Colleagues, Things have gotten somewhat heated in here. I think we need to take a step back.
While I have no doubts whatsoever that the participants and chairs are well-intentioned and would like to see this working group make progress in an appropriate direction, even if we may not all agree yet on what that direction is, it is critical to follow process and, more importantly, to behave in a respectful and professional manner. The IETF's Code of Conduct can be found in BCP 54 (RFC 7154). If you have not read it, please take the time to do so. As with the IPR rules of the IETF, everyone on this list is expected to observe those guidelines, and consistently straying from them makes you eligible for corrective handling under BCP 25. To be clear, I have no concerns with questions about proper procedure. Questions are welcome. I need reminders of proper process from time to time. Also, a procedural error does not constitute evidence of malice. Any public challenges to authority or procedural decisions must be delivered respectfully and professionally. If you can't, or won't, then do it privately. Laura is a new chair and is still learning our processes. I would like to thank her for taking on this work in any working group, especially this one. Development of new talent in the IETF is to be supported, and I intend to do so. Tim and I are providing support, but this week has been challenging as we're spread very thin during IETF 116. This has been baptism by fire for her. I would appreciate it if people provided her with guidance when we aren't able to do so. I want to make clear that openly assaulting her integrity as she undergoes this onboarding will not be tolerated. As any of us, the chairs are allowed missteps, especially while learning, so I would like to help here by correcting two of them. Also, as mentioned, we need to cool off. Thus, effective immediately: (1) The action under BCP 25 (RFC 3934) regarding Michael Thomas is reversed by one step; the "communicating privately" step has been completed, but the public warning is struck. (2) The chairs should initiate a Call For Adoption of a reasonable period on one of the problem statement drafts. The working group is reminded that adopting a draft does not endorse its content as final or even close to final; it's merely a starting point for discussion and iteration. The chairs may select one of the candidate documents at their discretion. (3) The working group's list is to be set for moderation until next week to provide a cooling off period. Working group business may still be conducted, but the chairs will review posts to ensure they are moving the WG's purposes forward, and comply with BCP 54, before approving them. Anything else will be rejected. -MSK, ART AD
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list Ietf-dkim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
