IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Old directions in social media.

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Thu, 07 January 2021 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@fresheez.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 5822E3A0B3A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 09:33:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=mtcc.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 lgW3WnHo_Ukv for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 09:33:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x429.google.com (mail-pf1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::429]) (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 D8F2F3A0AFD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 09:32:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x429.google.com with SMTP id m6so4287261pfm.6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 09:32:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mtcc.com; s=fluffulence; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=X0JPIj9czdYz3Vn4wjLBfqZyRI6RTZrppxfpY51mFyA=; b=KjDMvx37hMUcPMcWDo4L1yVRo9OPJ/b7ou4+Q608MMCHFvt1c++tAjbXa0OBCYuO4+ gU9CJyqpQCGHNY9uJjaFcFexojyDHUs2VnByEEIEptk+hgvTRdVIOf4T898e580YZnvT qCgpE9+DcFiVadB4+X83dp57iKa0uUwg4up443zJ/u7ePTtwE+8nFDr5vlyASmqNrlYF aDv7m1G5RmrygG89qnikbE7LFMUEdrZtUcGtJg8u1RyWpBofFD3G42ZBQYqOED/IM8GD eRgOEnb7BKKB9T5JiDFmBPgA9TsC8xCKfD1ueIdGtbp+G8DujEIUqmT1v5UE28jVqghp AiSg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=X0JPIj9czdYz3Vn4wjLBfqZyRI6RTZrppxfpY51mFyA=; b=t1b2ynQpyI13rW6/pYLHwhPp81ABlkk5BSvPntALmpTTjSQrgOnPp2z79NDKTdakev Ta7NrqgQwBd7U6uZJhmY3osMkKrGxqiDNBXNyubjLWx2ZgnHqnli1iS97B3e0VAwwla0 N9kkkDCY7879L7NCbqS65VtZcLlId0Az98hkYGnGQTJM6LoO+0umrTYnheOTldmli0sF drNWb+eb1S8WIwpG4pHEPNQo5pUtRSwq3BJu/r42pUelKIoBbj6iKbmyoFqt2b8dBXZj oPVNLPm6vCTo8a9ddJ+5NWGWayM9AvULymlw28Os67zNv++h3sF5xi+Zyciu6KZCirPQ 98XQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531XsMWhyk/8f9r5ejdprPRROqWS7cTyddo/itFK7x9mOlXcbLFG E0aQjzsmwu8AHBlG9SmXD17fvOLimD2xhPPs
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzLp/mXlgOthZZmEBbSMS3SWJNYg5i0VldAKu/AYWQqqrvZx1DxwSXSHaB1jpuZWa6ziL23Gw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:44:b029:19d:e250:1355 with SMTP id i4-20020a056a000044b029019de2501355mr3059265pfk.36.1610040767973; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 09:32:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mike-mac.lan (107-182-33-192.volcanocom.com. [107.182.33.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h8sm6972132pjc.2.2021.01.07.09.32.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Jan 2021 09:32:47 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Old directions in social media.
To: Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <CAMm+Lwg1-pxKU8vMinFDUbVca52VgFzTOOSJMnJjaUJvF6PLew@mail.gmail.com> <CAJU8_nWD3MwLs5aVNMi_3LqZysrfjv0N7N3ujV-zhqxiFh3tsA@mail.gmail.com> <788651ca-0c84-7a54-9c48-b962faed635f@network-heretics.com> <CAJU8_nXSE-E2AVrJnqe5ZifR+qGhXscNCFXQRDj_GU1r=hNOyw@mail.gmail.com> <70416f47-7c31-8571-02ce-f95ff386d54f@network-heretics.com> <X/TtgTtl02AMyns8@mit.edu> <AM0PR08MB371623409DE8AB03CC667234FAD00@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <866b1357-ec50-7765-4277-fd4fba8d793e@network-heretics.com> <AM0PR08MB37166B8E57C293917737D9D6FAD00@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <d8454121-f6fb-3cbb-3149-656e20efce96@joelhalpern.com> <AM0PR08MB3716C960817BCCFEE4F9F911FAAF0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <edf8225b-d005-4f99-b96f-41bc49633da3@joelhalpern.com> <AM0PR08MB37169778B08F3F83413194B0FAAF0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <1dc686a0-6810-a006-5e54-72268b0b55f2@mtcc.com> <CAJU8_nWHwN3tTVyMOf1ZW_ZrKyLnBR_mNbwpzDuoPuZZ3JHNxQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Message-ID: <6268f836-8f78-3b72-6b61-c4dc3197ab14@mtcc.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2021 09:32:45 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJU8_nWHwN3tTVyMOf1ZW_ZrKyLnBR_mNbwpzDuoPuZZ3JHNxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------559952775F8A609FA23F8A2C"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Ve9gz2Vwsv0wiyYzEG_KyvJYp-U>
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: Thu, 07 Jan 2021 17:33:08 -0000

On 1/7/21 9:27 AM, Kyle Rose wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 12:03 PM Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com 
> <mailto:mike@mtcc.com>> wrote:
>
>     The problem with a pull request
>     per se is that if it's not a nit it needs to be determined if it has
>     consensus
>
>
> This is unrealistic, and is not in fact how things actually work. In 
> general, very minor changes employ a form of acclimation: unless 
> someone objects, they are assumed to have rough consensus if the 
> editors apply them. If every single change regardless of size needed a 
> consensus call, no document would ever get finished. In reality, only 
> major proposed changes get this kind of formal treatment.
>
If anybody can send a pull request of whatever magnitude and it is 
pulled by the editors, that's a process problem. That's allowing a 
backdoor to the process of achieving consensus. Yes it happens now 
regardless of git, but that doesn't make it a good thing.

Mike

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email