IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Fri, 24 July 2020 06:54 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F3A3A0D56 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 23:54:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.989
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL=0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 ags-_g1sV8-2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 23:54:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4A5DA3A0D54 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 23:54:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 79878 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2020 06:36:49 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 24 Jul 2020 06:36:49 -0000
Subject: Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language
To: Carrick Bartle <cbartle891@icloud.com>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <933ce8b4-78a5-76bf-55c3-7c5694faffbb@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <267BCA35-3A3F-440B-9F5F-2C818D5AE71A@icloud.com>
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <e7956fd8-2639-3df6-9539-0dd483cafa25@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:54:48 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <267BCA35-3A3F-440B-9F5F-2C818D5AE71A@icloud.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/8fjVQfFIRmU979V05dXlyJxDhqU>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:54:35 -0000

Carrick Bartle wrote:

> I think we can all agree that slavery is bad, right?
> So why should we even allude to it in technical documents?

That is not a valid argument against some terminology,
especially because it should have been agreed so at
the time when the term of "master slave" was originally
coined.

That is, we have long established agreement to use words
to be considered bad by many for technical terms.

					Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email