idnits 2.17.1 draft-odell-code-of-conduct-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Cannot find the required boilerplate sections (Copyright, IPR, etc.) in this document. Expected boilerplate is as follows today (2024-04-27) according to https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info : IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.a: This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 2: Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 3: This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. == Mismatching filename: the document gives the document name as 'draft-odell-code-of-conduct-01', but the file name used is 'draft-odell-code-of-conduct-02' == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (March 1998) is 9540 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 7 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group Mike O'Dell 3 Internet-Draft UUNET Technologies 4 March 1998 6 Some Thoughts on the Importance of Modesty and Decorum 7 and an IETF Code of Conduct 9 11 Status of this Memo 13 This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working 14 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, 15 and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 16 working documents as Internet-Drafts. 18 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 19 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 20 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 21 material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.'' 23 To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the 24 1id-abstracts.txt listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow 25 Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe), 26 munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or 27 ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast). 29 Abstract 31 Because of the importance of the work done in the IETF, and because 32 of the broad cultural diversity of the participants, some of whom 33 find our most-unrestrained "style" of interaction rather foreign and 34 uncomfortable, I believe the time has come for the IETF to adopt a 35 Code of Conduct to govern our interactions. 37 1.0 Background 39 The Internet Engineering Task Force is the unique, all-volunteer 40 organization promulgating the standards which make the global 41 Internet technically viable. As such, the participants who do this 42 critical work are very bright, usually quite passionate individuals, 43 often with strong opinions which are equally strongly held. 45 The IETF has a long tradition of evolving ideas forged in the fires 46 of impassioned analysis which then go on to be tempered by 47 confrontation with real-world operational deployment before they are 48 deemed "a standard." 49 The its very nature, this process of vigorous debate and evaluation 50 makes for the occasionally over-animated interchange between well- 51 intentioned people. A free-ranging exchange of ideas and viewpoints 52 is critical to the success of the process, but when it oversteps the 53 bounds of modesty and decorum, it is to the detriment of the process. 55 2.0 Codes of Conduct 57 Historically, many great deliberative bodies have attempted to 58 wrestle with the conflicting demands of passion and reason by 59 establishing a "code of conduct" which serves to remind the 60 deliberants of their obligations to their colleagues. While the 61 antiquarian honorifics such as "The Gentleman from Upper Lowerville" 62 and "The Honorable Senator from East Noseblow" strike the modern ear 63 with some humor, the underlying agreement to treat each other with a 64 respectable level of civility is the critical matter. 66 Such codes of conduct reinforce the tenets of honest debate and 67 create a bond of honor which can and does get called when the heat of 68 passion overtakes the machinery of reason. This provides an agreed- 69 upon obligation to pull back from the brink of personal insult and 70 affront, providing an opportunity for reason to salvage honor. 72 3.0 The Need for a Code of Conduct in the IETF 74 Because of the importance of the work done in the IETF and because of 75 the broad cultural diversity of the participants, some of whom find 76 our most-unrestrained "style" of interaction hard rather foreign and 77 uncomfortable, I believe the time has come for the IETF to adopt a 78 Code of Conduct to govern our interactions. It would apply to in- 79 person interactions like those at the IETF Meetings, but also to 80 Email exchanges as well where the level of invective tends to 81 escalate even faster than in face-to-face interactions. 83 It has become clear that the IETF is missing opportunities to review 84 some very important technology because the creators chose to go 85 elsewhere to define these technologies. We are also denied the 86 expertise of smart people who could otherwise contribute 87 significantly to what we do but chose not to subject themselves to 88 behavior we have previously excused as "unrefined advocacy." 90 Note carefully that the intent is not to proscribe any particular 91 behavior, but rather to affirm a commitment to a course of action and 92 an attitude toward each other which will improve the effectiveness of 93 our deliberations. Or said in a somewhat more IETF-like way: 95 "Reduce the heat and increase the light." 97 4.0 Precepts of the IETF Code of Conduct. 99 What follows is a list of precepts which form the IETF Code of 100 Conduct. Adherence to these in both action and spirit will promote 101 the general welfare of the IETF community and promote more productive 102 deliberations. Variance from them should only provoke a gentle 103 reminder, not provide grounds for flamewars. 105 (1a) The IETF is composed of many people from many cultures and does 106 work having global scope and importance. 107 (1b) An IETF Member honors the organization by extending his 108 colleagues respect and honest courtesy at all times, especially 109 when it is difficult to agree with them. Seeing from another's 110 point of view is often revealing, even when it fails to be 111 compelling. 113 (2a) The business of the IETF is the development and testing of 114 Ideas. 115 (2b) An IETF Member disputes an idea with reasoned argument rather 116 than attacking the colleague proposing the idea. Intimidation and 117 Ad Homonym attack have no place in reasoned deliberations, 118 especially so for casting aspersions upon a participant's 119 motivations. 120 (2c) Likewise, "witty repartee'" and rhetorical one-upsmanship have 121 scant use in technical discussions. While spirited word-play may 122 be an emotionally satisfying diversion and may occasionally 123 provide much-needed comic relief, it is at best only a diversion 124 and does not advance the real business of the IETF. Worse, when 125 done badly or to intentionally prickle another, it serves only to 126 increase contentiousness and breed rancor. 128 (3a) The goal of the IETF is a working, viable, scalable global 129 Internet and the concomitant problems are genuinely very hard. 130 (3b) An IETF Member always proceeds based on Right Reason and strives 131 to be as intellectually honest as she knows how to be. Further, 132 she dedicates her intellect to solving the problems in the best 133 way, not merely the most expedient. 134 (3c) An IETF Member understands that "Scaling is the Ultimate 135 Problem" and that many ideas quite workable in the small fail this 136 crucial test. 137 (3d) An IETF Member strives to find the best solution for the whole 138 Internet, not the best solution for any particular vendor, 139 operator or user. Few things are as unseemly as transparent axe- 140 grinding. 142 (4a) "Best" is a very tricky concept, fluid and dynamic. 143 (4b) An IETF Member understands change is one of the few certainties 144 and that without the exercise of supreme discipline, one can spend 145 eternity working for unknowable perfection while the real-world 146 problems languish, denied adequate attention. (4c) An IETF Member 147 is keenly aware that solutions unfettered by consideration of 148 global deployability are likely to be unproductive. 150 (5a) An IETF Member strives at all times to abide by this code and 151 the spirit it embodies. This spirit is all-encompassing, and is 152 especially applicable to electronic exchanges such as email and 153 telephony as well as in-person interactions. 154 (5b) When a colleague suffers a lapse in adherence to this spirit, an 155 IETF Member offers a gentle but forthright reminder of their 156 agreement to honor this spirit. Castigation and remonstration are 157 inappropriate in all except the the most refractory situations, 158 and even then, it should never cross the line into personal 159 invective and dishonor. 160 (5c) An IETF Member apologizes appropriately in private or in public 161 for any offense caused to other members. 163 5.0 Conclusion 165 By every IETF member adhering to this code of conduct we can promote 166 the vigorous but measured exchanges required for the work we pursue 167 without unrequired incursions into the realm of personal invective. 168 This should make the IETF a more pleasant experience for all. 170 6.0 Security Considerations and Other Matters 172 Security (other than personal) is not addressed in this memo. 174 Canon Law regarding the use of certain auxiliary verbs ("SHOULD", 175 "MUST", etc) is deemed inapplicable. 177 7.0 Author's Address 179 Mike O'Dell 180 UUNET Technologies, Inc. 181 3060 Williams Drive 182 Fairfax, VA 22030 183 voice: 703-206-5890 184 fax: 703-206-5601 185 email: mo@uu.net