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

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

Ofer Inbar wrote:

> It was not you specifically, it was the discussion with many
> participants, with several either expressing or assuming the
> idea that "no consensus in the US population" necessarily means
> that TERM should just give up and not look into this at all.

That is not very precise, because you misunderstand which party
has responsibility for proof.

As TERM is trying to restrict very basic human right of freedom
of speech in an international organization of IETF, it can be
authorized only when there is very smooth consensus that some
terminology is definitely not acceptable not only in US but
internationally.

Moreover, it is responsibility of those who are arguing for TERM
to prove that there is such very smooth international consensus.

However, from comments on NYT article, it is obvious that, even
in US, there is no such consensus, not even roughly.

As such, TERM, attempting to restrict freedom of speech
internationally without any valid reasoning, is hopeless.

TERM could be authorized only when there is a valid proof that
there is a very smooth international consensus for it, which
is totally lacking.

						Masataka Ohta