IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Wed, 28 August 2013 01:13 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.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 CE2C321E80FD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 18:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.514
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aBGbF5sRZvaO for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 18:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x22d.google.com (mail-lb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1FA721E80FB for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 18:13:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id r11so3199301lbi.18 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 18:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=y1CaVzoWuXo4LGPJTclRpDXcSimtlHDl2JX5xCKfGvc=; b=PN+ANZ8VlL3Ty2ESja1SSu10161cvivQxZV6WSnmvqYg3ZLbHmVXZhXCUZ3U7uciHd HSRkVJjImrhWTzeaOwA5zoX4sdq8Ex8egZbpEOru9pEaCRLo8yE+Uux4TaAgNK6B46j3 r3ozdRC6EAB6c3hQXPF0ql8VkWcQ7y+2DTy/w7ka+Zrcfd5lNIdGdOb613tcYp5HA7P9 iJy1DqTi6HcTkRZrOVRFeMXqbVopjAwK8mJNJGpOLhinN92WkHpA86XFAsYCLo/aW52C 1dALBrxoSbPJQhDD4YtqyIuAGgyRILEziMPfeojq8f3AjLLb3kiWF9OpxqlYqgIK8EHN uSFQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.198.39 with SMTP id iz7mr19624081lbc.24.1377652393499; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 18:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.148.165 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 18:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130827171456.0d7e1e48@resistor.net>
References: <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F12408224060750E@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <CADnDZ891f9z=snhx2mP1oqZK+iPih79LDhHrFHu1gjT4mkMbhw@mail.gmail.com> <38BAB050-5B83-4530-84E8-FBF27E822C7F@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|1ad6c5e007d1f092769939d09c0615b9p7QBpW03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|38BAB050-5B83-4530-84E8-FBF27E822C7F@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775267379@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <CAPv4CP8ORvFQXsRV2vZqk46S4+ZkLm+GeV3wxdUvcmZ96yyEVA@mail.gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775267681@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <20130827190857.GA48013@verdi> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775267BF5@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <521D0F39.4040201@qti.qualcomm.com> <CAMm+LwhekZdQ2gej-raCD_oGr5ErU577sOwcMxq_eg-6kaF0UA@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130827171456.0d7e1e48@resistor.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:13:13 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwgiyPLfwoQjx7dhK7TzWj4kBjdb1YoHs03Hh19BZJDD0g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c233ea89dfb904e4f7b1cf"
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 01:13:23 -0000

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:28 PM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

> Hi Phillip,
>
> At 15:53 27-08-2013, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>
>> What I found incredibly rude was when an AD and Working Group chair
>> actually hissed when I gave my company name at the mic.
>>
>
> I submitted draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-**3184bis  During the
> discussions (see thread at http://www.ietf.org/mail-**
> archive/web/diversity/current/**msg00201.html<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00201.html>)about the draft it was suggested there should be consequences of not
> following the code of conduct.  What action would you suggest against:
>
>  (i)  the Area Director in a case such as the above?
>
>  (ii) the Working Group chair in a case such as the above?
>

In that case they were the same person. Which I think was a major
structural problem in that nobody on the IESG was prepared to stand up to
him.

So I would start off by not allowing that situation to occur in the first
place.


But in general where you have a WG chair that shows blatant bias you have
to get rid of that WG chair.

If DNSSEC had been my product I would have pushed VeriSign to do more than
appeal the Opt-in debacle, I would have litigated.


-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email