Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective]
Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Fri, 10 June 2016 17:24 UTC
Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.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 5DB5412D864 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:24:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 0vfmSuGHR4b1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22c.google.com (mail-oi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22c]) (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 90C4F12D85C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id p204so122301915oih.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=lgT/ss2QPELcnpRlXYU/yi6wemy2n4KcRPtMiN57zlE=; b=HOb/1vQ5pTIzBB4b8i+eLTlsUmjjfMlb29yD1/2/9yH9SqoNhiUGHCUDzcygp5kYuZ whB7b4MXrgzQsjHLiuhxCc64rhudUlf0YwvhbrxLjkJUPjFddmoikBbG8ghoF3WsHIu/ joIYPQTujJbJr5RjOMxdqBqEBykJP9OCBOLXGh6eNWYSiaE30mbLEavfU1mPD+ND/zDM Xl4IY2BQ9TSGRqctcNHwbjOfct812qYcAY5SvvcUdwY2nrfgS5OHHlH8NNxPfKrTOBRt 5kZDUdrJKxFp5XYU2tSpRMoa5DXjAqhv6WePj2Tt9tPz+mehZFZyfOJg9tcdyHBOATH1 SSXg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=lgT/ss2QPELcnpRlXYU/yi6wemy2n4KcRPtMiN57zlE=; b=KlAly6KKQ4j1HLQk7TrAKrL4aSMXPzLA8jTVMvbblwCxC7diCVhIo6NkRigUmIknA0 sgv85rSqLKLuQwzicnMrqaNyo7nMbRUXJJXobowlI3xK0HoQWrQcL6y0+C8TC4eE17B4 M/isB8jgtaSakIUkSD0hxfMCeHfKYJG4E9Ii0AFX06S3QRrOzrja8RRO2yTsdtdgQpBO MKh+H7s/LeAhDl6vVaIgO27GJS4UBTNpXeQvG9o598pdba+eS2W16GhP0dQb/BVOepGi JY/nXv+xq66sPBKmlAhOGm6Cru3EqM09cIPhD8L4wjbeuDT7RhqNb+6y58i+OMukXTsH kffQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIn2MkG6kNYGRNBZ14JCJ4w+nz6tpwt2LLRn1VdF9KFH8CLN6JmWAflfMhRJ1FQelfq2HDFwDugLX18Zw==
X-Received: by 10.157.42.199 with SMTP id e65mr1780703otb.110.1465579489900; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:24:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.38.66 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAQiQRfeFn-az3n5OGLwQqscWJ_Up6V8M0WSrE4boRbbCLnvug@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160608135632.20063.81792.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <c0dac7eb-3886-5bd0-4ecb-0f66008fe755@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <6d8e2bb4-e41c-5cf7-18a3-d6eac6e9a13f@gmail.com> <m28tydvh5c.wl%randy@psg.com> <C172F8BC-6339-4762-A600-5AFEEFD3ED6A@piuha.net> <0c54dab2-89cc-6d0f-c8c7-a2a65249d04d@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <6597503E-AB88-4A89-BF86-57B06E7C8FD3@consulintel.es> <0848b990-dec1-78e9-7845-1f5b683a49cd@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <4DD051C3-841E-45EE-82F0-8AF4991685A7@consulintel.es> <72313874-f19d-1a0e-0ffa-cc34e380bb8a@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <FADEFCB4-034F-49A1-999E-D3DF78DBFC89@consulintel.es> <CAAQiQRfeFn-az3n5OGLwQqscWJ_Up6V8M0WSrE4boRbbCLnvug@mail.gmail.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 13:24:35 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEFCtf4HmEZfUvzb7wH_8Ov2g0CdRzzzYsrAhhp2NhR3rg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective]
To: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c032044e2bdc20534efd080"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bj2ncyTiWGrpL9i_FaVhLHD-Uw4>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 10 Jun 2016 17:24:52 -0000
People seems to be very confused about respect in the IETF. Of course people can think what they want and love/hate national origin / skin color / gender / gender-orientation / etc. But the primary thing is that they are required to respect participants technical input, regardless of such factors. And, in order to promote the civilized discourse that is required to resolve technical issues, they are required, in the IETF context, to refrain from statements or actions that disrespect or attack participants because of such irrelevant factors regardless of what they think. I'm sure there are IETF participants who, for example, believe that certain religions or sexual orientations are evil. They don't have to change their mind or speak in favor of those things. But they should not in the IETF context, not to speak or act against them. In most IETF discussions, there is no reason to speak of such things. I do not believe it is the role of the IETF as a technical organization to lobby on issues of discrimination policy but in meeting selection among the factors being balanced must be the comfort and peace of mind of a wide variety of contributors. And, if we turn down a facility for a meeting due to problems with local laws or customs, we should certainly tell that facility why. On the family issue, I would point out that we have had and do have nursing mothers or disabled persons as IETF participants and leaders. They need to bring their infants or assistants (frequently family members) and for this reason the ability to bring family is a factor. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 7:34 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ > <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote: > > Dear Secretariat, > > > > Speaking as sergeant-at-arms, please make sure to restrict posting > rights of Mr. Masataka Ohta for the next 2 months, until 11th August, noon > CET. > > What just happened? Did posting rights just get suspended because a > member of the community wanted to let us know that his values differ > from the assumed values of the broader community as stated by the IETF > chair? In the email I read, there did not appear to be a personal > attack. > > While I am not supportive of his opinion, doesn't he have the right to > let us know that his opinion differs from that which was stated by the > chair? > > -andy > >
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Jari Arkko
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Margaret Cullen
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Jari Arkko
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Masataka Ohta
- IETF 100, IAOC perspective IAOC Chair
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Ted Hardie
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Yoav Nir
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective John C Klensin
- Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, IAOC perspective Robin Wilton
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Michal Krsek
- Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, IAOC perspective Jakob Heitz
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective John Levine
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Melinda Shore
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Michal Krsek
- Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, IAOC perspective Ted Lemon
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Yoav Nir
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Tim Chown
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Bert Wijnen (IETF)
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Harald Alvestrand
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Bert Wijnen (IETF)
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Melinda Shore
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Eliot Lear
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Melinda Shore
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Michael StJohns
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Yoav Nir
- Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Melinda Shore
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Eliot Lear
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… lloyd.wood
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Randy Bush
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Jari Arkko
- Meeting discussions (was: IETF 100, IAOC perspect… S Moonesamy
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Lloyd Wood
- Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective Masataka Ohta
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Andrew Newton
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Michael StJohns
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Donald Eastlake
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Melinda Shore
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Jari Arkko
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Andrew Allen
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Jari Arkko
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… John Leslie
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Lloyd Wood
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Jari Arkko
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… John C Klensin
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Randy Bush
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… John C Klensin
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Randy Bush
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspec… Masataka Ohta