Re: Effective discourse in the IETF

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

I can't immerse myself in this discussion for more than about 15 seconds
without thinking about the many online communities I have seen implode and
dissolve in a pool of anger and recrimination.  A tendency for rhetoric to
become polemic and then spiral out of control seems an unavoidable inbuilt
feature of the medium.  Therefore, I'm generally in favor of proactive
attempts to throw water on flames before the community is placed at risk.
If you think you are a victim of "political correctness", please consider
that the people you're mad at probably think they're preserving community
health.

It's a pity that "tone policing" has come to mean "attack a position you
disagree with based on whining about rudeness" because the literal meaning
of the phrase "tone policing" is something I'm generally sympathetic with.
Like any other kind of policing, it can get out of control. But I think
it's a necessary activity.

I've been told to shut up and be less rude in at least two IETF WGs and you
know what, the people telling me were right.

Having said all that: Heather's departure looks from the outside like a
major failure of process design or basic management competence.  We need to
find out whether either or both of these perceptions are true, and try to
prevent this kind of thing from becoming a pattern.  I think it's perfectly
OK for people to be deeply upset.

On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:47 PM Keith Moore <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> On 7/3/19 3:09 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
>
> > On 7/3/19 11:01 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
> >> I may be exaggerating the situation somewhat by stating things in terms
> >> of the extremes of possibility.   I agree that there is a middle
> >> ground.   It is not necessary to be brutally honest at all times to get
> >> good technical work done.
> > It is not necessary at all to be brutal to get good technical
> > work done.  It is a choice.
>
> DIsagree.  Not brutal, but (as I said) brutally honest - which is an
> idiom.   (That's the best expression that currently comes to my mind,
> but there might be a better one.)
>
> > I'll also point out that we use consensus-based decision-making
> > in the IETF, and it may be worth a re-read (or first-time read)
> > of RFC 7282.
>
> I find this belittling and insulting.   Of course I'm aware that we used
> consensus-based decision-making.  But the appearance of consensus is
> misleading if people aren't permitted to openly express their views,
> even if they do so in a suboptimal manner.
>
> Keith
>
>
>