Re: [dmarc-ietf] Decorum on the DMARC WG list and BCP 94

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Thu, 07 January 2021 14:47 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@fresheez.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCA53A11D0 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 06:47:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.012
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.012 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mtcc.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yAtqc3O0Aexm for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 06:47:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52e.google.com (mail-pg1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FCBC3A11C4 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 06:47:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id i5so5104117pgo.1 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 06:47:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mtcc.com; s=fluffulence; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=rWYr24e3hALX9+zK0qLMFCrwhyf8Yl217XaDQrcTxck=; b=U+nMR/oCxJ1YFxdhT+bBjjuvt0+36yrdRawiDwW3KZ12A4ywYS13AzAJlRuyVmAOgb BnpLkXJCU972Cl6EKMS6T7RA4YoaABv+EaldRmG7bd5O2vPxtlWVuTR0fUOpT39XR7OD h4nhWgSpQIdtY9IEoReJwTdK8B91zaRD9y/6f51TMqC3REhmr7Y7KKCENGwDb4UwuEHU XL7B+MpVXdVD+tGBa0fdb/Kqc3LKM78UTxWEi5crWu0Kh4+uwwUGGcectD3FXKx+GQcJ djN2Ho9xEGm6CH1m0t4AgVtdxo44NYSOVF2sbJT34nU4yaoG09XNB0YlyISwNAMjbSLr EsWQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=rWYr24e3hALX9+zK0qLMFCrwhyf8Yl217XaDQrcTxck=; b=IqPiaHHdQxU6WShd7dBXTe395u7u8X8LdzWn+daetgosNBq93o5eS4czRZWy4qErAe EE/PdABA/ieGp+5PfNavmUknf78UjS+t6VOhDSJ16Ee2ZJBcIHEJp3+OwQKMEUzNlzft VMu3IEwAHnK2KnFZHP58MQPM83Muzod6eyawhl3hwMNKOaInymEm1xRGSImrGrQ+nPLW bxAAT8iB00ICRQt23UbxK/D72yldH8tFPd0ecnhCldd+Xbqa1sXXw+sXr1w5hOOVstt1 v5n64r/pqJ27WsTiNr7MIEwhuRcCYOCXU1p/89oZPbj/D32iDaJ3h3qgO66qaWLPkfuC KR9w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Tt769DmNJzUexsxnkiKylcBxcYh9LB6uNptrdjTgdMJKkVIeK On4neYQmGvL3bW+Pi9+OhKKbNmyhfU4CKbQ0
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzA/E0ONj3XI2fE3sAjugRvG0I2Ipc+IvATmKY7a+yjlUDzPW76jkq5B5AoL/nJ1YDSqWOWtw==
X-Received: by 2002:a65:434c:: with SMTP id k12mr2130843pgq.373.1610030858231; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 06:47:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mike-mac.lan (107-182-33-192.volcanocom.com. [107.182.33.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j17sm5872248pfh.183.2021.01.07.06.47.37 for <dmarc@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Jan 2021 06:47:37 -0800 (PST)
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <CAOZAAfPW6Oki-4Ebgk9yS1H-r19PBTqE8nDMTFjUKY38JKgrfQ@mail.gmail.com> <acf32e64-f1fa-25df-b677-2e279ffeb2cc@gmail.com> <CADyWQ+HQk2+o+YweayH5t3GHua79zUBB1=1VFr6XXLgPt6kO0g@mail.gmail.com> <d8dd3487-48b7-bd35-90fb-60c1d62eb39f@gmail.com> <CALaySJJza3qv72XJda2jHV4RfrfgGkyJmzrtjPkprVsvzQ63jQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Message-ID: <578ae4e8-2cd0-37ad-b095-c86a2cccc43d@mtcc.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 06:47:36 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJJza3qv72XJda2jHV4RfrfgGkyJmzrtjPkprVsvzQ63jQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/w_C4punSOMxdTXsPIlEYCizyzI0>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Decorum on the DMARC WG list and BCP 94
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2021 14:47:41 -0000

PS: what brought this all up was me pointing to a report which 
contradicted his claim, and he nastily snarled about whether I had read 
it. he constantly gets away with that kind of shit and never suffers any 
consequences. never. yes, i've been told he's been tut-tut'd in private, 
but it never changes his behavior. get rid of him if you want to make 
progress. he's poison, and i'm not the only one who feels that way.

Mike

On 1/7/21 6:38 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Supporting what Tim said, and expanding a bit (and, yes, it's general,
> not specific): If we all do our best to stick to the technical issues
> and to keep our tone neutral, then it's easier for the chairs to
> respond appropriately to cases of inability to conduct civil
> discourse, and to target that response appropriately.  Best efforts to
> understand each other, to respond to the points, and to avoid
> implications that anyone's concerns are trivial will make it possible
> for the chairs to manage the discussion and to take appropriate action
> when they have to.  If you think something's been hashed out enough
> and that further discussion along the same line isn't useful, don't
> say that publicly: let the chairs know what you think, and let them
> handle it from there.
>
> Barry
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 11:52 PM Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 1/6/2021 8:47 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>>
>> You should have a pretty good idea based on these arguments over the past few months to have a sense of how responses will be received. Take a step back and take a second read.
>>
>> This goes for all. Folks have very specific views of how they think mail should work
>>
>>
>> Tim,
>>
>> This has nothing to do with differences in opinion.  It has to do with his persistent inability to conduct civil discourse in the face of disagreement.
>>
>> Disagreement is fine.  Abuse is not.
>>
>> d/
>>
>> --
>> Dave Crocker
>> dcrocker@gmail.com
>> 408.329.0791
>>
>> Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
>> American Red Cross
>> dave.crocker2@redcross.org
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc