Re: A contribution to ongoing terminology work

[Dan Harkins <[e-mail]>]

On 4/4/21 1:51 PM, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> Hi -
>
> Is anyone else troubled by how this discussion has centered
> on whatever inconvenience might be "suffered" by authors and
> editors and has totally disregarded the considerations that
> would lead someone hoping to communicate more effectively to
> search for better terminology in the first place?

   Well yea, given how thoroughly cancel culture has taken over,
I was concerned that some cop [1] somewhere would be gunning for
Lloyd. I didn't want anyone to take the fall on my account. It's
not a mere "inconvenience", it could be loss of career or
livelihood.

   So now all the cops will be told who their target is. Here
I am coppers, come and get me.

   As far as the poor people just looking to figure out how to
communicate more effectively, well, this is the IETF. Might I
suggest a local community college course.

> Does this organization to make the Internet work better, or
> to stroke the fragile egos of authors and editors?  And do
> those clutching their pearls at the thought of editorial
> standards really think the IETF is a censoring government?

   And here you were just troubled the fact that the IETF wasn't
centered on the considerations of the poor people who are just
looking for ways to communicate more effectively? You ask
a lot of questions that normally would take rhetorically but
I don't think those are rhetorical questions.

   No one's clutching pearls. And before you reach for another
tired cliche, there are no fainting couches around here either.

   I'll answer your questions: no, no, and no, respectively.

   Dan.


> Randy
>


[1] Planet of Cops
     https://medium.com/@jesse.singal/planet-of-cops-50889004904d

-- 
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to
escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius