rfc9945v1.txt		rfc9945.txt
	Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Eggert, Ed.		Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Eggert, Ed.
	Request for Comments: 9945 Mozilla		Request for Comments: 9945 Mozilla
	bcp: 245 E. Lear, Ed.		BCP: 245 E. Lear, Ed.
	Obsoletes: 3683, 3934 Cisco Systems		Obsoletes: 3683, 3934 Cisco Systems
	Updates: 2418, 9245 February 2026		Updates: 2418, 9245 February 2026
	Category: Best Current Practice		Category: Best Current Practice
	ISSN: 2070-1721		ISSN: 2070-1721
	IETF Community Moderation		IETF Community Moderation
	Abstract		Abstract
	The IETF community will treat people with kindness and grace, but not		The IETF community will treat people with kindness and grace, but not
	skipping to change at line 74 ¶		skipping to change at line 74 ¶
	3.1. Actions That Are Out of Scope		3.1. Actions That Are Out of Scope
	3.2. Unsolicited Bulk Messages		3.2. Unsolicited Bulk Messages
	4. Moderation Procedures and Transparency		4. Moderation Procedures and Transparency
	4.1. Consistency and Conflict Resolution		4.1. Consistency and Conflict Resolution
	4.2. Reinstatement		4.2. Reinstatement
	5. Relationship to Other IETF Functions		5. Relationship to Other IETF Functions
	5.1. Relation to the Ombudsteam		5.1. Relation to the Ombudsteam
	5.2. Relation to the IETF LLC		5.2. Relation to the IETF LLC
	6. Security Considerations		6. Security Considerations
	7. IANA Considerations		7. IANA Considerations
	8. Acknowledgments		8. References
	9. References		8.1. Normative References
	9.1. Normative References		8.2. Informative References
	9.2. Informative References
	Appendix A. Motivation		Appendix A. Motivation
	A.1. Background		A.1. Background
	A.2. Problems with the Previous Approach		A.2. Problems with the Previous Approach
	Appendix B. Non-Normative Examples of Disruptive Behavior		Appendix B. Non-Normative Examples of Disruptive Behavior
			Acknowledgments
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	This memo establishes a policy for the moderation of disruptive		This memo establishes a policy for the moderation of disruptive
	participation across the IETF's various public online contribution		participation across the IETF's various public online contribution
	channels and discussion fora. It creates a moderator team to develop		channels and discussion fora. It creates a moderator team to develop
	procedures and to facilitate their consistent application.		procedures and to facilitate their consistent application.
	This memo obsoletes and updates some prior IETF processes, summarized		This memo obsoletes and updates some prior IETF processes, summarized
	skipping to change at line 104 ¶		skipping to change at line 104 ¶
	This memo makes the following changes to existing processes:		This memo makes the following changes to existing processes:
	* Obsoletes [RFC3683] as the "posting rights" (PR) action it defines		* Obsoletes [RFC3683] as the "posting rights" (PR) action it defines
	is replaced by processes defined herein;		is replaced by processes defined herein;
	* Obsoletes [RFC3934] as it replaces working group moderation		* Obsoletes [RFC3934] as it replaces working group moderation
	procedures;		procedures;
	* Obsoletes Section 3 of [RFC9245] and the second paragraph of		* Obsoletes Section 3 of [RFC9245] and the second paragraph of
	Section 4 of [RFC9245], as the moderator team replaces the IETF		Section 4 of [RFC9245], as the IETF moderator team defined in this
	discussion list moderation team.		document replaces the IETF discussion list moderator team.
	* Updates Section 6.1 of [RFC2418], because the moderator team will		* Updates Section 6.1 of [RFC2418], because the moderator team will
	work together with working group chairs to moderate disruptive		work together with working group chairs to moderate disruptive
	behavior.		behavior.
	The processes described in this memo are solely applicable to IETF		The processes described in this memo are solely applicable to IETF
	activities, and not to other related organizations, such as the		activities, and not to other related organizations, such as the
	Internet Research Task Force (IRTF), the Internet Architecture Board		Internet Research Task Force (IRTF), the Internet Architecture Board
	(IAB), the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG), the RFC Series Approval		(IAB), the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG), the RFC Series Approval
	Board (RSAB), or the Independent RFC Submission Stream, without their		Board (RSAB), or the Independent RFC Submission Stream, without their
	skipping to change at line 135 ¶		skipping to change at line 135 ¶
	list, chat group, or discussion in a collaborative tool such as		list, chat group, or discussion in a collaborative tool such as
	GitHub or GitLab. For example, working group chairs are		GitHub or GitLab. For example, working group chairs are
	administrators of all the public fora that their working groups use,		administrators of all the public fora that their working groups use,
	which typically includes mailing lists and chat groups, but might		which typically includes mailing lists and chat groups, but might
	also include collaborative tools such as GitHub or GitLab. The		also include collaborative tools such as GitHub or GitLab. The
	"owners" of non-WG IETF mailing lists are another example of		"owners" of non-WG IETF mailing lists are another example of
	administrators.		administrators.
	1.2. General Philosophy		1.2. General Philosophy
	This cornerstone of this policy is that individuals are responsible		The cornerstone of this policy is that individuals are responsible
	for furthering the goals of the IETF as an organization [RFC3935] in		for furthering the goals of the IETF as an organization [RFC3935] in
	a manner consistent with the policy laid out in [RFC7154].		a manner consistent with the policy laid out in [RFC7154].
	Disagreement and diverse points of view within any standards		Disagreement and diverse points of view within any standards
	organization are to be expected and are even healthy. The IETF is an		organization are to be expected and are even healthy. The IETF is an
	open standards organization with a discussion-based rough consensus		open standards organization with a discussion-based rough consensus
	process, a non-normative description of which is in [RFC7282].		process, a non-normative description of which is in [RFC7282].
	Engaged, respectful discussion that is within the scope of an IETF		Engaged, respectful discussion that is within the scope of an IETF
	forum should therefore not be considered disruptive, nor should		forum should therefore not be considered disruptive, nor should
	someone be considered disruptive solely because they are outside the		someone be considered disruptive solely because they are outside the
	skipping to change at line 157 ¶		skipping to change at line 157 ¶
	disruptive behavior, action must be taken in order to maintain		disruptive behavior, action must be taken in order to maintain
	decorum of the community.		decorum of the community.
	The moderation policy goals are as follows:		The moderation policy goals are as follows:
	* Apply consistent, fair, and timely moderation of communication		* Apply consistent, fair, and timely moderation of communication
	across all public online IETF participation channels and		across all public online IETF participation channels and
	participation fora without regard to a participant's role in the		participation fora without regard to a participant's role in the
	IETF or previous technical contributions;		IETF or previous technical contributions;
	* Ensure appeals are available to address disagreements about		* Ensure that appeals are available to address disagreements about
	moderation actions;		moderation actions;
	* Balance transparency against both privacy of individuals involved		* Balance transparency against both privacy of individuals involved
	and further disruption to the community;		and further disruption to the community;
	* Allow moderation decisions to be reconsidered; and		* Allow moderation decisions to be reconsidered; and
	* Provide the broadest possible latitude to all people doing		* Provide the broadest possible latitude to all people doing
	moderation, so that they have the flexibility to address a broad		moderation, so that they have the flexibility to address a broad
	range of individuals and circumstances.		range of individuals and circumstances.
	Questions about the processes detailed below should be answered		Questions about the processes detailed below should be answered with
	through the lens of these aims.		these goals in mind.
	The objective is explicitly *not* punishment, but to maintain an		The objective is explicitly *not* punishment, but to maintain an
	open, welcoming, non-hostile environment in which all may participate		open, welcoming, non-hostile environment in which all may participate
	on an equal footing, regardless of their role in the IETF or past		on an equal footing, regardless of their role in the IETF or past
	technical contributions.		technical contributions.
	2. IETF Moderator Team		2. IETF Moderator Team
	This memo defines a consistent approach to moderating the IETF's		This memo defines a consistent approach to moderating the IETF's
	various public online fora. A moderator team for the IETF will		various public online fora. A moderator team for the IETF will
	skipping to change at line 199 ¶		skipping to change at line 199 ¶
	The IESG appoints and recalls moderators. The moderator team		The IESG appoints and recalls moderators. The moderator team
	initially consists of no fewer than five individuals. The moderator		initially consists of no fewer than five individuals. The moderator
	team may expand or contract based on operational experience. In		team may expand or contract based on operational experience. In
	selecting members, the IESG will take into account geographic		selecting members, the IESG will take into account geographic
	coverage, expected and unexpected absences, and team diversity.		coverage, expected and unexpected absences, and team diversity.
	Because the IESG and IAB are in the appeals chain for moderator team		Because the IESG and IAB are in the appeals chain for moderator team
	decisions (see Section 4.1), the IESG must not appoint a moderator		decisions (see Section 4.1), the IESG must not appoint a moderator
	who is serving on the IESG or IAB. Individuals serving on other		who is serving on the IESG or IAB. Individuals serving on other
	bodies to which the NomCom appoints members, such as the IETF Trust		bodies to which the NomCom appoints members, such as the IETF Trust
	or the LLC Board, as well as LLC staff and contractors, shall also be		or the IETF LLC Board, as well as IETF LLC staff and contractors
	excluded from serving on the moderator team. If a moderator assumes		shall also be excluded from serving on the moderator team. If a
	any such role, they shall step down from the moderator team soon		moderator assumes any such role, they shall step down from the
	after.		moderator team soon after.
	2.1.1. Team Diversity		2.1.1. Team Diversity
	Due to the global nature of the IETF, the membership of this team		Due to the global nature of the IETF, the membership of this team
	should reflect a diversity of time zones and other participant		should reflect a diversity of time zones and other participant
	characteristics that lets it operate effectively around the clock and		characteristics that lets it operate effectively around the clock and
	throughout the year. Ideally, the moderators should be able to		throughout the year. Ideally, the moderators should be able to
	respond to issues within a few hours.		respond to issues within a few hours.
	Team diversity is also important to ensure any participant observing		Team diversity also improves the likelihood that any participant
	disruptive behavior can identify a moderator they feel comfortable		experiencing or observing disruptive behavior can identify a
	contacting.		moderator they feel comfortable contacting.
	2.2. Training		2.2. Training
	The IETF is committed to providing and/or funding training for		The IETF is committed to providing and/or funding training for
	administrators and moderators as necessary. The IESG will negotiate		administrators and moderators as necessary. The IESG will negotiate
	any required funding or resources with IETF Administration LLC		any required funding or resources with IETF Administration LLC
	[RFC8711].		[RFC8711].
	3. Scope and Responsibilities		3. Scope and Responsibilities
	skipping to change at line 242 ¶		skipping to change at line 242 ¶
	* *Participants* should always behave in the manner discussed in		* *Participants* should always behave in the manner discussed in
	Section 1.2. They are also encouraged to report disruptive		Section 1.2. They are also encouraged to report disruptive
	behavior directed at them or someone else to an administrator of		behavior directed at them or someone else to an administrator of
	the respective forum *and* the moderators.		the respective forum *and* the moderators.
	* *Administrators* are primarily responsible for managing their fora		* *Administrators* are primarily responsible for managing their fora
	in accordance with procedures developed by the moderators and		in accordance with procedures developed by the moderators and
	approved by the IESG. As such, they shall address reports of		approved by the IESG. As such, they shall address reports of
	disruptive behavior in a timely fashion, apprising moderators of		disruptive behavior in a timely fashion, apprising moderators of
	reports or actions taken. Administrators may amend or rescind		reports or actions taken. Administrators may amend or rescind
	actions, including those taken by members of the moderation team		actions, including those taken by members of the moderator team
	*after* they have consulted with that team.		*after* they have consulted with that team.
	For a working group, chairs are by default the administrators.		For a working group, chairs are by default the administrators.
	They may delegate this responsibility in the same vein as		They may delegate this responsibility in the same vein as
	Section 6.4 of [RFC2418], but they must always accept,		Section 6.4 of [RFC2418], but they must always accept,
	acknowledge, and keep track of complaints of disruptive behavior.		acknowledge, and keep track of complaints of disruptive behavior.
	Forum administrators should perform moderation in a way that		Forum administrators should perform moderation in a way that
	obviates the need for moderator team involvement.		obviates the need for moderator team involvement.
	* *Moderators* are responsible for establishing procedures to		* *Moderators* are responsible for establishing procedures to
	skipping to change at line 401 ¶		skipping to change at line 401 ¶
	A suspension of participation privileges imposed prior to this		A suspension of participation privileges imposed prior to this
	process shall be reconsidered only in accordance with the processes		process shall be reconsidered only in accordance with the processes
	in place at the time of the suspension, even if the corresponding RFC		in place at the time of the suspension, even if the corresponding RFC
	has been formally obsoleted.		has been formally obsoleted.
	5. Relationship to Other IETF Functions		5. Relationship to Other IETF Functions
	5.1. Relation to the Ombudsteam		5.1. Relation to the Ombudsteam
	Administrators and moderators shall complement the efforts of the		Administrators and moderators shall complement the efforts of the
	IETF Ombudsteam [OT], whose focus on anti-harassment and operation		IETF Ombudsteam [OT], whose focus on anti-harassment shall remain
	shall remain unchanged. Administrators and moderators should always		unchanged. Administrators and moderators should always report
	report suspected harassment. They should nonetheless take any		suspected harassment. They should nonetheless take any necessary
	necessary actions regarding disruptive behavior.		actions regarding disruptive behavior.
	5.2. Relation to the IETF LLC		5.2. Relation to the IETF LLC
	The Board of Directors of the IETF Administration LLC (IETF LLC) has		The Board of Directors of the IETF Administration LLC (IETF LLC) has
	fiduciary duty for the overall organization, which includes the duty		fiduciary duty for the overall organization, which includes the duty
	to protect the organization from serious legal risk that may arise		to protect the organization from serious legal risk that may arise
	from the behavior of IETF participants.		from the behavior of IETF participants.
	This protection may include the need for the IETF LLC to take		This protection may include the need for the IETF LLC to take
	emergency moderation actions. These emergency actions are expected		emergency moderation actions. These emergency actions are expected
	skipping to change at line 464 ¶		skipping to change at line 464 ¶
	is mitigated in eight ways:		is mitigated in eight ways:
	1. Section 4 requires the moderator team to first establish		1. Section 4 requires the moderator team to first establish
	procedures that are intended to apply uniformly across the IETF.		procedures that are intended to apply uniformly across the IETF.
	2. Section 1.2 explicitly states that viewpoints outside the rough		2. Section 1.2 explicitly states that viewpoints outside the rough
	consensus are not in and of themselves disruptive.		consensus are not in and of themselves disruptive.
	3. Section 4 provides transparency by requiring that moderation		3. Section 4 provides transparency by requiring that moderation
	actions that restrict participation privileges be immediately		actions that restrict participation privileges be immediately
	reported to the affected person and to the moderation team, and		reported to the affected person and to the moderator team, and
	periodically reported to the IESG.		periodically reported to the IESG.
	4. Section 4 also requires that the community be informed in the		4. Section 4 also requires that the community be informed in the
	case of suspensions lasting longer than 14 days.		case of suspensions lasting longer than 14 days.
	5. Section 4.1 lays out an appeals process in the case of		5. Section 4.1 lays out an appeals process in the case of
	disagreements.		disagreements.
	6. If moderators find that the procedures themselves are leading to		6. If moderators find that the procedures themselves are leading to
	inappropriate moderation, Section 4 allows them to update those		inappropriate moderation, Section 4 allows them to update those
	skipping to change at line 495 ¶		skipping to change at line 495 ¶
	are not set in stone.		are not set in stone.
	Moderation actions are intended to limit the likelihood of disruptive		Moderation actions are intended to limit the likelihood of disruptive
	behavior by a few IETF participants that may discourage participation		behavior by a few IETF participants that may discourage participation
	by other IETF participants.		by other IETF participants.
	7. IANA Considerations		7. IANA Considerations
	This document has no IANA actions.		This document has no IANA actions.
	8. Acknowledgments		8. References
	This memo is based on two individual Internet-Drafts, draft-ecahc-
	moderation (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ecahc-moderation/)
	authored by Lars Eggert, Alissa Cooper, Jari Arkko, Russ Housley, and
	Brian E. Carpenter, and draft-lear-bcp83-replacement
	(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lear-bcp83-replacement/)
	authored by Eliot Lear, Robert Wilton, Bron Gondwana, and John
	R. Levine. Robert Sayre authored draft-sayre-modpod-excellent
	(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sayre-modpod-excellent/),
	which also originated ideas reflected in this work. Pete Resnick
	provided the basis for how the moderators interact with list/forum
	leadership.
	These individuals contributed additional improvements:
	* Alissa Cooper
	* Brian Carpenter
	* Chris Box
	* Colin Perkins
	* David Schinazi
	* Eric Rescorla
	* Jay Daley
	* Joel Halpern
	* John Klensin
	* John Scudder
	* Martin Thomson
	* Melinda Shore
	* Michael Richardson
	* Nick Hilliard
	* Pete Resnick
	* Rich Salz
	* Robert Sayre
	* Russ Housley
	* Sean Turner
	* Simon Josefsson
	* Stephen Farrell
	* Ted Lemon
	* Tim Bray
	N.B., acknowledgment should not be taken as endorsement by the
	individuals named above.
	9. References
	9.1. Normative References		8.1. Normative References
	[BCP10] Best Current Practice 10,		[BCP10] Best Current Practice 10,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp10>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp10>.
	At the time of writing, this BCP comprises the following:		At the time of writing, this BCP comprises the following:
	Kucherawy, M., Ed., Hinden, R., Ed., and J. Livingood,		Kucherawy, M., Ed., Hinden, R., Ed., and J. Livingood,
	Ed., "IAB, IESG, IETF Trust, and IETF LLC Selection,		Ed., "IAB, IESG, IETF Trust, and IETF LLC Selection,
	Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the IETF		Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the IETF
	Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 8713,		Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 8713,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC8713, February 2020,		DOI 10.17487/RFC8713, February 2020,
	skipping to change at line 604 ¶		skipping to change at line 539 ¶
	[RFC7776] Resnick, P. and A. Farrel, "IETF Anti-Harassment		[RFC7776] Resnick, P. and A. Farrel, "IETF Anti-Harassment
	Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 7776, DOI 10.17487/RFC7776, March		Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 7776, DOI 10.17487/RFC7776, March
	2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7776>.		2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7776>.
	[RFC8711] Haberman, B., Hall, J., and J. Livingood, "Structure of		[RFC8711] Haberman, B., Hall, J., and J. Livingood, "Structure of
	the IETF Administrative Support Activity, Version 2.0",		the IETF Administrative Support Activity, Version 2.0",
	BCP 101, RFC 8711, DOI 10.17487/RFC8711, February 2020,		BCP 101, RFC 8711, DOI 10.17487/RFC8711, February 2020,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8711>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8711>.
	9.2. Informative References		8.2. Informative References
	[AHP] IESG, "IETF Anti-Harassment Policy", 3 November 2013,		[AHP] IESG, "IETF Anti-Harassment Policy", 3 November 2013,
	<https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/anti-		<https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/anti-
	harassment-policy/>.		harassment-policy/>.
	[DP] IESG, "IESG Statement on Disruptive Posting", 17 February		[DP] IESG, "IESG Statement on Disruptive Posting", 17 February
	2006, <https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/		2006, <https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/
	disruptive-posting/>.		disruptive-posting/>.
	[IESG-SPAM]		[IESG-SPAM]
	skipping to change at line 680 ¶		skipping to change at line 615 ¶
	IESG statement [DP] clarifies that the IESG tasks list administrators		IESG statement [DP] clarifies that the IESG tasks list administrators
	with moderation. And the IETF list for general discussions has,		with moderation. And the IETF list for general discussions has,
	mostly for historic reasons, a team of moderators that are not list		mostly for historic reasons, a team of moderators that are not list
	administrators and operate by a different set of processes [RFC9245].		administrators and operate by a different set of processes [RFC9245].
	Note that the term "moderation" can refer both to _preemptive_		Note that the term "moderation" can refer both to _preemptive_
	moderation, where administrators review attempted participation		moderation, where administrators review attempted participation
	before it occurs (such as reviewing messages to a mailing list), and		before it occurs (such as reviewing messages to a mailing list), and
	_reactive_ moderation, where administrators intervene after		_reactive_ moderation, where administrators intervene after
	disruptive participation has occurred. Historically, the IETF has		disruptive participation has occurred. Historically, the IETF has
	mainly practiced reactive moderation, with a spectrum from gentle		mainly practiced reactive moderation, employing actions ranging from
	reminders on- and off-list, all the way to suspension of posting		gentle reminders on- and off-list, all the way to suspension of
	rights and other ways of participating or communicating. It is up to		posting rights and other ways of participating or communicating. It
	the moderators and administrators to decide which mix of preemptive		is up to the moderators and administrators to decide which mix of
	and reactive moderation to employ as part of their procedures.		preemptive and reactive moderation to employ as part of their
			procedures.
	In addition, [RFC3683] defines a process for revoking an individual's		In addition, [RFC3683] defines a process for revoking an individual's
	posting rights to IETF mailing lists following a community Last Call		posting rights to IETF mailing lists following a community Last Call
	of a "posting rights" action (PR-action) proposed by the IESG, often		of a "posting rights" action (PR-action) proposed by the IESG, often
	in response to complaints from the community.		in response to complaints from the community.
	Experience and community input suggests that an evolution of the		Experience and community input suggests that an evolution of the
	existing processes is necessary.		existing processes is necessary.
	A.2. Problems with the Previous Approach		A.2. Problems with the Previous Approach
	skipping to change at line 733 ¶		skipping to change at line 669 ¶
	* For a given mailing list, participants may not feel comfortable		* For a given mailing list, participants may not feel comfortable
	reporting disruptive behavior to a chair or list administrator,		reporting disruptive behavior to a chair or list administrator,
	for various reasons. For mailing lists not associated with		for various reasons. For mailing lists not associated with
	working groups, list administrators are not even publicly		working groups, list administrators are not even publicly
	identified -- they can only be contacted through an anonymous		identified -- they can only be contacted through an anonymous
	alias address. This exacerbates the problem, because participants		alias address. This exacerbates the problem, because participants
	may not be comfortable reporting disruptive behavior to an		may not be comfortable reporting disruptive behavior to an
	anonymous party.		anonymous party.
	* The IETF offers participation not only through in-person meetings		* Moderation processes have been defined for only two channels of
	and mailing lists, which are the two channels of participation for		participation in the IETF: in-person meetings and mailing lists.
	which moderation processes are currently defined. IETF business		However, IETF business now happens in a number of fora (e.g., chat
	also happens in chat groups, remote meeting participation systems,		groups, remote meeting participation systems, virtual meetings,
	virtual meetings, wikis, GitHub repositories, and more. How		wikis, and GitHub repositories). Procedures for moderating
	disruptive behavior is moderated in these fora is currently		disruptive behavior in these fora are currently undefined.
	undefined.
	Appendix B. Non-Normative Examples of Disruptive Behavior		Appendix B. Non-Normative Examples of Disruptive Behavior
	The list below describes some types of disruptive behavior, but it is		The list below describes some types of disruptive behavior, but it is
	non-exhaustive.		non-exhaustive.
	* Discussion of subjects unrelated to a forum's charter or scope;		* Discussion of subjects unrelated to a forum's charter or scope;
	* Uncivil commentary, regardless of the general subject;		* Uncivil commentary, regardless of the general subject;
	skipping to change at line 767 ¶		skipping to change at line 702 ¶
	* "Sealioning", where a participant makes incessant requests for		* "Sealioning", where a participant makes incessant requests for
	evidence or data, even while remaining superficially polite.		evidence or data, even while remaining superficially polite.
	These items are examples. Moderators and administrators may take		These items are examples. Moderators and administrators may take
	moderation actions for many other cases.		moderation actions for many other cases.
	The moderator team's task consists of subjective judgment calls.		The moderator team's task consists of subjective judgment calls.
	Behaviors not listed here might require moderation, and it is not		Behaviors not listed here might require moderation, and it is not
	possible to write a complete list of all such behaviors.		possible to write a complete list of all such behaviors.
			Acknowledgments
			This memo is based on two individual Internet-Drafts, draft-ecahc-
			moderation (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ecahc-moderation/)
			authored by Lars Eggert, Alissa Cooper, Jari Arkko, Russ Housley, and
			Brian E. Carpenter, and draft-lear-bcp83-replacement
			(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lear-bcp83-replacement/)
			authored by Eliot Lear, Robert Wilton, Bron Gondwana, and John
			R. Levine. Robert Sayre authored draft-sayre-modpod-excellent
			(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sayre-modpod-excellent/),
			which also originated ideas reflected in this work. Pete Resnick
			provided the basis for how the moderators interact with list/forum
			leadership.
			These individuals contributed additional improvements:
			* Alissa Cooper
			* Brian Carpenter
			* Chris Box
			* Colin Perkins
			* David Schinazi
			* Deb Cooley
			* Dhruv Dhody
			* Eric Rescorla
			* Éric Vyncke
			* Erik Kline
			* Harald Alvestrand
			* Jay Daley
			* Joel Halpern
			* John Klensin
			* John Scudder
			* Lisa Dusseault
			* Martin Thomson
			* Melinda Shore
			* Michael Richardson
			* Mike Bishop
			* Mohamed Boucadair
			* Murray Kucherawy
			* Nick Hilliard
			* Orie Steele
			* Paul Hoffman
			* Paul Wouters
			* Pete Resnick
			* Rich Salz
			* Robert Sayre
			* Robert Sparks
			* Roman Danyliw
			* Russ Housley
			* Sean Turner
			* Simon Josefsson
			* Stephen Farrell
			* Ted Lemon
			* Tim Bray
			N.B., acknowledgment should not be taken as endorsement by the
			individuals named above.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Lars Eggert (editor)		Lars Eggert (editor)
	Mozilla		Mozilla
	Stenbergintie 12 B		Stenbergintie 12 B
	FI-02700 Kauniainen		FI-02700 Kauniainen
	Finland		Finland
	Email: lars@eggert.org		Email: lars@eggert.org
	URI: https://eggert.org/		URI: https://eggert.org/
End of changes. 18 change blocks.
	104 lines changed or deleted		132 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48.