Re: A contribution to ongoing terminology work

[Lloyd W <[e-mail]>]

Oh, sorry, I can see how my last email might confuse the hasty reader, since I used the sense of "you" differently between paragraphs. So, here's a rewrite:

responding directly to the comment:

> "if you have to spend your time telling everyone how moral, polite, and educated you are it's probably because you're not."


more clearly, with the hypothetical 'you' I used keeping that sense of 'you' used above, and with a deliberate run-on sentence indicating the sense is continued, but now rewritten as referring to me, responding directly to that claim :

> or it's perhaps because *I was* facing some difficult questions about two bigoted, not very well thought out, and frankly racist anonymous drafts that *I* didn't know of or write but *am* now being associated with, and dealing with those questions and clearly setting *myself* apart from those anonymous drafts, by demonstrating how moral, polite, and educated *I am*, is exactly how *I* spent *my* Easter weekend.

and with 'you' now referring to Dan Harkins/Les White, as specifically called out as the subject of that self-contained sentence:

> Your loud and frankly not very well thought-out public opinions need to be evaluated in light of your previous furtive actions, "Lester White". Your apology cannot be accepted.

and that's referring to the grudging conditional apology in Dan's list email of 6 April, my time.

(My own draft's suggestion of replacing 'you' with the more inclusive 'we' really doesn't work up there. Inclusivity does have its limits.)

I do find that talking about internet-drafts is quite relevant to the IETF and to this list. We should perhaps do more of that. I find I'll be reading this list more selectively from now on (because I have mailboxes, mail threading and mail filters - useful come-and-go distancing that I've recommended before) and that is, surprisingly, not due to a matter of terminology.

Lloyd Wood
[e-mail]

I'll be parsing Padlipsky next!

> On 7 Apr 2021, at 13:03, Lloyd W <lloyd.wood=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Really, Dan?
> 
> 
> "if you have to spend your time telling everyone how moral, polite, and educated you are it's probably because you're not."
> 
> 
> or it's perhaps because you are facing some difficult questions about two bigoted, not very well thought out, and frankly racist anonymous drafts that you didn't know of or write but are now being associated with, and dealing with those questions and clearly setting yourself apart from those anonymous drafts, by demonstrating how moral, polite, and educated you are, is exactly how you spent your Easter weekend.
> 
> Your loud and frankly not very well thought-out public opinions need to be evaluated in light of your previous furtive actions, "Lester White". Your apology cannot be accepted.
> 
> Lloyd Wood
> [e-mail]
> 
>> On 7 Apr 2021, at 07:57, Dan Harkins <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> if you have to spend your time telling everyone how moral, polite,
>> and educated you are it's probably because you're not.