Re: Terminology discussion threads

[Leif Johansson <[e-mail]>]

Skickat från min iPhone

> 13 aug. 2020 kl. 22:32 skrev Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>:
> 
> 
> RFC 3005 says plainly:
> 
> """
>    Inappropriate postings include: ... Unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject
>    The IETF Chair, the IETF Executive Director, or a sergeant-at-arms
>    appointed by the Chair is empowered to restrict posting by a person,
>    or of a thread, when the content is inappropriate
> """
> 
> Given the level of unprofessional discourse in the muted conversation, muting the entire topic seems like an entirely appropriate recourse.
> 

I hate to point out the obvious but just because you disagree doesn’t make the other side of an argument unprofessional. That way is *dangerous* as it otherizes part of the community. 

The thread in question touched on fundamental questions of language and technology and just because a lot of people (me included) found the topic unpleasant and politically inconvenient doesn’t amount to unprofessional behavior in any way.

Leif

> --Richard
> 
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 4:26 PM Michael StJohns <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> On 8/13/2020 3:48 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote:
>> > At least there seems to be sufficient +1 from distinguished community
>> > members such as current or past IAB, IESG members, IAB Liaison, IETF ISOC
>> > appointee, IRTF and NomCom chair to hope that the action taken was rightfully
>> > within the privilege of IETF chair according to the rules.
>> 
>> Mike StJohns, Past IAB, Past Nomcom Chair
>> Scott Bradner, Past IAB, Past Area Director
>> Randy Bush, Past Area Director
>> Charlie Perkins,  Past IAB
>> 
>> (sorry if I've missed other roles...)
>> 
>> So what's your point?
>> 
>> In any event, my opinion is that this action was NOT taken "rightfully 
>> within the privilege of the IETF chair according to the rules", but I'm 
>> withholding further judgement until the Chair responds to my request to 
>> clarify which part of 3005 they believe applies and grants authority for 
>> a mass PR threat.
>> 
>> >
>> > If this step was ultimately determined (by whom... ?) not to be within
>> > the privilege of IETF chair then i am bit worried about what i would
>> > have to think about all those +1.
>> 
>> I'm not sure why.  Everyone has opinions.  Some are more useful than 
>> others, and each of us will have an opinion on that topic as well.
>> 
>> 
>> Later, Mike
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>