IETF Community Moderation
draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-13

Network Working Group                                     L. Eggert, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                   Mozilla
Obsoletes: 3683, 3934 (if approved)                         E. Lear, Ed.
Updates: 2418, 9245 (if approved)                          Cisco Systems
Intended status: Best Current Practice                  12 November 2025
Expires: 16 May 2026

                       IETF Community Moderation
                  draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-13

Abstract

   The IETF community will treat people with kindness and grace, but not
   endless patience.

   This memo establishes a policy for the moderation of disruptive
   participation across the IETF's various public contribution channels
   and discussion fora.  It establishes guardrails for moderation and a
   moderator team.  That team will develop a set of guidelines and
   facilitate their consistent implementation with chairs and
   administrators.

About This Document

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   The latest revision of this draft can be found at
   https://larseggert.github.io/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/draft-
   ietf-modpod-group-processes.html.  Status information for this
   document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-
   modpod-group-processes/.

   Discussion of this document takes place on the mod-discuss Working
   Group mailing list (mailto:mod-discuss@ietf.org), which is archived
   at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mod-discuss/.  Subscribe
   at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mod-discuss/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 16 May 2026.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Terminology Note  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.2.  General Philosophy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  IETF Moderator Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.1.  Composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.1.1.  Team Diversity  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.2.  Training  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   3.  Scope and Responsibilities  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.1.  Actions That Are Out of Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.2.  Unsolicited Bulk Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   4.  Moderation Procedures and Transparency  . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.1.  Consistency and Conflict Resolution . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.2.  Reinstatement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   5.  Relationship to other IETF functions  . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.1.  Relation to the Ombudsteam  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.2.  Relation to the IETF LLC  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   8.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   Appendix A.  Change History of this I-D . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     A.1.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-11  . . . . . . .  15
     A.2.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-10  . . . . . . .  15
     A.3.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-09  . . . . . . .  16
     A.4.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-08  . . . . . . .  16
     A.5.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-07  . . . . . . .  16
     A.6.  Since draft-ietf-modmod-group-processes-06  . . . . . . .  17
     A.7.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-05  . . . . . . .  17
     A.8.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-04  . . . . . . .  17
     A.9.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-03  . . . . . . .  17
     A.10. Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-02  . . . . . . .  17
     A.11. Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-01  . . . . . . .  18
     A.12. Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-00  . . . . . . .  18
     A.13. Since draft-ecahc-moderation-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   Appendix B.  Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     B.1.  Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     B.2.  Problems with the Previous Approach . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   Appendix C.  Non-Normative Examples of Disruptive Behavior  . . .  20
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21

1.  Introduction

   This memo establishes a policy for the moderation of disruptive
   participation across the IETF's various public contribution channels
   and discussion fora.  It creates a moderator team to develop
   procedures and to facilitate their consistent application.

   This memo obsoletes and updates some prior IETF processes, summarized
   here.  Background information is described in more detail in
   Appendix B.

   This memo makes the following changes to existing processes:

   *  Obsoletes [RFC3683] as the "posting rights" (PR) action it defines
      are replaced by processes defined herein;

   *  Obsoletes [RFC3934] as it replaces working group moderation
      procedures;

   *  Obsoletes Section 3 of [RFC9245] and the second paragraph of
      Section 4 of [RFC9245], as the moderator team replaces the IETF
      discussion list moderation team.

   *  Updates Section 6.1 of [RFC2418], because the moderator team will
      now work together with working group chairs to moderate disruptive
      behavior.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 3]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   The processes described in this memo are solely applicable to IETF
   activities, and not to other related organizations, such as the
   Internet Research Task Force (IRTF), the Internet Architecture Board
   (IAB), the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG), the RFC Series Approval
   Board (RSAB), or the Independent RFC Submission Stream, without their
   explicit agreement.  These changes take effect when the procedures
   described in Section 4 have been approved by the IESG.

1.1.  Terminology Note

   Below we use the term "administrator" to refer to the people who are
   assigned by the IESG to manage a particular public participation
   channel or discussion forum.  This memo uses the term "forum" to
   refer to any public IETF participation channel, such as a mailing
   list, chat group, or discussion in a collaborative tool such as
   GitHub or GitLab.  For example, working group chairs are
   administrators of all the public fora their WG uses, which typically
   includes mailing lists and chat groups, but might also include
   collaborative tools such as GitHub or GitLab.  Another example of
   administrators are the "owners" of non-WG IETF mailing lists.

1.2.  General Philosophy

   The cornerstone of our philosophy is that individuals are responsible
   for furthering the goals of the IETF as an organization [RFC3935] in
   a manner consistent with the policy laid out in [RFC7154].

   Disagreement and diverse points of view within any standards
   organization are to be expected, and are even healthy.  The IETF is
   an open standards organization with a discussion-based rough
   consensus process, a non-normative description of which is in
   [RFC7282].  Engaged, respectful discussion that is within the scope
   of an IETF forum should therefore not be considered disruptive, nor
   should someone be considered disruptive solely because they are
   outside the rough consensus.  However, when someone crosses the line
   into disruptive behavior, some action must be taken in order to
   maintain decorum of the community.

   The moderation policy goals are as follows:

   *  Apply consistent, fair, and timely moderation of communication
      across all public IETF participation channels and participation
      fora without regard to a participant's role in the IETF or
      previous technical contributions;

   *  Appeals are available to address disagreements about moderation
      actions;

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 4]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  Balance transparency against both privacy of individuals involved
      and further disruption to the community;

   *  Allow moderation decisions to be reconsidered; and

   *  Provide the broadest possible latitude to all people doing
      moderation, so that they have the flexibility to address a broad
      range of individuals and circumstances.

   Questions about processes detailed below should be answered through
   the lens of these aims.

   The goal is explicitly *not* punishment, but to maintain an open,
   welcoming, non-hostile environment in which all may participate on an
   equal footing, regardless of their role in the IETF or past technical
   contributions.

2.  IETF Moderator Team

   This memo proposes a consistent approach to moderating the IETF's
   various public fora.  A moderator team for the IETF will develop
   guidelines for moderation and will facilitate their consistent
   implementation and application as detailed below.  These changes are
   intended to address the issues identified in the previous model
   Appendix B.2 and the principles described in the introduction.

2.1.  Composition

   The IESG appoints and recalls moderators.  The moderator team
   initially consists of no fewer than five individuals.  The moderator
   team may expand or contract based on operational experience.  In
   selecting members, the IESG will take into account geographic
   coverage, expected and unexpected absences, and team diversity.

   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
   who is serving on the IESG or IAB.  Individuals serving on other
   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
   excluded from serving on the moderator team.  If a moderator is
   assuming any such role, they shall step down from the moderator team
   soon after.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 5]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

2.1.1.  Team Diversity

   Due to the global nature of the IETF, the membership of this team
   should reflect a diversity of time zones and other participant
   characteristics that lets it operate effectively around the clock and
   throughout the year.  Ideally, the moderators should be able to
   respond to issues within a few hours.

   Team diversity is also important to ensure any participant observing
   disruptive behavior can identify a moderator they feel comfortable
   contacting.

2.2.  Training

   The IETF is committed to providing and/or funding training for
   administrators and moderators as necessary.  The IESG will negotiate
   any required funding or resources with IETF Administration LLC
   [RFC8711].

3.  Scope and Responsibilities

   This policy applies to all public IETF fora, both present and future,
   including, but not limited to, mailing lists, chat groups, and
   discussions in other systems that the IETF or WGs have chosen to
   employ, such as GitHub repositories, wikis, or issue trackers.

   Different people have different moderation responsibilities:

   *  *Participants* should always behave in a manner discussed in
      Section 1.2.  They are also encouraged to report disruptive
      behavior directed at them or someone else to an administrator of
      the respective forum *and* the moderators.

   *  *Administrators* are primarily responsible for managing their fora
      in accordance with guidance developed by the moderators and
      approved by the IESG.  As such, they shall address reports of
      disruptive behavior in a timely fashion, apprising moderators of
      reports or actions taken.  Administrators may amend or rescind
      actions, including those taken by members of the moderation team
      *after* they have consulted with that team.

      For a working group, chairs are by default the administrators.
      They may delegate this responsibility in the same vein as
      Section 6.4 of [RFC2418] but they must always accept, acknowledge,
      and keep track of complaints of disruptive behavior.  Forum
      administrators should perform moderation in a way that obviates
      the need for moderator team involvement.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 6]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  *Moderators* are responsible for establishing procedures to
      address moderation needs across all IETF fora, both present and
      future.  They are a resource that the community can use to address
      disruptive behavior.  The moderator team is responsible to the
      IESG.  The IESG may create or designate a forum to facilitate
      discussion about moderation, and refer interested parties to that
      forum.

      Moderators may take actions when administrators do not respond to
      reports in a timely fashion.  Their first action should generally
      be to attempt to contact and advise the relevant administrators.
      They should only take moderation actions when administrators are
      not responsive, or when someone disrupts multiple fora at the same
      time.  Moderators should generally give WG chairs the opportunity
      to manage what may be difficult and contentious debates within
      their groups.  Within the bounds of this principle, it is left to
      moderators' judgement to determine when they must act, with the
      understanding that some situations may require fast responses.
      Section 4.1 discusses the handling of disagreements.

      Moderators are administrators for IETF plenary fora, currently
      including the IETF discussion and last-call lists and any plenary
      chat sessions.  They are also administrators for any forum that
      does not otherwise have an administrator.

      In order to scale the function, except for plenary fora as
      described above, moderators are not expected to always actively
      monitor all communications.  In general, they will process reports
      from participants.

   *  *Area Directors* are expected to resolve conflicts as described
      here and in Section 4.1.  The IESG will periodically evaluate the
      performance and needs of moderators, and may appoint and recall
      moderators as they deem appropriate.  Apart from that, the IESG
      shall refrain from the day-to-day operation and management of the
      moderator team.  The moderators may consult with the IESG when
      needed.

3.1.  Actions That Are Out of Scope

   Moderator actions are only permitted for the purposes of limiting
   disruptive communications in IETF fora.  All other actions are beyond
   the scope of this memo.  Examples of actions that are out of scope
   include, but are not limited to, Datatracker account removal,
   restriction of in-person meeting registration, content removal or
   redaction, and moderation or policing of private or non-IETF
   communications.  While the moderator team does not moderate non-
   public IETF mailing lists, the administrators of such lists can

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 7]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   choose to adopt some of the procedures that the moderator team
   develops.

3.2.  Unsolicited Bulk Messages

   Unsolicited bulk messages are considered disruptive and should be
   handled in a manner consistent with the IESG statement on IETF Spam
   Control on IETF Mailing Lists[IESG-SPAM], or its successors.
   Administrators and moderators may take similar actions in other fora
   (e.g., GitHub or Instant Messaging).  Such actions require no
   additional reporting.

4.  Moderation Procedures and Transparency

   Within the bounds of the policies set herein, the moderator team
   shall develop and maintain procedures and criteria relating to
   moderation, including the moderator team's own operating procedures.

   Those procedures and criteria shall be developed with community
   input, be approved by the IESG prior to going into effect, and be
   made public.  However, they need not be documented in the RFC series.
   This shall be the first task for the moderator team.  Until those
   procedures and criteria are established, all previous processes
   referenced in Section 1 shall remain in effect.

   The intent of this memo is to provide the widest possible freedom of
   action to administrators and moderators, with the expectation that
   the minimal actions necessary will be taken.  Those who are directed
   to stop disrupting a forum must do so immediately.  Further
   disruptions may lead to further corrective actions.

   Examples of actions that could be taken include:

   *  Automated rate limiting mechanisms;

   *  Review and approval of submissions/messages;

   *  A private or public admonishment;

   *  Temporary or permanent suspension of participation privileges in
      one or more fora.

   We stress that these are only examples, and not in any way
   prescriptive.  Administrators and moderators are free to decide on
   these or other actions.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 8]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   All moderation actions that restrict participation privileges shall
   be immediately reported to those against whom those actions take
   effect and to the moderator team for their review.  They shall also
   be periodically reported to the IESG.

   Only moderation actions suspending participation privileges for
   longer than fourteen (14) days must be reported to the forum to which
   such an action applies, or in any event, at the request of the
   suspended person.  If such an action applies to more than one forum,
   it should be communicated to the community in a manner decided by the
   IESG.

   Moderators will periodically provide an aggregate report to the
   community on actions taken under this policy.

4.1.  Consistency and Conflict Resolution

   Administrators and moderators shall act in a manner consistent with
   this memo and the guidelines approved by the IESG.  In cases of
   disagreement over a moderation decision, anyone may take the matter
   up with the responsible Area Director for resolution, or with the
   IETF chair if a responsible Area Director cannot be determined or is
   not assigned.  If the disagreement cannot be resolved by the Area
   Director, that person may then appeal to the IESG, and subsequently
   to the IAB using the processes stated in Sections 6.5.1 and 6.5.4 of
   [RFC2026].

4.2.  Reinstatement

   People and circumstances change.  Individuals whose participation
   privileges have been indefinitely suspended from a forum may request
   reinstatement.  Requests for reinstatement may be made only a year
   after the initial decision, and then only annually afterwards.

   Any such request must be directed to the entity who made the decision
   (e.g., moderator team, working group chairs, etc.) or their
   successors.  That party may at their discretion reinstate someone,
   conditionally or unconditionally.

   To avoid denial-of-service attacks on our processes, decisions to not
   reinstate someone's participation privileges may not be appealed.
   Any reinstatement is a grace and not a right.

   A suspension of participation privileges imposed prior to this
   process shall be reconsidered only in accordance with the processes
   in place at the time of the suspension, even if the corresponding RFC
   has been formally obsoleted.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                  [Page 9]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

5.  Relationship to other IETF functions

5.1.  Relation to the Ombudsteam

   Administrators and moderators shall complement the efforts of the
   IETF ombudsteam [OT], whose focus on anti-harassment and operation
   shall remain unchanged.  Administrators and moderators should always
   report suspected harassment.  They should nonetheless take any
   necessary actions regarding disruptive behavior.

5.2.  Relation to the IETF LLC

   The Board of Directors of the IETF Administration LLC (IETF LLC) has
   fiduciary duty for the overall organization, which includes the duty
   to protect the organization from serious legal risk that may arise
   from the behavior of IETF participants.

   This protection may include the need for the IETF LLC to take
   emergency moderation actions.  These emergency actions are expected
   to be taken only when the IETF LLC has received legal advice that
   such action is necessary, and therefore extremely rare in frequency.
   Some examples of where this might be necessary are:

   *  Someone making a credible threat of harm to other IETF
      participants.

   *  Someone using IETF mailing lists and/or websites to share content
      where publishing that content on IETF lists and/or websites brings
      serious legal risk to the IETF.

   *  Someone making a credible threat of legal action where any form of
      interaction with them on IETF mailing lists may have serious legal
      consequences for the IETF.

   If any such action is taken, the IETF LLC should, except where
   limited by legal advice to the contrary, inform the IESG as soon as
   possible, providing full details of the subject of the action, nature
   of the action, reason for the action and expected duration.  The IETF
   LLC should also inform the moderator team and IETF community, except
   where it receives legal advice to the contrary.

   As such an action would be taken by the IETF LLC in order to protect
   the IETF according to its fiduciary duty, then it cannot allow that
   to be overridden by a decision of the moderator team or the IESG.
   The subject of any such action may request a review by the IETF LLC
   board, as documented in section 4.7 of [RFC8711]

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   Any such action taken by the IETF LLC under this section of this
   policy, is not subject to the rest of this policy.

6.  Security Considerations

   The usual security considerations [RFC3552] do not apply to this
   memo.

   There is the potential abuse of the moderation procedures by
   moderators, working group chairs, and potentially others that could
   lead to censorship of legitimate participation.  This potential risk
   is mitigated in eight ways:

   1.  Section 4 requires the moderator team to first establish
       procedures that are intended to apply uniformly across the IETF.

   2.  Section 1.2 explicitly states that viewpoints outside the rough
       consensus are not in and of themselves disruptive.

   3.  Section 4 provides transparency by requiring that moderation
       actions that restrict participation privileges be immediately
       reported to the affected person and to the moderation team, and
       periodically reported to the IESG.

   4.  That same section requires that the community be informed in the
       case of suspensions lasting longer than 14 days.

   5.  Section 4.1 lays out an appeals process in the case of
       disagreements.

   6.  If moderators find that the procedures themselves are leading to
       inappropriate moderation, Section 4 allows them to update those
       procedures in consultation with the community, and with the
       approval of the IESG.

   7.  If IETF participants believe that either the IESG or the IAB are
       not performing their respective oversight functions as described
       in this document, they may comment to the NomCom [BCP10] or the
       community at large.

   8.  Finally, if it appears that these processes are not functioning
       properly, the policies stated in this memo may be amended.  They
       are not set in stone.

   Moderation actions are intended to limit the likelihood of disruptive
   behavior by a few IETF participants from discouraging participation
   by other IETF participants.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

7.  IANA Considerations

   No IANA actions are requested.

8.  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

   *  Eric Rescorla

   *  Jay Daley

   *  Joel Halpern

   *  John Klensin

   *  John Scudder

   *  Martin Thomson

   *  Melinda Shore

   *  Michael Richardson

   *  Nick Hilliard

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  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

   [BCP10]    Best Current Practice 10,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp10>.
              At the time of writing, this BCP comprises the following:

              Kucherawy, M., Ed., Hinden, R., Ed., and J. Livingood,
              Ed., "IAB, IESG, IETF Trust, and IETF LLC Selection,
              Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the IETF
              Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 8713,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8713, February 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8713>.

              Duke, M., "Nominating Committee Eligibility", BCP 10,
              RFC 9389, DOI 10.17487/RFC9389, April 2023,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9389>.

   [RFC2026]  Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
              3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2026>.

   [RFC2418]  Bradner, S., "IETF Working Group Guidelines and
              Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 2418, DOI 10.17487/RFC2418,
              September 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2418>.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   [RFC3683]  Rose, M., "A Practice for Revoking Posting Rights to IETF
              Mailing Lists", BCP 83, RFC 3683, DOI 10.17487/RFC3683,
              March 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3683>.

   [RFC3934]  Wasserman, M., "Updates to RFC 2418 Regarding the
              Management of IETF Mailing Lists", BCP 25, RFC 3934,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3934, October 2004,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3934>.

   [RFC3935]  Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF",
              BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3935>.

   [RFC7154]  Moonesamy, S., Ed., "IETF Guidelines for Conduct", BCP 54,
              RFC 7154, DOI 10.17487/RFC7154, March 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7154>.

   [RFC7776]  Resnick, P. and A. Farrel, "IETF Anti-Harassment
              Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 7776, DOI 10.17487/RFC7776, March
              2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7776>.

   [RFC8711]  Haberman, B., Hall, J., and J. Livingood, "Structure of
              the IETF Administrative Support Activity, Version 2.0",
              BCP 101, RFC 8711, DOI 10.17487/RFC8711, February 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8711>.

   [RFC9245]  Eggert, L. and S. Harris, "IETF Discussion List Charter",
              BCP 45, RFC 9245, DOI 10.17487/RFC9245, June 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9245>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [AHP]      IESG, "IETF Anti-Harassment Policy", 3 November 2013,
              <https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/anti-
              harassment-policy/>.

   [DP]       IESG, "IESG Statement on Disruptive Posting", 16 February
              2006, <https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/
              disruptive-posting/>.

   [IESG-SPAM]
              IESG, "IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing
              Lists", 18 April 2008, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
              statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-spam-control-on-ietf-
              mailing-lists-20080414/>.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   [MODML]    IESG, "IESG Guidance on the Moderation of IETF Working
              Group Mailing Lists", 29 August 2000,
              <https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/
              mailing-lists-moderation/>.

   [OT]       "Ombudsteam", <https://www.ietf.org/contact/ombudsteam/>.

   [RFC3552]  Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC
              Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3552, July 2003,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3552>.

   [RFC7282]  Resnick, P., "On Consensus and Humming in the IETF",
              RFC 7282, DOI 10.17487/RFC7282, June 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7282>.

Appendix A.  Change History of this I-D

      |  RFC Editor: Please remove this appendix before publication.

A.1.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-11

   *  clarify when changes take effect (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/238/)

   *  Refine security considerations (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/239)

   *  Multi group and moderator reversal (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/257/files)

   *  Last(?) bits from 2nd last call (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/258)

A.2.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-10

   *  Many editorial suggestions received during WGLC.

   *  remove attendee mailing lists from moderator primary
      responsibility (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-
      group-processes/pull/181)

   *  Correct reference to appeals process.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/149) Also this. (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-
      modpod-group-processes/pull/230)

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  Clarify fora that are out of scope.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/197) Incl. attendees' lists. (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/181) Also this.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/235)

   *  Clarify WG chairs are default admins but can delegate.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/220)

   *  Mod team size guidance. (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-
      modpod-group-processes/pull/231)

   *  Chair immediately notify mods and affected parties.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/229)

   *  Add all of the available mitigations to risks of censorship.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/232)

   *  Clarify AD responsibilities. (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-
      ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/234)

A.3.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-09

   *  Try to find another happy medium on power of moderators
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/147)

A.4.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-08

   *  Address timeliness and exisgent circumstances
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      issues/142)

   *  Make clear that moderators should use their judgment on timing
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/143)

A.5.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-07

   *  Pete Resnick issues and similar (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/issues/134)

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  Includes changes to abstract, intro, tweaks to make relationship
      between admins/WG chairs clearer; makes roles clearer, moderation
      team → moderator team. (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-
      modpod-group-processes/pull/135)

A.6.  Since draft-ietf-modmod-group-processes-06

   *  Normalize handling of moderation across all fora
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/129)

   *  Obsolete RFC 3934, explicit admin responsibility
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/132)

A.7.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-05

   *  New attempt to address moderation/WG interactions
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/126)

A.8.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-04

   *  Use plain English instead of BCP 14 language
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/120)

A.9.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-03

   *  Non-normative Examples of Disruptive Behavior
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/121)

A.10.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-02

   *  Say which RFCs this obsoletes and updates.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/105)

   *  Address issue 113 (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-
      modpod-group-processes/pull/116)

   *  Rewrite philosophy (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-
      modpod-group-processes/pull/103)

   *  Reinstatement (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-
      group-processes/pull/107)

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  Content removal is not moderation. (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/109)

A.11.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-01

   *  Update "Relation to the IETF LLC". (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/92)

   *  Point to relevant IRTF material. (https://github.com/larseggert/
      draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/pull/97)

   *  Add some text to explain the role of moderators.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/100)

A.12.  Since draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-00

   *  Spelling fix (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-
      group-processes/pull/80)

   *  Initial attempt to balance what the moderator defines and what
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/75)

   *  Scope and relationship between WG chairs and moderators
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/76)

   *  Fix wording, spelling and capitalization.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/88)

   *  Editorial changes to acknowledgments.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/87)

A.13.  Since draft-ecahc-moderation-01

   *  Content taken from draft-ecahc-moderation-01
      (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ecahc-moderation/01/).
      Updated editors.  Acknowledge authors of original pre-WG I-Ds.
      (https://github.com/larseggert/draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes/
      pull/65)

Appendix B.  Motivation

   Section 1 summarized the process changes introduced by this memo.
   This appendix discusses the background that led to them.

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

B.1.  Background

   The IETF community has defined general guidelines for personal
   interactions in the IETF [RFC7154], and the IESG has defined an anti-
   harassment policy for the IETF [AHP] for which the IETF community has
   defined anti-harassment procedures [RFC7776], empowering an
   ombudsteam [OT] to take necessary action.

   Dealing with _disruptive_ behavior, however, is not part of the role
   of the ombudsteam.  [RFC2418] tasks the chairs of each IETF working
   group with moderating their group's in-person meetings while
   [RFC3934] provided chairs a procedure to help manage mailing lists.
   An IESG statement [MODML] described additional guidance to working
   group chairs about how — but not when — to moderate their lists.

   For IETF mailing lists not associated with a working group, another
   IESG statement [DP] clarifies that the IESG tasks list administrators
   with moderation.  And the IETF list for general discussions has,
   mostly for historic reasons, a team of moderators that are not list
   administrators and operate by a different set of processes [RFC9245].

   Note that the term "moderation" can refer both to _preemptive_
   moderation, where administrators review attempted participation
   before it occurs (such as reviewing messages to a mailing list), and
   _reactive_ moderation, where administrators intervene after
   disruptive participation has occurred.  The IETF historically mainly
   practiced reactive moderation, with a spectrum from gentle reminders
   on- and off-list, all the way to suspension of posting rights and
   other ways of participating or communicating.  It is up to the
   moderators and administrators to decide which mix of preemptive and
   reactive moderation to employ as part of their procedures.

   In addition, [RFC3683] defines a process for revoking an individual's
   posting rights to IETF mailing lists following a community last-call
   of a "posting rights" action (PR-action) proposed by the IESG, often
   in response to complaints from the community.

   Experience and community input suggests that an evolution of the
   existing processes is necessary.

B.2.  Problems with the Previous Approach

   The previous approach to moderation of disruptive participation
   through chairs, list administrators, and moderator teams, combined
   with the IESG-led process of PR-actions, has proven to be less than
   ideal:

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  The IETF community has not been able to agree on a common
      definition of disruptive behavior.  Therefore, chairs and list
      administrators apply individually different criteria when making
      decisions, and participants have different expectations for when
      PR-actions are warranted.

   *  The moderation process that chairs and list administrators need to
      follow [RFC3934] is slow and cumbersome, which makes it ill-suited
      to situations that escalate quickly.  It also assumes that the
      originator of disruptive behavior is a misguided participant who
      can be reasoned with and who will change their ways.

   *  Chairs and list administrators may only enact moderation actions
      for their single list, which is ill-suited when a pattern of
      disruptive behavior spans multiple lists.  Also, chairs and list
      administrators may not be fully aware of disruptive behavior that
      spans multiple lists, due to not being subscribed to some of them.

   *  PR-actions, which can address disruptive behavior across several
      lists, are cumbersome and slow, and inconsistent.  This has led to
      a situation where PR-actions are rarely used, and when they are
      used, they are perceived as very heavy-handed.

   *  For a given mailing list, participants may not feel comfortable
      reporting disruptive behavior to a chair or list administrator,
      for various reasons.  For mailing lists not associated with
      working groups, list administrators are not even publicly
      identified - they can only be contacted through an anonymous alias
      address.  This exacerbates the problem, because participants may
      not be comfortable reporting disruptive behavior to an anonymous
      party.

   *  The IETF offers participation not only through in-person meetings
      and mailing lists, which are the two channels of participation for
      which moderation processes are currently defined.  IETF business
      also happens in chat groups, remote meeting participation systems,
      virtual meetings, wikis, GitHub repositories, and more.  How
      disruptive behavior is moderated in these fora is currently
      undefined.

Appendix C.  Non-Normative Examples of Disruptive Behavior

   The list below describes some types of disruptive behavior, but it is
   non-exhaustive.

   *  Discussion of subjects unrelated to a forum's charter or scope;

   *  Uncivil commentary, regardless of the general subject;

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft          IETF Community Moderation          November 2025

   *  Messages announcing conferences, events, or activities that are
      not sponsored or endorsed by the Internet Society or IETF, unless
      posted with prior approval of list administrators;

   *  Repeatedly arguing counter to a WG charter that has been approved
      by the IESG; and

   *  "Sealioning", where a participant makes incessant requests for
      evidence or data, even while remaining superficially polite.

   These items are examples.  Moderators and administrators may take
   moderation actions for many other cases.

   The moderator team's task consists of subjective judgement calls.
   Behaviors not listed here might require moderation, and it is not
   possible to write a complete list of all such behaviors.

Authors' Addresses

   Lars Eggert (editor)
   Mozilla
   Stenbergintie 12 B
   FI-02700 Kauniainen
   Finland
   Email: lars@eggert.org
   URI:   <https://eggert.org/>

   Eliot Lear (editor)
   Cisco Systems
   Richtistrasse 7
   CH-8304 Wallisellen
   Switzerland
   Phone: +41 44 878 9200
   Email: lear@lear.ch

Eggert & Lear              Expires 16 May 2026                 [Page 21]