Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

[Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>]

On 8/7/2020 9:53 AM, Nico Williams wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 09:37:43AM -0700, Dan Harkins wrote:
>>   Speaking for myself, I won't stop contributing until something or someone
>> stops me and this isn't going to stop me. I don't think I have used
>> "master-slave"
>> in a draft or RFC but I have used the term "master key". And while I know no
>> one
>> is demanding that term be changed _right now_ it's only a matter of time.
> I haven't used offensive terminology in my RFCs.
>
> That's the thing: do we even have a problem?  I've asked in this thread
> that the author do a modicum of research to demonstrate that we do (or
> do not).  To my knowledge there has been no acknowledgement of the lack
> of evidence for the need for this proposal, let alone actual evidence.
> It's really not a lot to ask.
>
> I've also proposed that we use existing mechanisms to deal with
> offensive language in RFCs.  There's no need to have this self-DDoS
> except maybe as a way to broadcast that we're doing it (which might well
> be the whole point of the exercise for all I know).

Where I grew up in France, we did study the history of the French
Revolution. We studied it in primary school, and then in high school.
There was a very different take on the "reign of terror". In high
school, we were using the official manuals that explained terror by the
need to defend the republic. They acknowledged the regrettable excesses,
but moved on quickly. In the catholic primary school on the other end,
the memory of these "excesses" was still raw. The ritual murders and the
wanton cruelty of the representatives, the genocidal repression of the
peasantry that dared to rebel against the draft and the religious
repression, six generations later the memory was still very much alive.
Want it or not, that still inform my instinctive resistance against
imposition of language, let alone the references to guillotines by some
of the radical protesters. I understand that my colleagues of Russian
origin have similar memories, only more vivid.

I do understand that many have the same reaction to "master-slave" as me
to "guillotine". Such terms are better avoided in technical
specifications. But at the same time, I shudder at the idea of any
"purity of speech" committee. Such committees tend to discard checks and
balances because of "purity", and that leads to detestable behaviors.
That's why I would rather rely on a shared culture that goes for clear
specification than on a power structure that dictates language.

-- Christian Huitema