[I18ndir] Civility (Was: Getting restarted and triage)

"Pete Resnick" <resnick@episteme.net> Sat, 22 June 2019 22:59 UTC

Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
X-Original-To: i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35BE120075 for <i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 15:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vD9Y0nW6akDQ for <i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 15:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAAC4120019 for <i18ndir@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 15:59:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35708839BF0A; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:59:46 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from episteme.net ([]) by localhost (episteme.net []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h84fUTWncIEz; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:58:56 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [] (episteme.net []) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B4D6839BEEE; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:58:56 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Pete Resnick" <resnick@episteme.net>
To: "Asmus Freytag" <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
Cc: i18ndir@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:58:55 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.5r5635)
Message-ID: <6D619291-692E-4B49-BA24-D29EC440E696@episteme.net>
In-Reply-To: <caa4c371-4199-17d9-a005-2ba1ca4f6a4b@ix.netcom.com>
References: <20190621224209.5A2B820162CB0E@ary.qy> <AF49257619901A2694737684@PSB> <caa4c371-4199-17d9-a005-2ba1ca4f6a4b@ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_F71E1684-456B-4738-93FE-BC92CC9E5F66_="
Embedded-HTML: [{"HTML":[1266, 3226], "plain":[901, 2125], "uuid":"45A54CE9-FE82-469B-89A4-8368A52C777F"}]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i18ndir/0MXw-6gIKKJJ1x4ul43yJNh5McE>
Subject: [I18ndir] Civility (Was: Getting restarted and triage)
X-BeenThere: i18ndir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internationalization Directorate <i18ndir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i18ndir>, <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i18ndir/>
List-Post: <mailto:i18ndir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18ndir>, <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 22:59:55 -0000

Asmus (and others for future reference),

Please confine commentary on the list to the technical discussion (e.g., 
"Such-and-so is a minute issue that is not worth considering, and 
therefore the document should say this-or-that") and not personal 
comments on the participation style of other participants. Not calling 
someone out by name can still appear to be personally going after 

If you do have a concern about someone's participation style, please 
mention it to Peter or I offline and we'll try to address it. If you 
have a concern that the group more broadly is going down the wrong path 
(e.g., focusing on the wrong issues), note that to the list if you think 
it will be effective, but more likely also bring that to the chairs' 
attention. It's our job to focus discussion, and if we're not doing that 
job, we should be told so.


On 21 Jun 2019, at 21:34, Asmus Freytag wrote:

> John,
> some of us don't have the time to thrash to death things like Patrik's 
> draft over minute issues, like whether to consider the single 
> DISALLOWED character for Unicode 12.1 a technical omission.
> If we can't find ways to remove this artificial friction, we won't see 
> more vigorous involvement.
> Notably, such hyperfocus on minutiae of little practical impact is 
> absent from successful projects in the i18n arena.
> A./
> On 6/21/2019 5:46 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
>> --On Friday, June 21, 2019 18:42 -0400 John Levine
>> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>> In article <F2A317B2420BA48FC2A23176@PSB> you write:
>>>> I've read Barry's note, which seems entirely reasonable.  As
>>>> you (and I trust most other's here) have noticed, while
>>>> waiting I did post a note to the IDNAbis list asking for
>>>> review and feedback on the theory that, if anyone on that
>>>> list but not on this one had something to say / contribute,
>>>> we should listen. So far the silence has been deafening which
>>>> I can interpret either as ...
>>> It's on my List of Things to Do Immediately.  You know how it
>>> is.
>> Oh, yes.
>> But one guess as to what is causing Pete's difficulties in
>> getting responses to his triage question is that I18N issues
>> generally, and perhaps IDNA-related ones in particular, have
>> gotten into that state and that List for everyone here
>> (including Pete's and Peter's and, probably given the progress
>> on draft-faltstrom-unicode12-00 since March 11th, Alexey's).
>> While we've been saying things in terms of "insufficient
>> expertise" for i18n issues, it may be equally true that is just
>> has not been high enough priority for anyone with expertise or
>> otherwise in the critical path.
>> If that is the case, then the question --and, again, the
>> question since Patrik and I requested the BoF over a year ago --
>> is whether we have a plan about changing that (maybe easier than
>> finding more expertise and maybe not) or whether should be
>> making another plan entirely, presumably one that gets the IETF
>> out of the critical path.
>>     john

Pete Resnick http://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best