These are good points, Sam.

As noted I think we need a general statement of criteria as to what constitutes harassment. Some examples might be helpful .

I think the definition should encompass patterns of stalking, etc.

From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sam Lanfranco
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 6:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] ICANN Community Anti-Harassment Policy Comment Period

I offer the following as food for thought:

Having read the ICANN Community Anti-Harassment Policy draft I would like to table two concerns for discussion. The ICANN anti-harassment policy is intended to insure that individuals of all backgrounds and cultures are made to feel welcome in ICANN and within its activities irrespective of the specified characteristics of individuals. Well and good, but I am left with two concerns.

While noting that harassment may take many forms, nine of the ten examples related to sexual harassment. The tenth refers specifically to conduct or commentary that shows hostility, disrespect, or the demeaning individuals, because of specified characteristics including but not limited to those listed in the policy document. The sexual harassment list looks to be an arbitrary selection of nine from what could be an exhaustive list of conducts and commentaries. Might it be more appropriate to simply re-affirm that harassment, sexual or otherwise, will not be tolerated with the ICANN community? Policy could further state that allegations of harassment, sexual or otherwise, will be handled according to the procedures set down in the anti-harassment policy document, policies to be further refined in light of ICANN experience.

My second concern is that this policy draft implicitly assumes that incidents of harassment are one time incidents. What are the processes for dealing with ongoing harassment? In 2013 I had to deal with a persistent stalker, for six months. I and my university had to resort to an escalating sequence of measures to finally terminate that episode. There was no point at which an agent of the university could have simply ruled on, and stopped, the persistent behavior.

Sam L.