RE: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)

[Vasilenko Eduard <[e-mail]>]

Hi S. Moonesamy,
The diversity of humans (for the matter that I have touched below) are very big even if one takes a very small and uniform part of the population.
IETF covering the whole world - diversity is in the full range possible (100%).
It does not help on average (or better median - for the biggest crowd) - the motivation is distorted.

The discussion for what is "public good" is not important in this context - the difference in understanding would be relatively small.
Eduard
-----Original Message-----
From: S Moonesamy [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 10:43 AM
To: Vasilenko Eduard <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)

Hi Eduard,
At 01:14 AM 15-04-2021, Vasilenko Eduard wrote:
>You are very close to the root cause. The root cause is motivation. 
>Well, probably one could say that it is "culture" or part of the 
>culture.
>
>Many people in IETF have a personal motivation that is not fully in 
>line with the "public good".
>For example: publish any nonsense to report personal IETF progress for 
>the employer.
>Rigorously fight back even if somebody would show that particular idea 
>is on the opposite side from perfect.
>Example 2: never dispute any job of others, even if they propose 
>something really bad. It would destroy your relationships, people could 
>fight back to your proposals later.
>Example 3: support whatever chair would propose, never criticize the 
>boss - yoou are dependent on him.
>Example 4: create small closed groups and help each other on every 
>occasion (without paying any attention to the public good).
>And so on, so on, so on. Humans are intelligent, especially in IETF.

I'll express an opinion instead agreeing (or disagreeing) with you.

Every group learns and shares common some behavior and beliefs.  We both likely have different motivations to participate in this group.  We both have our own beliefs of what constitutes the "public good".  This group, or can I say task force, version of what constitutes the "public good" is the technical specifications, mailing list discussions, and minutes (of meetings) which are provided for free.  Does this version of the "public good" 
benefit, on balance, the public or private interests?  My guess is that it is the latter.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy