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

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Vittorio,

On 13/2/21 07:57, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> 
>> Il 13/02/2021 03:08 Mallory Knodel <[e-mail]> ha scritto:
>>
>>
>> Strange assumptions in this thread that as a community we can’t choose 
>> to do *all* of the things that would lead to more diversity, just 
>> because we are focussing on one, very achievable goal with this 
>> carefully crafted and thoroughly discussed action (eg the group on 
>> inclusive terminology).
>>
>> I’m here— and many of us are ready— to support all of these other 
>> ideas, too.
> I share Fernando's view that language improvement is quite low in the 
> scale of priorities to make the IETF actually more inclusive, but at the 
> same time, I also agree with your point that we can do more than one 
> thing at the same time. I would however create a single WG that can deal 
> with all diversity-related issues; there, people that want to work on a 
> specific problem, including language, can find a home for their drafts. 
> I don't see why we should have one WG on language inclusiveness, another 
> one on participation inclusiveness etc., also given that SHMOO is 
> chartered only to discuss the issues related to remote online 
> participation and not those related to other factors that make 
> participation difficult.

+1

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492