IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective]

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> Fri, 10 June 2016 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@hxr.us>
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 87A8212D0B0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:07:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hxr-us.20150623.gappssmtp.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 sc5S1CHfLcmr for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:07:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (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 D659512B077 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:07:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id n184so272964911wmn.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:07:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hxr-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=uODX5H22RS6mvTGfBmw0a5QtiQmhWc0usHxTSfuNnSM=; b=KKhnktdAzqR1jet9CcsHICw+I8OQgXXJUdAbOzytB/P9RsWX5q8fTwpEuzzGtQGdRo PL6uB+Vx6z6+CFp34asiHmAj4rWgWJZe0eDLl5rwbGI8dluFsQ5jgldRe8a1f7zKLH6l 5A6TfYnH5BC2eoZvuJSCB0Dx/XJAx6bvxkjMwicfEY01D9IGk8nuUHGYSpn67Kvx5jN+ G7urL1e+u0DdjaF4P6PshCWXR3QCLAQBuBKHLpxCNOWYoqeHLib+PMuG5HACiyxlWnoE Zw+xcgPQE/f9DvvrAjukosMbX8YIB8yubOTke5sqR1xixIAIR4DORVoCxnTJeL9g1fdG 8P/g==
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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=uODX5H22RS6mvTGfBmw0a5QtiQmhWc0usHxTSfuNnSM=; b=b5YI4slweVDnZmtgjxPYMqDH7i0yF9AkNLF2x/tRlpw90XeJD+fEZyUO4ApJ+fzUz1 zjdcGADfTeIVAs8sGtti07XG0CkTy6iqRIkmKGQg08mm/wwdm+os9vWxtBNThZRp3mNu QPU128QvAG3i394FBgoCkAZNraEFo3Xv/rWbOPio+fbllabkhhyRHwawJ+UH3Sp6q9go NHsKqNlpOdBWWXuzcOkbVN1J9lra+aCSW0LjRR3KwKS7Te9SoPjbOQhOfiUbDSrwU5Hw MOcR+qxYfIoGxckwSUFwBTVsWkV8x2MPKV8hOgOtVSwfU76y+jGYzpcf+Euftf52Eq9c QQaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tL96mRnCnwWRKYuT2+t7Fmxe5g62rWCTDok0Hb6UDRdw7B64LOrw4gLeSK5c7iULVAoWscKXz4Otvsl2w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.28.227.11 with SMTP id a11mr3692812wmh.100.1465574861363; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.161.202 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [192.149.252.11]
In-Reply-To: <FADEFCB4-034F-49A1-999E-D3DF78DBFC89@consulintel.es>
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>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 12:07:41 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAQiQRfeFn-az3n5OGLwQqscWJ_Up6V8M0WSrE4boRbbCLnvug@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Value and respect [Re: IETF 100, IAOC perspective]
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
To: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/e0tsO83PZlduqYAolC4Wr4zIQD8>
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
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 16:07:44 -0000

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email