Re: Terminology discussion threads

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dan,

Trying to focus on the topics that have not already been covered heavily...

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:11:28AM -0700, Dan Harkins wrote:
> 
> On 8/14/20 10:30 AM, Christian Huitema wrote:
> >
> > The question is, what to do?
> 
[...]
> 
>    Fundamentally, we don't have a problem with language in RFCs so we don't
> need to "fix" that which is not broken. We might have a problem with abusive
> language on mailing lists (guilty as charged) but that's different and it is
> best solved differently.

I don't think that "language in RFCs" or "abusive language on mailing
lists" is what Christian was asking about.  Rather, the departure of many
prominent IETF contributors from the membership list of [e-mail] has
placed us in a (or, perhaps, excacerbated an existing) situation where the
membership of what is nominally the "general IETF discussion list" is not
representative of the IETF community.  As someone who is, at times, charged
with assessing IETF consensus, I feel that this calls into question the
utility of the [e-mail] list for determining consensus.  Personally, I
now have significant doubts that the results of discussion on [e-mail]
will reflect IETF consensus.  If the general list isn't useful for
determining consensus, some re-thinking of its purpose and procedures is
likely in order, as Christian alludes to.

Thanks,

Ben