IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: discussion style and respect

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 11 June 2015 05:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91EAC1A1A2D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 ElgIxfP7pW9k for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x230.google.com (mail-wg0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::230]) (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 102B61A1A2C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wgez8 with SMTP id z8so48180953wge.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:47:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=UFHur6DOJ5FIc9p3TCPAGF2SIam8pDySaJ9KeVaG18g=; b=LM7Xop7Wj9infOl5EyijQjM8ObIHb2W8JXYhlWs77nvGN+EdGZZvU08YDNXLz2I5FM wGpL1cTbABLzVIKbbs8sElVNv2TsWD5829e8Q28oiKEzOXLvp92/xyypggd03sTmOeVN aQOmRKTMwmtf/USikr/dtsDpQ/J75QSvD7sZtr27V062LxIBtIMrUeCq9AoGQ5Io8aGi NwQF2n4AnkABvseIioDoPRs0zP/TNDzNyUVntaFBM3LV59ufENO49/sgJBojlDDQU1XV ilAMdLYvT8LMI6nMBHvAGJP2kqSfphYT7FGaQVDvqDJwkc6j4tWvMGANQIpsQWVaP0Qy ADUg==
X-Received: by 10.194.173.225 with SMTP id bn1mr12486932wjc.83.1434001625816; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:47:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.4.46.53] ([82.102.169.113]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id yz3sm17629190wjc.19.2015.06.10.22.46.59 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Subject: Re: discussion style and respect
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150610215800.867D91B2C4A@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:46:34 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1798EE63-68EF-491F-A4EB-4B55ED0359EF@gmail.com>
References: <3BF40BF3-B7EB-4571-BD7B-D394D4F0CB6C@ietf.org> <20150610204037.6837A1ACD25@ietfa.amsl.com> <5578AB4F.3020406@dcrocker.net> <48E1A67CB9CA044EADFEAB87D814BFF632D561D2@eusaamb107.ericsson.se> <20150610215800.867D91B2C4A@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/6QRD1kxXn3-DpXob4ncyYDkP2KE>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, "dcrocker@bbiw.net" <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 05:47:08 -0000

> On Jun 11, 2015, at 12:58 AM, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Let me try this again.
> 
> 1) Is my description of the IETF process reasonably close to reality?  E.g. does the consensus process contribute to "Standardization by Combat”?

Perhaps. But the best tactic for winning this kind of combat in the IETF is not to shout louder than others. The best tactic is to get a small group around you (preferably not all from the same company), insist on your position and refuse to budge. Then wait it out until your opponents grow tired and walk away.

It is up to chairs to prevent this kind of outcome. I mean, we think of tenacity as a good quality but it shouldn’t override all others. One way is to encourage reaching consensus quickly. Long discussions tend to favor the tenacious.

Yoav

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email