Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 28 July 2020 21:25 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 9C9C13A03EA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 BDA6hTXTzIyt for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:25:15 -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 EFE7D3A02F9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:25:14 -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 382AC7E0692; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 21:25:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-21-23.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.21.23]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A6F427E0EE3; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 21:25:13 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.8); Tue, 28 Jul 2020 21:25:14 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Name-Name: 7672f8cb793ecb3a_1595971514021_886765893
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1595971514021:901301684
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1595971514020
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9D87F68F; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:25:13 -0700 (PDT)
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; s=cryptonector.com; bh=0kZpvtyDHnpNIk OVwzxLDKs6KOM=; b=OI0+0o27zmHXFW4D8SDyr4EHT0BJn3qmKaQgD5JmzIiLKa lFWMfoMHwnW/Eg1CpvpbwlBWeMpZzhJTzH6FMBl8ii24NtWfpZHNQaRfdF+aaL+a mt1vKphRQ8SU+H0Y5/BDHhXE3BdATxclOUl5TMJ+Es+ymQpcvcdwNPax/RZGA=
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-a26.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E8C77F68C; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:25:09 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a26
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language
Message-ID: <20200728212507.GG3100@localhost>
References: <D5CC0F87-FF6A-4824-B930-A43875C2FF1E@akamai.com> <d7604baf-7caf-85d3-21af-b765295951f1@lounge.org> <E9923B2A-7A94-4EA1-9890-16801D82285D@akamai.com> <19456FE4-8781-4F4E-943B-9A430080A0E8@gmail.com> <CABmDk8=HBbOnEMprWfi7u4gtCbS1u-HW2watN48-SVG+9AtdAQ@mail.gmail.com> <2075838754.11970423.1595891262683@mail.yahoo.com> <76D06CB1-6A36-4FA1-972B-02E2CBE6FB41@gmail.com> <1390423269.12257387.1595931939454@mail.yahoo.com> <315DB65A-EDB9-4605-8CAB-DC80D76FADAC@akamai.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20200728091207.10165f08@elandnews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20200728091207.10165f08@elandnews.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK
X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100
X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedriedvgdduheekucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdpffftgfetoffjqffuvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjfgesthdtredttdervdenucfhrhhomheppfhitghoucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpefftdektefhueetveeigfefgeejteejvdfhhefgvddtfeeujeehleeguefhgffhgfenucfkphepvdegrddvkedruddtkedrudekfeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdphhgvlhhopehlohgtrghlhhhoshhtpdhinhgvthepvdegrddvkedruddtkedrudekfedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthheppfhitghoucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhm
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/jtZ4OQ4TrMNBV--3p7J2f3Mkmss>
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, 28 Jul 2020 21:25:17 -0000

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 10:19:59AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote:
> At 05:11 AM 28-07-2020, Salz, Rich wrote:
> > Not all.  Sometimes we are trying to establish a rapport by using
> > informal language.  Trying to add a little informality to a fairly rigid
> > communications system.  Not unlike an IETF bar conversation.  HOWEVER,
> > I've since learned that the term is offensive to some and I am going to
> > try to find other words.

In regards to "folks"?!

I'm from Argentina.  I spent 15 years in the NYC area.  I've since been
living in Texas.  I use Texas-isms all the time to demonstrate comfort.

Yes, I suppose I could use "y'all" and "folks" to talk-down-to, or sign
"Cheers," (an Ozzie-ism?) as in "bleep off", and perhaps I have, but I
also sign "Cheers," frequently out of habit, as a positive note.  Because:

> It is difficult to determine which of the two opinions about slang and
> contractions is true.

Well, context simply matters.  Much language is dual-use!  :)

Intent also matters.  Lack of intent to offend does not mean offense
won't be received, and it does not mean that the first person shouldn't
consider adapting their speech to avoid giving further offense when they
learn of it, nor does it mean that the second person shouldn't learn to
identify contexts that make the apparently-offensive speech not-quite-
so.  Lack of intent certainly means we should be open to forgiveness.

Empathy requires we make an effort to assume good faith, and that we be
open to learning and forgiving.

> > Perhaps we can assume good intentions all around?
> 
> The usual response, in the IETF, is that a complainant could assume that the
> action (or content of a message) was in good faith.  I asked someone else to
> review a few messages (unrelated to this thread).  The messages were
> described as condescending.

+1e6.

Plus, I know condescencion when I see it; I've seen plenty.  And, I
always know it when I sometimes even express it myself.  (Imagine that,
me being human.)

Nico
--