Re: Harassment, abuse, accountability. and IETF mailing lists

[Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>]

Yes, we use "rude" in email.  Yes, the documents use "professional
  or "unprofessional" to which you have objected.  So proposed better 
wording.  Just saying "do not limit things that way" does not help us 
get to a state that works better for the community.

Yours,

Joel

PS: I recognize that there have been some (we can debate how often) 
abuses of these rules to suppress dissent.  I agree that is also very 
bad for the community.

On 6/11/2022 7:03 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
> On 6/11/22 18:12, Joel Halpern wrote:
>
>> If I am reading your email correctly, most of your concern is about 
>> the vague definition and vague applicaiton of "rude".
>>
>> As far as I know, the terms of reference use terms like "personal 
>> attack" and other descriptions which are much less vague.  We tend to 
>> use "rude" as the shorthand for the discussions of the topic rather 
>> than reciting the defintions and descriptions in the RFCs.
>>
>> Do you see the RFCs referring to "rude"?
>>
> I'm mostly responding to Jay here.   But the RFCs use derivatives of 
> "[un]professional" which are equally problematic.
>
> Keith
>
>