Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 03 September 2019 09:02 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 A33E212010E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 02:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.965
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.965 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 ccuDsvM387Zn for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 02:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81112120100 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 02:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id A17EEBE77; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 10:02:22 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZAax-B9Ef7Ig; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 10:02:21 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.244.2.138] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0276EBE64; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 10:02:20 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1567501341; bh=7o+o6y6P+XVfwBKvTAFpzSR0WWRxy/6leDAQA//aCx0=; h=To:References:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=wG/WSIjxaSJWNFoSRC7vbdHm5cA9zg5WCO+QsPm7ygltEvDtemzeTy1bAM7D/Ngs6 0f55wYuTupJL2L/upPXBPc6Pn7A4Lyhjo2584AYNsA8nVDd4NYEm0/IeJtTN82clzQ zuXQAemomjaovnnkW8Q+37hTVdxIAvsW3x7GQdaU=
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <2D3C4495-F61A-4616-82B7-4A7AF36EC282@cooperw.in>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=5BB5A6EA5765D2C5863CAE275AB2FAF17B172BEA; url=
Autocrypt: addr=stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFo9UDIBEADUH4ZPcUnX5WWRWO4kEkHea5Y5eEvZjSwe/YA+G0nrTuOU9nemCP5PMvmh 5Cg8gBTyWyN4Z2+O25p9Tja5zUb+vPMWYvOtokRrp46yhFZOmiS5b6kTq0IqYzsEv5HI58S+ QtaFq978CRa4xH9Gi9u4yzUmT03QNIGDXE37honcAM4MOEtEgvw4fVhVWJuyy3w//0F2tzKr EMjmL5VGuD/Q9+G/7abuXiYNNd9ZFjv4625AUWwy+pAh4EKzS1FE7BOZp9daMu9MUQmDqtZU bUv0Q+DnQAB/4tNncejJPz0p2z3MWCp5iSwHiQvytYgatMp34a50l6CWqa13n6vY8VcPlIqO Vz+7L+WiVfxLbeVqBwV+4uL9to9zLF9IyUvl94lCxpscR2kgRgpM6A5LylRDkR6E0oudFnJg b097ZaNyuY1ETghVB5Uir1GCYChs8NUNumTHXiOkuzk+Gs4DAHx/a78YxBolKHi+esLH8r2k 4LyM2lp5FmBKjG7cGcpBGmWavACYEa7rwAadg4uBx9SHMV5i33vDXQUZcmW0vslQ2Is02NMK 7uB7E7HlVE1IM1zNkVTYYGkKreU8DVQu8qNOtPVE/CdaCJ/pbXoYeHz2B1Nvbl9tlyWxn5Xi HzFPJleXc0ksb9SkJokAfwTSZzTxeQPER8la5lsEEPbU/cDTcwARAQABtDJTdGVwaGVuIEZh cnJlbGwgKDIwMTcpIDxzdGVwaGVuLmZhcnJlbGxAY3MudGNkLmllPokCQAQTAQgAKgIbAwUJ CZQmAAULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCWj6jdwIZAQAKCRBasvrxexcr6o7QD/9m x9DPJetmW794RXmNTrbTJ44zc/tJbcLdRBh0KBn9OW/EaAqjDmgNJeCMyJTKr1ywaps8HGUN hLEVkc14NUpgi4/Zkrbi3DmTp25OHj6wXBS5qVMyVynTMEIjOfeFFyxG+48od+Xn7qg6LT7G rHeNf+z/r0v9+8eZ1Ip63kshQDGhhpmRMKu4Ws9ZvTW2ACXkkTFaSGYJj3yIP4R6IgwBYGMz DXFX6nS4LA1s3pcPNxOgrvCyb60AiJZTLcOk/rRrpZtXB1XQc23ZZmrlTkl2HaThL6w3YKdi Ti1NbuMeOxZqtXcUshII45sANm4HuWNTiRh93Bn5bN6ddjgsaXEZBKUBuUaPBl7gQiQJcAlS 3MmGgVS4ZoX8+VaPGpXdQVFyBMRFlOKOC5XJESt7wY0RE2C8PFm+5eywSO/P1fkl9whkMgml 3OEuIQiP2ehRt/HVLMHkoM9CPQ7t6UwdrXrvX+vBZykav8x9U9M6KTgfsXytxUl6Vx5lPMLi 2/Jrsz6Mzh/IVZa3xjhq1OLFSI/tT2ji4FkJDQbO+yYUDhcuqfakDmtWLMxecZsY6O58A/95 8Qni6Xeq+Nh7zJ7wNcQOMoDGj+24di2TX1cKLzdDMWFaWzlNP5dB5VMwS9Wqj1Z6TzKjGjru q8soqohwb2CK9B3wzFg0Bs1iBI+2RuFnxLkCDQRaPVAyARAA+g3R0HzGr/Dl34Y07XqGqzq5 SU0nXIu9u8Ynsxj7gR5qb3HgUWYEWrHW2jHOByXnvkffucf5yzwrsvw8Q8iI8CFHiTYHPpey 4yPVn6R0w/FOMcY70eTIu/k6EEFDlDbs09DtKcrsT9bmN0XoRxITlXwWTufYqUnmS+YkAuk+ TLCtUin7OdaS2uU6Ata3PLQSeM2ZsUQMmYmHPwB9rmf+q2I005AJ9Q1SPQ2KNg/8xOGxo13S VuaSqYRQdpV93RuCOzg4vuXtR+gP0KQrus/P2ZCEPvU9cXF/2MIhXgOz207lv3iE2zGyNXld /n8spvWk+0bH5Zqd9Wcba/rGcBhmX9NKKDARZqjkv/zVEP1X97w1HsNYeUFNcg2lk9zQKb4v l1jx/Uz8ukzH2QNhU4R39dbF/4AwWuSVkGW6bTxHJqGs6YimbfdQqxTzmqFwz3JP0OtXX5q/ 6D4pHwcmJwEiDNzsBLl6skPSQ0Xyq3pua/qAP8MVm+YxCxJQITqZ8qjDLzoe7s9X6FLLC/DA L9kxl5saVSfDbuI3usH/emdtn0NA9/M7nfgih92zD92sl1yQXHT6BDa8xW1j+RU4P+E0wyd7 zgB2UeYgrp2IIcfG+xX2uFG5MJQ/nYfBoiALb0+dQHNHDtFnNGY3Oe8z1M9c5aDG3/s29QbJ +w7hEKKo9YMAEQEAAYkCJQQYAQgADwUCWj1QMgIbDAUJCZQmAAAKCRBasvrxexcr6qwvD/9b Rek3kfN8Q+jGrKl8qwY8HC5s4mhdDJZI/JP2FImf5J2+d5/e8UJ4fcsT79E0/FqX3Z9wZr6h sofPqLh1/YzDsYkZDHTYSGrlWGP/I5kXwUmFnBZHzM3WGrL3S7ZmCYMdudhykxXXjq7M6Do1 oxM8JofrXGtwBTLv5wfvvygJouVCVe87Ge7mCeY5vey1eUi4zSSF1zPpR6gg64w2g4TXM5qt SwkZVOv1g475LsGlYWRuJV8TA67yp1zJI7HkNqCo8KyHX0DPOh9c+Sd9ZX4aqKfqH9HIpnCL AYEgj7vofeix7gM3kQQmwynqq32bQGQBrKJEYp2vfeO30VsVx4dzuuiC5lyjUccVmw5D72J0 FlGrfEm0kw6D1qwyBg0SAMqamKN6XDdjhNAtXIaoA2UMZK/vZGGUKbqTgDdk0fnzOyb2zvXK CiPFKqIPAqKaDHg0JHdGI3KpQdRNLLzgx083EqEc6IAwWA6jSz+6lZDV6XDgF0lYqAYIkg3+ 6OUXUv6plMlwSHquiOc/MQXHfgUP5//Ra5JuiuyCj954FD+MBKIj8eWROfnzyEnBplVHGSDI ZLzL3pvV14dcsoajdeIH45i8DxnVm64BvEFHtLNlnliMrLOrk4shfmWyUqNlzilXN2BTFVFH 4MrnagFdcFnWYp1JPh96ZKjiqBwMv/H0kw==
Subject: Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms
Message-ID: <3acd6fe8-0943-62ec-c4dd-eb40131a29fe@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 10:02:19 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2D3C4495-F61A-4616-82B7-4A7AF36EC282@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0KBOhyu3OHbhbPKuwnx09j5itRTTj4iy9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/9ecxZhe1vPxzKd-pdRkvMrHy2Ek>
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: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 09:02:27 -0000
Hi Alissa, I fully agree with your mail with two minor caveats. I hope those may be useful input to IESG discussion on this, hence this mail. #1 I don't think continuing to discuss the SOW/RSE role on the IETF list as well as or instead of the rfc-interest list is at all unreasonable if that's what a poster wants to do, despite us asking for discussion to move to the rfc-interest list. For this one, I think the onus is on whomever needs to be up to speed with that discussion to monitor both and there are enough different opinions on related topics that I can imagine someone having what they consider a reasoned argument why moving discussion to rfc-interest is wrong. #2 I'd like to suggest a phrase you used is a bit too broad. You said: On 03/09/2019 02:51, Alissa Cooper wrote: > a firmer commitment to building a respectful environment I've two quibbles with how you expressed that. I think we want an environment where we are all respectful of the people participating (or not participating) in the IETF, but we explicitly do not want participants to be overly respectful of the (current) organisational structures, nor of the fact that one us happens to be in a certain role etc. That does differ from bring "professional" at least as that term is understood by some reasonable people. How to phrase that well is tricky but I'd say doable if we somewhere explicitly note that the kind of openness we aim for requires us to encourage criticism of the subsets of us acting in leadership roles, and of the roles as well, and that such criticism ought be actively encouraged, as long as it's not personally disrespectful. And as a corollary, as nomcom appointees we ought not take ourselves, nor that we're acting in particular roles, too seriously:-) Secondly, we also do not want IETF participants to be shy criticising what they consider technically bad ideas. That's an area where some of us go wrong when we step over lines between criticism of ideas and get too close to being critical of other IETF participants. (For example by imputing motives, which can be done very politely and tangentially but is nonetheless wrong.) I think there's definitely room for improvement here, (myself included) but I'm less sure how to ensure that improvement doesn't also damage the culture of openly criticising ideas. So yes, let's work on being better, but carefully, and taking into account the subtle differences between the IETF and a company, university, or other kinds of organisation. (In some respects, I think we're much more like a largely volunteer-driven amateur-sports organisation, which has different needs, and dangers, compared to a regular for-profit company or even a professional-sports setup.) I guess we may agree that those quibbles need to be handled in IESG discussion of this topic, but do think there's real value in explicitly aiming at preserving one of what I think is the best bits of IETF culture, being folks' willingness to openly disagree. We absolutely need to be better at doing that, (for example, avoiding endless repetition of well-worn arguments that'll never be resolved;-) but we cannot stop disagreeing or I think we're organisationally dead. Cheers, S.
- Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Alissa Cooper
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Masataka Ohta
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Alissa Cooper
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Michael StJohns
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Eliot Lear
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Stephen Farrell
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Masataka Ohta
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Eric Rescorla
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Masataka Ohta
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms john heasley
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Rob Sayre
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Stephen Farrell
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Stephen Farrell
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Miles Fidelman
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Alissa Cooper
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Alissa Cooper
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Stephen Farrell
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Paul Wouters
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Michael StJohns
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Masataka Ohta
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Matthew Kerwin
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Dan Harkins
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Keith Moore
- Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms Matthew Kerwin