a disciplinary process that upholds basic 
standards of fairness and due process, while seeking to apply the aspirations 
of the Code of Conduct. I would suggest that they take as guidance the 
objective of developing a process that would be lawful in the context of an HR 
disciplinary process for employees, when administered by community members. I 
recognise that this is not literally an employment process, and RIPE community 
members do not enjoy the legal rights of employees, but it is useful to have 
some kind of standard to apply and best not to try to reinvent the wheel; if 
there are particular features of employment protection that do not seem to RIPE 
Legal to be appropriate to apply in this context they should of course be free 
to disapply them. Once written, NCC Legal's proposal would then be remitted for 
consideration for adoption by this community.

    Kind Regards,

    Malcolm.

    -- 
     Malcolm Hutty | Executive Director, Legal and Policy
    T: +44 7789 987 023 | www.linx.net



    London Internet Exchange Ltd (LINX)
    c/o WeWork, 2 Minster Court, Mincing Lane London EC3R 7BB

    Registered in England No. 3137929 at Trinity Court, Trinity Street, 
Peterborough PE1 1DA




    -----Original Message-----
    From: diversity <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Leo Vegoda
    Sent: 13 September 2022 16:47
    To: [email protected]
    Cc: [email protected]
    Subject: [diversity] Two Documents from the Code of Conduct Task Force

    Dear RIPE community,

    Earlier today, the Code of Conduct TF published two documents for the 
community's review.

    We updated the document describing the Code of Conduct Team's operational 
procedures based on community input. We have also published a document 
describing a selection process for the Code of Conduct Team.

    You can find a blog post summarising the changes and linking to the drafts 
here:

    
https://labs.ripe.net/author/leo_vegoda/two-documents-from-the-code-of-conduct-task-force/

    Please review the documents and share feedback by the end of September.

    Comments on any aspects of either document are welcome. We're particularly 
keen to get feedback on the term length for the Code of Conduct Team.

    Kind regards,

    Leo Vegoda for the Code of Conduct TF

    _______________________________________________
    diversity mailing list
    [email protected]
    https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity

    _______________________________________________
    diversity mailing list
    [email protected]
    https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity



**********************************************
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.




-- 

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

Reply via email to