Re: Tolerance

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 16 July 2019 23:11 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 E2E5712008D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 16:11:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=Tay6kzmW; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=CoO/WV5r
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 uEHbu8AMOH_3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 16:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99DA412002F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 16:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 32027 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2019 23:11:11 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=7d19.5d2e598f.k1907; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=qnBCXCmYYnGzdJm1bEzp+Zr3CtvygFgd+jv9STd+4A4=; b=Tay6kzmWGNMatwbG5Ra4vO6mkebq94fXn/FWx9smptrGVmKYEb82gHNvOBwwrcOsjLxIcZ+O2nhc8mWsnA6trFH5izxD0R6k0/d8rjnEqPisZ9yyt3ACwEfAcFCJwwgY01298lwRNZKJCzn08pI8uUucFTATX3F8KgkGb4tkuzttOwPTMDTbC+tohfJXMoQ7u3/RDxdx0Qkp1Z70DtfS3vwbGFaayQ73w3CgpKoWnuAvsVYwc6bN0JIgZX19Lw26
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=7d19.5d2e598f.k1907; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=qnBCXCmYYnGzdJm1bEzp+Zr3CtvygFgd+jv9STd+4A4=; b=CoO/WV5rWvL4eHs3iDlNxc9Bx9jqDga+keEH1kZ2peVo/xfIK1YJdIDHbNkzp3H3hfdh7b8u3M4z2XYEzge+7y7r7jbsQEK+HTMLrUfKMo+PqC3UcuntKntTVt1I7KZHtCSvMeQDy4fdDr2dthmpHKdmVCEDGMu6AzQAyahJLaU7DvXN/ltLUWqe0u5hQyJ8yWFhGe1JiVwaqQbZ6m6SQH4jQhTcBbU2dFit4C3JgJkjFrD6HIa3tgz1QHEvDNyR
Received: from ary.qy ([64.246.232.221]) by imap.iecc.com ([64.57.183.75]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP; 16 Jul 2019 23:11:11 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 4D233507EE5; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 19:11:11 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 19:11:11 -0400
Message-Id: <20190716231111.4D233507EE5@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Cc: douglasroyer@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Tolerance
In-Reply-To: <00dcede6-11a0-6a33-d4b4-ceb413f22874@gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/CMqXBlOqy1bzaAQa7e0AOZhS5uM>
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, 16 Jul 2019 23:11:16 -0000

In article <00dcede6-11a0-6a33-d4b4-ceb413f22874@gmail.com> you write:
>Given that, then the next decision is: Can you work with less than perfect people? I can. Others can. If a person can not, then the IETF is not the place to post, because it is full of less than perfect people.

"I put up with it and so can you" is not a great strategy for the long
term health of the IETF.  There is quite a wide gap between people
being perfect and people acting the way some IETFers do.  The
ombudsbeings ocasionally have a chat with me and while I can't say I
enjoy it, we've always concluded amicably and it hasn't affected my
ability to say that bad ideas are bad ideas.

It may be instructive to look at M3AAWG which also has three meetings
a year, e-mail discussions between meetings, and people much like the
IETF, indeed a fair number of the same people.  A few years ago after
some bad experiences at the conference social events, they made a
conscious decision that they wanted an environment where nobody was
threatened and people worked together respectfully.  They put together
a very reasonable code of conduct, and enforced it.  A few people
never got the hint and were sent home (no great loss) but the effect
is that people work at least as well together, women don't have to
worry that they'll be hit on if they join a conversation in the bar,
and the overall feel is the same but perhaps a little more relaxed.
We're also well positioned to welcome and get work from people who are
not old white guys.  Perhaps coincidentally, there are a lot more
women attending and doing work than at the IETF.

What does M3AAWG know that we don't?

The conduct policy is here:  https://www.m3aawg.org/conduct-policy

R's,
John