Re: [Gendispatch] draft charter text: terminology-related WG

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On 2/13/21 7:11 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:

> What I am wondering is if any of the folks who are concerned abut 
> issues outside of language selection can draft a charter.  Then we, 
> and the IETF, can decide (assuming we agree on the value of the 
> proposal) if the two charters should be combined, if we should have 
> two working groups, or if we should have only one (and which.)
>
> I don't think it is really fair to the proponents of this proposal to 
> object on the grounds that we should do some unspecified different thing. 

It is if doing one of these things takes up energy that would otherwise 
be used to address the broader problem.

But unlike publishing a document, diversity and inclusion isn't a 
check-off item.   It's not a problem that you can solve once and move 
on.   It's something that has to be built into community values and 
maintained indefinitely by the whole community (or most of it).   Simply 
publishing yet another RFC won't do that.     So we can't rely on our 
habits or familiar processes, we have to work through out to do it and 
make it part of our normal discussions. There used to be a lot of this 
value in IETF culture, and I think there's still some left.   How do we 
revive and expand it?

Keith