Last Call Result The IESG received a large volume of feedback from the community in response to the last-call on the proposed BCP83 PR-action for Dan Harkins [1]. After evaluating this feedback and BCP 83, the IESG has concluded that there is sufficient support for going ahead with the PR-action based on a pattern of disruptive behavior on IETF mailing lists, after repeated efforts at moderation and asking for self-moderation have failed.
The administrators of the following mailing lists are requested to suspend his posting privileges under the terms described in Section 2 of BCP 83: * admin-discuss * gendispatch * ietf * terminology The administrators of other IETF mailing lists may moderate his postings at their discretion following BCP 83 Section 2 based on Dan Harkins' future behavior on those lists. Last Call Feedback Summary The last-call email thread on the proposed PR-action received both short messages indicating agreement or disagreement with the proposal, along with a lot of additional commentary on both the proposal itself and on the process that the IESG chose to follow. We would like to thank the community for providing feedback. Below, we provide a broad summary of the comments heard, around three quarters of which was sent in public and the rest directly to the IESG. The majority of the feedback received indicated support for the proposed PR-action. A fraction of the feedback supported the PR-action, but expressed some level of disagreement with part of the IESG's rationale and/or included alternative reasons. A similarly-sized fraction of the feedback did not state an agreement or disagreement with the proposal, but provided other commentary. A small fraction of the feedback disagreed with the proposed PR-action, suggesting either that the cited behavior was not sufficiently disruptive to warrant it or that a PR-action would be a disproportionate response. The community expressed concern about the broader negative impact of this action, or even the associated last-call discussion, on the affected individual. It also raised the issue of the risk of abuse of a PR-action to suppress opinions. These topics should be considered as input for a discussion on the BCP 83 process (see below). A fraction of the feedback requested that the IESG impose a type of sanction other than the proposed PR-action. Current BCPs do not define other possibilities, and the IESG felt that adhering to measures defined by community consensus is hence the appropriate option. Some feedback indicated that BCP 83 could be improved, possibly as part of a larger change to how the IETF moderates its various contribution and participation channels. The IESG welcomes community proposals and suggests GENDISPATCH as an appropriate venue for initial considerations on this topic. The IESG reiterates that the purpose of this action is to minimize disruptive behavior by a single participant, after repeated efforts at moderation and asking for self-moderation have failed. The IESG also reaffirms its view that a wide set of opinions on relevant topics are both important for the IETF and actively encouraged. Lars Eggert IETF Chair, on behalf of the IESG [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/d_OfXZu0hJZP3RgwaPtqFzLt3g8/ _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
