Re: A contribution to ongoing terminology work

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 06 April 2021 23:08 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 925E83A34F3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:08:32 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.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 FCbPe7uEGJkV for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from beige.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (beige.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20C683A34EF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9A63426C7; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:08:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a92.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-133-36.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.133.36]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A40DA3428C9; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:08:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a92.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 100.96.133.36 (trex/6.1.1); Tue, 06 Apr 2021 23:08:26 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Fumbling-Wipe: 63c7ddf73e461f7b_1617750506755_2808112431
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1617750506754:2948916281
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1617750506754
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a92.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a92.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 588268A9FF; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:08:24 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=MPPoOolDqNNUkc+/MzQzsq64PWw=; b=vhR3YtaIdY0 tntcDIllfxnWmjjLAmLrODDqBs6xRITMYwlVnWBGg80q0rmVHFEEPhnustEtwDtf N4H4Plh69I1bR6i+NllUamLcjwDKuQ+CX7WMXq16b8+c8+BrdPIonaj9/rLGC+Am fh8kD8U8+DX0vdzbl++KGtuJDZCsFJ5g=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a92.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26D3D8A9FB; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:08:21 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 18:08:19 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a92
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: A contribution to ongoing terminology work
Message-ID: <20210406230818.GU3828@localhost>
References: <20210404201640.GD3828@localhost> <b24abb42-2876-40d8-2130-e80c01096e7f@alumni.stanford.edu> <9cb4a281-be2f-92b2-b883-736624788e59@network-heretics.com> <F7448554-4B81-48DB-B084-31E39153C131@tzi.org> <1bfd3fae-f42e-6bd2-bb75-0d1163379540@network-heretics.com> <ybly2dwiab5.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <CAMm+Lwjq_3F+C4-0rNeHLHu_pFTv6DW=Ogmmvt0rUR+JSQmguQ@mail.gmail.com> <6d5b2ea9-b47f-6165-03f7-460ff2fa0e16@network-heretics.com> <CAMm+Lwi8BfYkNCt=Zc9EsA=01Gk=FEHofYw5sBj0smpaJShFyQ@mail.gmail.com> <3e445e49-db8b-d537-88f2-f4c3c882880b@lounge.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3e445e49-db8b-d537-88f2-f4c3c882880b@lounge.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/esPx7HXdgWkx1eMbZNbjL9MtgL4>
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: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 23:08:33 -0000

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 02:56:36PM -0700, Dan Harkins wrote:
> On 4/6/21 12:43 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> > There is a difference between extreme views and extreme methods.
> > 
> > I am an absolutist on certain issues but I have never instigated the use
> > of force or put my opponents in a position where they have no option but
> > to use force for self protection.
> 
>   It's not about use of force. It's how you are characterizing the debate
> as the "good, pure, moral people like me" and the "bigots, morons, and
> troglodytes like the other."
> 
>   That kind of language is very divisive and it just makes people angry.
> No one likes being called a bigot, no one likes having their motives
> questioned (e.g. "language was used to intentionally denigrate people"),
> and if you have to spend your time telling everyone how moral, polite,
> and educated you are it's probably because you're not.

In today's cancel culture, being called such a name is intimidating as
well.  Let's avoid intimidation and bullying please.

> > It was abundantly obvious to which political party I was referring to in
> > this instance.
> 
>   There are no political parties here.

+1