Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 09:37:43AM -0700, Dan Harkins wrote:
>   Speaking for myself, I won't stop contributing until something or someone
> stops me and this isn't going to stop me. I don't think I have used
> "master-slave"
> in a draft or RFC but I have used the term "master key". And while I know no
> one
> is demanding that term be changed _right now_ it's only a matter of time.

I haven't used offensive terminology in my RFCs.

That's the thing: do we even have a problem?  I've asked in this thread
that the author do a modicum of research to demonstrate that we do (or
do not).  To my knowledge there has been no acknowledgement of the lack
of evidence for the need for this proposal, let alone actual evidence.
It's really not a lot to ask.

I've also proposed that we use existing mechanisms to deal with
offensive language in RFCs.  There's no need to have this self-DDoS
except maybe as a way to broadcast that we're doing it (which might well
be the whole point of the exercise for all I know).

Nico
--