Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

On 23/7/20 13:35, The IESG wrote:
> The IESG believes the use of oppressive or exclusionary language is
> harmful.  Such terminology is present in some IETF documents, including
> standards-track RFCs, and has been for many years. It is at odds with
> our objective of creating an inclusive and respectful environment in the
> IETF, and among readers of our documents.
> 
> The IESG realizes that the views of the community about this topic are
> not uniform. Determining an actionable policy regarding problematic
> language is an ongoing process. We wanted to highlight that initial
> discussions about this topic are taking place in the general area (a
> draft [1] is slated for discussion in GENDISPATCH [2] at IETF 108).
> Updating terminology in previously published RFCs is a complex endeavor,
> while making adjustments in the language used in our documents in the
> future should be more straightforward.
> 
> The IESG looks forward to hearing more from the community, engaging in
> those discussions, and helping to develop a framework for handling this
> issue going forward.

Since we are at it, may I ask that the following terms be added to the 
"discussion":
* balkanization
* third-world countries
?

I've seen instances of these in RFCs, IETF I-Ds, mailing-list postings, 
and meeting minutes...

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492