IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com> Wed, 14 April 2021 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <brong@fastmailteam.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 1E3663A1ABF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 11:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.118
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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=fastmailteam.com header.b=frK3xZD5; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=H3VK7Z5B
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 gC3O9WkAB0Q8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 11:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A5E23A1ABD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 11:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C365C0042; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:32:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap41 ([10.202.2.91]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:32:31 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= fastmailteam.com; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to :references:date:from:to:subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=/hNDUu/ CKA3WSlhuKImdO0zeqtJNF5jUPeNNhHTwDOo=; b=frK3xZD52rQtjdqpGAbrFrb mAa5MQ045cjA6aW6VdnNgVNLs7d32ULG+RISeTXLSow+Tub01xSSkoVosdO1+azE 1gn4ZPprLiKWG9RVlYBd7Vwvp3KillSd5lclUo1ZPiY5/+gMu9ZacTketsMyKVQO sIAeBtAI+FA2lNHtOFyTc5QZruC5ubAYMabZVvQnLowedl1zHVmU4vmgjHuQueRY nygzuDK9Ph/HQDsGxXpj+YpT8V1HWl8rIU/cXriCBSRV+zWtSTaJej3NQLH6UzOy ZKm4MwP+ERSpPxQ8M6VFzbrXNtrEcPsghaG7XuHO1sadalMRUgCNAVhA2TR4khw= =
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=/hNDUu /CKA3WSlhuKImdO0zeqtJNF5jUPeNNhHTwDOo=; b=H3VK7Z5Bisf2tWM+XjiyFq Ptw/4EYFoRb2rlMaMxrE/5T/dx4hJD/CTr4GbgG91EC/dGvdaVzkNicsvmQvgmZi nNqwCQVoUyJzDeMcWsblbynsjMU12PEGo/0x80HeIdBQM6GKaFvtdK8W7+yGI7I7 duMcgbHOF3OdIJTt5qLfJVar2qQJYv4HhBTi9ASo0Qd96JPIPjf1iMnOcOiQ6t4A VCOw0arj4eYPnMOXAB9N/OJx/LmjWBu2xG3J7AnGnKGykrwWP5PjuozIRa1jEVkj wk2Kn0/VT96t6sNxI7ql38zce4rCaG5PbNqzf3BFBGh9arOJ1c8dKhasIyEvXL5g ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:PjV3YBltQ_Wjz6wQ3uxMkByZzh7LqHGzXfwZzAhhnBCQ2z9oX4i9xA> <xme:PjV3YM0FvIqyVzN8tTyJlWHTDQAFhBUAWn3jICVHIJDk_5PtXdO3B55SBzAceQi9h 713QuPmf-Q>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudeluddguddvjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsegrtderreerreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfuehr ohhnucfiohhnugifrghnrgdfuceosghrohhnghesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlthgvrghmrdgtoh hmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtheetgeefveetudffveetheffgfehhfdvveekuefh heeuteduhefggeeikeejteenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpegsrhhonhhgsehfrghsthhmrghilhhtvggrmhdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:PjV3YHr-oBVu3s6RctwFRDJ9PCRGfvzQmAP0HpwD-BME3hCxdhKMZw> <xmx:PjV3YBliiYMrQ8fARIFpZavlWbLcGMgBfKjv5saqUwvzxSRev4_ApA> <xmx:PjV3YP3-8MgmKo4H60ZHKkXeEfIgqRq3KTt5u3Q5nRfKmY34HQuppg> <xmx:PzV3YEhFPEMf6wCv0CIwcsBgqBkg-F00q2FreqCbliroWdSG4Sz8PA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id EF17A260005F; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:32:29 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-378-g5ea5579899-fm-20210412.001-g5ea55798
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <24b99e33-62ea-4b84-b373-636f71c0fb0d@beta.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <639A8C45-9AFA-4CD4-AC54-B0AE49448D84@akamai.com>
References: <20210413200535.BF29C72D2919@ary.qy> <7ac5ecf5-734e-7f63-a000-dea09cec1d0a@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <5198680E-3555-48FF-9FF5-77105DBC06D7@akamai.com> <52e31d01-c5cf-489f-aa9c-cea327ef03d5@dogfood.fastmail.com> <6FE260FD-09D0-4816-8CD1-8EDFF4644D52@akamai.com> <76e8a855-81d7-4f54-8841-61b4dd1858ec@dogfood.fastmail.com> <639A8C45-9AFA-4CD4-AC54-B0AE49448D84@akamai.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 04:32:08 +1000
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0017316ab02a4e9196b6e17f679c7b02"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/c4t0ia3mWEQCGBcQw21hwfbjTJg>
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: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:32:37 -0000


On Thu, Apr 15, 2021, at 04:13, Salz, Rich wrote:
>  * 1) all the people in the rough are NYT readers, and the rest of the USA are in wild agreement with one half of the NYT-reader opinion.
>  

> Ø    I consider case (1) above to be extremely unlikely.

>  

> By the way, the discussion was “there is no US consensus, so the IETF shouldn’t do anything.” I pointed out that the presumption is wrong.

>  

> I don’t know what US consensus was. I know the industry is moving in this direction. I don’t recall seeing polls about it for the general population.

>  

> You can consider it to be extremely unlikely.  That’s okay, but it is nothing beyond your opinion.  I just say “we don’t know”

>  


I'll agree with "we don't know". A reliable poll on the issue would be interesting, though I suspect it's hard to craft questions that everyone would agree weren't leading.

Bron.

--
  Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd
  brong@fastmailteam.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email