Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 10 September 2019 16:53 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 D4D86120074 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:53:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 paKkvIGxh-Py for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:53:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x734.google.com (mail-qk1-x734.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::734]) (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 16A12120058 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:53:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x734.google.com with SMTP id q203so17762224qke.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:53:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=AUVvMOE+WJJ05mO7tmMVsBjTiag0KmHoQt1S4eQHYug=; b=aO517/MTdJW5n82R0iEOiQt9rPg7/MEWbdSB0avDzad7r+TDjjQLuzidx1MCt9UoNT H9pCiN3zyMgc5UOyLErNPJmTqx/6nS0H/CATc5QvZ/fWyNAzsdX6R2Ko4flPhEK0g1xg AEfNtqtf25Tcjb2d3KJvIEJhdS5zNhMoC6kKjfJpZwDDoAYRxitv+HbyCmDIgjr3z2hp BU9RkPGvG3IQR37BvAE7hNE4alJn1frGf/1U0gjAeeaL2NQpbtvhczn9ZiIsY2aVRBwX RiuYchPxpvER31h7u39bYquNDYxx5hXlRGeVFr6GUjaoYG1KcWQIe4w57QLcQuplurUo vKzA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=AUVvMOE+WJJ05mO7tmMVsBjTiag0KmHoQt1S4eQHYug=; b=DClix+sxqPyRgvDzXQd6EkDQJxmSmgBz/Wry89j6cs8kRqUm6aBYrYTgwz9wL3Nyzg Or2ydvzVrOpFqQboou8GLKpfg6hzaIw6vanxQEHVZ0iQwUFSTZZzS0hcRni6b1BktYiV jMCVXnN9XifJ973HNOaNFGiOCj051b+vxYmxVefOI9pkU4AxuN9zyQfrGPrD7r4dQaK0 6e1xONSFubF43kSUcRvjXnF1qW1oX4rbgbYTK920rj54p62g2hjLEpebCyizJOVZMI1R hkURhwqXDmnxkxOMalw+96jaMhQbUH/CHfTrfJ7Oyc0uqPc/6JyxhsEUUlqPjf8WKxAf 6+qw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWm9pEspWW8NdoxqzjZg3PKBRGlGE6q1QiiObjS4nLHleARuFZk 8yQcrMPQtJGJBzNmXRWZtbdUdA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyuxuzfG1XkdtMJ0NEPITtU+lCFBp2Vy4jDTwI56dkw+h2R7tzUlgQe7ZXKEtsMP2rSmrOirQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a38c:: with SMTP id m134mr29739884qke.484.1568134427148; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:53:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.100.56] (c-73-186-137-119.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [73.186.137.119]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u5sm47057qkk.37.2019.09.10.09.53.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:53:46 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-235EA4FD-505D-4774-A084-B12AD2AED1E5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 12:53:45 -0400
Message-Id: <A44CE9E1-C177-4440-B99B-7A7885A309D6@fugue.com>
References: <CAMm+LwiMSdxq=grFfkbs5HZX3LXe3UdOOwb7JQDX6f1UQ_qfCw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwiMSdxq=grFfkbs5HZX3LXe3UdOOwb7JQDX6f1UQ_qfCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17A836)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_0iXYngRcS_dIUvpSp2rQvH5o5U>
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: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 16:53:52 -0000

Well said, Phillip. 

> On Sep 10, 2019, at 12:06, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> It might be more helpful to consider Keith's original point in terms of agenda denial which is a tactic that is used to avoid discussion of topics that a party knows they will lose if they get to the facts.
> 
> Tone policing is an agenda denial strategy. But so is jamming a conversation with irrelevant and repetitive statements.
> 
> Tone policing is the specific strategy of saying that because something was raised in the wrong way, it cannot ever be raised. So the canonical version would be a tinpot dictatorship that suspends parliament with the intention of provoking a riot it will use as pretext for seizing power. 
> 
> Tone policing not exactly unknown in IETF but the strategy of poisoning a debate by being disruptive is much more common.