Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF

Keith Moore <> Wed, 24 February 2021 18:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2DE53A18BD for <>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 10:03:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PMvKBW-ghhH0 for <>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 10:02:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A48E3A18BB for <>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 10:02:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal []) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDE652EB for <>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:02:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:02:58 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=eczenwXId4vr+0Lv1lAfkum+bhUJXwW36WqAhfzi0 g8=; b=kSr83jIFf5w1JYNK7+jLrFB8NObQ1dOytCf3BEgeeACTABzypam+/QKK8 7sGsc3Fpzx3MvjSy/u2o2Nu0p/40oJmvGr/M1cM72k+WH8yQ29VTp6DQaizBm/Oe Sj2odyLbjPzedKCBCFJy+sGkxkKwTFmOm9EcG3qcRj+KoZ7vkgH1yD1i6MCjkjej /DmYLqEJI43P8zQUQqduvr6TgSUHrBnFW8kfxrkJFaecOn6UGOGux/65bsnU/yKY vpGCjUkjyCpyNwkjLHQFZnj9RVGCP3So1oSr/LepSTK469vbBJo8OJla7YOXS0k2 YlpWG1Bw6Urb81bPA2PWRgupuyO3Q==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:0ZQ2YJvRLZiGH2q017_m57NuCKjsCCNZVE3HNGkCSXPc9ZuIQJbw5A> <xme:0ZQ2YCedreLinyGg0jSbPPH2zJLehfcEzfh4RWrPxZgl9BHgz3qrnME-iAlJpjv49 Y-homFLPiOATg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrkeejgddutdeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgfgsehtke ertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthif ohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehhfeutdehfe fgfefghfekhefguefgieduueegjeekfeelleeuieffteefueduueenucfkphepuddtkedr vddvuddrudektddrudehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrg hilhhfrhhomhepmhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:0ZQ2YMxLcSiNw1ig4XZpLLJd8T4X6c9ZjmQdUzBrpxV5F19hNVBa7g> <xmx:0ZQ2YAP6SQ9XAvESEGQpWL_VOpbbKEzjoi7Es91hKGnfAlh9W18okA> <xmx:0ZQ2YJ_pJUp6ym4q5IQl6qKP9p1fklzFnjM0BIgJbkb5gYn6Ka47ZQ> <xmx:0pQ2YPdhYeCX9azEMmKSUMWDQNu-ismJMpH50tZYaU64fxfQjkUu7g>
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 11C2B1080059 for <>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:02:57 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Keith Moore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:02:55 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 18:03:01 -0000

On 2/24/21 12:47 PM, Vittorio Bertola wrote:

> As a result, I am feeling like I should just stop participating in 
> these discussions for fear of using the wrong choice of language and 
> getting publicly shamed (and in my own culture, like in the Far East, 
> in Arab cultures and elsewhere, "saving your face" in public is 
> paramount). So, ironically, language correctness leads to 
> self-censorship and exclusion. 

Excellent point.

Please, people, we have participants from all over the world speaking a 
wide variety of languages.   Let's not publicly rebuke people for 
choosing a word that might have not quite the right shade of meaning, or 
might not be the perfect choice from someone else's perspective.   
Especially given that these shades of meaning can vary from one place to 
another even among native English speakers.  If we can tell what the 
speaker intended, that should be sufficient.   And public rebuke of 
language distracts from the main discussion.   If it's really important 
to try to correct someone, a polite, private note is probably better.

And contributors will generally adjust the words they use over time 
based on observation of others' writing and subtle feedback.   That's 
how people quite naturally become more fluent.


(FWIW I thought "coder" was fine.)