Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

On 14/4/21 15:01, Jim Fenton wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2021, at 10:33, Eliot Lear wrote:
> 
>> What does this mean to the IETF?  I don’t think it means “stop doing 
>> TERM”.  Rather I think it means that we should work on the other 
>> aspects.  We should make it easy and fun to be here.  And mostly it is 
>> fun (of course I’m biased), but sometimes it’s not easy.
> 
> The question I keep asking myself (and I don’t have an answer) is 
> whether by focusing on terminology in this way we are distracting 
> ourselves from making more meaningful efforts to make IETF more 
> inclusive. 

Well, the amount of energy spent on the topic, and how little we have 
discussed all other issues, might seem to indicate that, indeed.


FWIW, people should probably talk about "non-derogatory" language rather 
than about "inclusive terminology" -- unless they really think e.g. 
those are the core reasons that hinder diversity.


> I don’t know what those more meaningful efforts might be, but 
> I hope we’re addressing the big problems first.

At least when it comes to the *problems*, this might be of use: 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-diversity-analysis

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1