IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com> Mon, 19 April 2021 14:17 UTC

Return-Path: <victor@jvknet.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 DF5FB3A3288 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.005
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.005 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jvknet-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HHmjLCJM89TW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A17703A3304 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:17:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id k26so17812401wrc.8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:17:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jvknet-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=p5aYbw8XohyPvNXWjm5zINuxzbR5Xrkfs1Hds2ptkjI=; b=LBVKttpiFGT08bzNBR7EwHiNfmwB+erUjyk8OrcfuPNdNvPXGpralgXXgoMHMHSNpL vah1GhW1cquKlijGBoW9SxuenYVLLk0G4FY1UP/97jYS+TQnw5xIlUmmuDWuIONbD1nF km+IU3e8ATZJyUGm6jTEzWK5ykiFiMZOFgksxINrN0JICO6ddutn6WH1b0IQzQyqBzE0 HyDsLA9gq6PZfkeFNpfoTy77fqW+Okgt0h2QPm57jHM5PIVfHCJU/fv0GKFdZ+N8KHlt ZoKfGkWVuJvbMFSVGn5wlP0RdbAhvQVvKVyqhLu3v7PlQdwGZvCPYVN7BEL9Ob5ktNdT MxVg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=p5aYbw8XohyPvNXWjm5zINuxzbR5Xrkfs1Hds2ptkjI=; b=M2H7imj2eY+D7J+0sRWxM19+Ezm4MdH/8DX+EQR5h9r79hTRvDjKVZwzUxHLCljIsl GW1seNxIagepdLAUWoejeooB3jelCpWFqM79z5s51mdX+g6X2Iv3UKMU40KlfM3OaW4w kxvD7yrD7KXjkFiLk5uU0bqIqhmFIT7njY/nSGY3dfd1Edl9OldX+L7xqtfz0Z5OCVrC wrkzzb+7pyJB3+lOdVOO+ZPeZzAJKw7BJGTqZpnWlf86h6Zr7sDLcFQu2rnMs4+mWlV2 RzG8Bd7b7SYsmzxr/gm3VJuYAJJedxaRV43GWfsUMBSJdLrfbwBeBXVtpt2s3/npI/Xq c16Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532WS2M38wjG4XaMlIUT4lrbdvF83hvjjk31d+g8n6qPbxie/cVy l1NfJoCMIQISo63cJTBEH9cTSp2TqJo+U1rfClsopBFZP0RPJ7nj
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyoXTdgOWRk6GuDpAcGV65jy+z+h9yKy/nRwiPp2PidpknMo9MULQ2V467iMwGDZcaoRdU0Pzg5de+ow0yaL1w=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:fc01:: with SMTP id i1mr14705538wrr.374.1618841825505; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:17:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210413200535.BF29C72D2919@ary.qy> <7ac5ecf5-734e-7f63-a000-dea09cec1d0a@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <5198680E-3555-48FF-9FF5-77105DBC06D7@akamai.com> <20210415163423.GA10108@miplet.aaaaa.org> <1f2941bd-bc05-45ff-89f3-d852f470e53e@dogfood.fastmail.com> <20210418161626.GH2544@miplet.aaaaa.org> <50f396d2-9d19-9ffc-b602-b27fbe7572a8@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20cabdb0-3d66-46fd-4ce5-a9790f388a1f@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <20cabdb0-3d66-46fd-4ce5-a9790f388a1f@network-heretics.com>
From: Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 10:16:55 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJc3aaNYzgS=9-1YOxMDm1PMRr9C5X63uQk_RUPxSTNZ8iTjcg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f500be05c053fbf6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KpFIT4kpZhJnqcXMPiS_WoIeC2Y>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:17:20 -0000

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 8:45 AM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
wrote:

> On 4/19/21 7:37 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
>
> > However, from comments on NYT article, it is obvious that, even
> > in US, there is no such consensus, not even roughly.
>
> I don't think any conclusion about consensus within the US can be drawn
> from the NYT article comments.   The sample is too small and not
> representative of the US population.
>

Yes, I would agree. Also, I suspect the IETF's view of consensus is
different than what the general population may think it is.   Our approach
to consensus makes sense when determining how to move forward and get
things done with respect to technology, however for this topic (terminology
as it applies to humanity) is far more than a technical topic.

regards,


Victor K



>
> Keith
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email