IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: USA dominion: Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

Christian de Larrinaga <cdel@firsthand.net> Fri, 31 July 2020 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <cdel@firsthand.net>
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 D20483A1238 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 03:11:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.319
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.319 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=firsthand.net
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 2FAAXRW7NHlm for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 03:11:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tranquility.default.cdelarrinaga.uk0.bigv.io (tranquility.default.cdelarrinaga.uk0.bigv.io [IPv6:2001:41c8:51:8b8::184]) (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 016963A122C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 03:11:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=firsthand.net; s=tranquility; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:In-reply-to:Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:References; bh=v7YOaNMWJVesnDAseJAduSnio0g7JovLkuDaUcQnC7w=; b=ABFHVH81asEmBKbGrQVRWmW19ef2oiJpGwQjYmvDLzQ13m5JRU+GOtgDWW5TmqX2D67XvgKdiia5pbMaLqfN5Mqzh3/7Zt6SdZB4/LJiwaw33PSZLmau1PPpMGb+N2Btr0YSO8qiMQ/+gTSXajT7QXJIWxjguztO/pFecJKdeyA=;
Received: from 60.88.155.90.in-addr.arpa ([90.155.88.60] helo=christian-yoga) by tranquility.default.cdelarrinaga.uk0.bigv.io with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <cdel@firsthand.net>) id 1k1S0R-000430-AW; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 11:11:15 +0100
References: <35BE966B-63A2-438F-BD61-570E86ED2E1A@strayalpha.com> <297BF899-553D-44DB-AB56-04280F776F7A@employees.org> <6646575A-E6EA-4B4E-AC1B-F8B84B5A1203@strayalpha.com> <20200724225654.GB43465@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CABmDk8=g=nqAGADGuUmL-GmLQQ-kOi5P2mjtbxVN+NhJwxe3mA@mail.gmail.com> <20200725001454.GE43465@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <DC4B5029-DA11-4455-9499-68EF3AB71AA9@akamai.com> <20200725023449.GF43465@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <F84FE09E-9AB8-4496-9A7C-B39A15A124F0@akamai.com> <20200725204052.GI43465@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <038653DA-02EF-42CC-B881-CE36E6F874E3@strayalpha.com>
User-agent: mu4e 1.5.5; emacs 28.0.50
From: Christian de Larrinaga <cdel@firsthand.net>
To: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: USA dominion: Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language
Reply-To: cdel@firsthand.net
In-reply-to: <038653DA-02EF-42CC-B881-CE36E6F874E3@strayalpha.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 11:11:14 +0100
Message-ID: <87wo2kuh8d.fsf@firsthand.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/QEe9KTFl2x6Vk8U6a-MLgXAbLqc>
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: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:11:28 -0000


Joseph Touch writes:

>     On Jul 25, 2020, at 1:40 PM, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
>
>     For example, one could create a questionaire about language used in RFCs
>     and pass that to all ISOC chapters for feedback, and then analyze that
>     feedback.
>
>
> ISOC chapters have little to nothing to do with RFCs. They serve a different
> purpose, as described here:
> https://www.internetsociety.org/chapters/
>
> Joe


True - Although firstly chapters are a good place for IETFrs to engage
(with) their local  communities. It is maybe  worth pointing out
that many chapters have lists and connections across the entire "stack"
and so can be a useful place to find things out about the
level of hum or even bemusement you might receive outside the narrow  
confines of a Working Group IETF list context.



-- 
Christian de Larrinaga 
https://firsthand.net
mu4e - still working on my config... !

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email