Re: Bad/Good ideas and damage control by experienced participants

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On 6/22/22 13:04, Tim Bray wrote:

> The below from Tom Petch captures my opinion.  I have sympathy with 
> more or less all the notes from all the factions in this discussion, 
> which instantly stops when they say or imply “… and that’s why it’s OK 
> to be rude.” 
I also believe that Tom's advice is good advice.

In case I'm one of the people whom you think is saying or implying "... 
and that's why it's OK to be rude", I wish to clarify that I don't 
believe that at all.  Rather, I believe "rudeness" is extremely 
subjective, and that it's unfair for a small group of people (regardless 
of their positions) to impose their subjective criteria on discussion 
participants.  I don't object to specific, narrowly-tailored criteria 
that have been discussed and gained IETF Consensus.

I also believe, separately, that trying to police "rudeness" is both 
counterproductive and inconsistent with consensus-making. If you want to 
encourage better behavior, for some meaning of "better", the best way to 
do that is by example.   Note that reasonable people can have different 
ideas on what "better" is.

Keith

And for what it's worth, I regard the casting of the discussion points 
as either for or against rudeness, as at least potentially rude, or more 
specifically inappropriate, as a presumption of ill intent.   But I'd 
prefer to assume that such characterizations are merely misunderstandings.