Re: USA dominion: Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

[Joseph Touch <[e-mail]>]

A few points in summary:

- nobody has proposed a penalty for using these terms
	the typical RFC document review and editing process already allows for flexibility in many ways

- nobody has set restrictions on who can participate
	including the need for a ‘license’ for having participated in these issues elsewhere

- although our target is RFCs, every bit helps when trying to address these sorts of biases
	this isn’t about raising awareness; it’s about avoiding marginalization

- nobody has asserted that these terms are being used deliberately or maliciously
	the point is to be aware of their impact

- everyone is free to raise dimensions of this issue that they believe should be included
	I raised ageism, sexism, genderism, nationalism, etc., in addition to racism

- yes, the IETF routinely works on technologies that impact sociological issues
	that’s what the security considerations sections are often about, 
	including (but not limited to) privacy preservation

	but that isn’t the purpose of this doc.

>> ...
>> This is about what we do AFTER the doc is published, not the doc itself. The ???weight??? is what we do, not what we state we will do.
> 
> sorry... can't parse. rephrase ?

The point of this thread is that we should DO something; not merely document or talk about it.

Joe