IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Old directions in social media.

Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org> Fri, 08 January 2021 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <marc@petit-huguenin.org>
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 2BE313A11B8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:37:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.162
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.162 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Knt3gSsIbPHF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:37:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from implementers.org (implementers.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:45:216:3eff:fe7f:7abd]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E93753A11B4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:37:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2601:648:8400:8e7d:9057:83ac:3740:45b5] (unknown [IPv6:2601:648:8400:8e7d:9057:83ac:3740:45b5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "Marc Petit-Huguenin", Issuer "implementers.org" (verified OK)) by implementers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9B48AE11A; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 19:37:14 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: Old directions in social media.
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <CAMm+Lwg1-pxKU8vMinFDUbVca52VgFzTOOSJMnJjaUJvF6PLew@mail.gmail.com> <519a0e4d-7102-fac8-1517-04c590a80080@network-heretics.com> <MN2PR11MB43668BD4EE84EDCCA9C8062AB5D00@MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <8d37d121-3f47-43b4-93ae-036068121b08@network-heretics.com> <91FCD1A5-050D-476D-8EEA-38CB43DE20F1@akamai.com> <CAMm+Lwgvats19N7P1um437_LXjNG2gLK9OZCQdWmWBD52Gbuwg@mail.gmail.com> <ybl35zb4drj.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <CAJU8_nUH9htyhjPXnF3awt=kyrzULDsmFZSawpWPpxFVJ-kk+g@mail.gmail.com> <38287daa-dd67-fb58-938b-3cacb5bb488e@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <6262a4d9-3e73-be60-d352-ce3f9aabe9f1@petit-huguenin.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 10:37:12 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <38287daa-dd67-fb58-938b-3cacb5bb488e@network-heretics.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_TGPwSA1kHQx7Grqvz8x4JYcaWc>
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: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 18:37:23 -0000

On 1/8/21 10:22 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
> On 1/8/21 12:31 PM, Kyle Rose wrote:
> 
>> Staying on the same thread (so those who've muted can retain their sanity), but resetting a bit...
>>
>> Instead of welcoming new ideas and new ways of working into the milieu, and expressing appreciation that others want to put in effort to contribute to this shared venture, you and others are suggesting we micromanage the terms of engagement.
> 
> You say "new" as if it were inherently a Good Thing.  It's not. "New" is not by itself a good reason to welcome something.   That kind of argument is basically an appeal to prejudice, 

Technically, appeal to novelty (/argumentum ad novitatem/).

> and an argument based on "new" vs. "old" is at best a distraction.    I'd like to see more insight as to why a tool or a way of working is better or worse than another.
> 
> Keith
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email