Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs

[Mark Rousell <[e-mail]>]

On 21/09/2018 00:34, John Levine wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>> In the discussion that followed it was remarked that in RFCs terms like
>> Master/Slave, blacklist/whitelist, man-in-middle, and other terminology
>> that is offensive to some people and groups is quite common.
> If this is really the best that HRPC can do, I would suggest that it's
> time for the IRTF to consider whether to shut it down.
>
> [...]
> Instead, we get this stuff.  Even if you think that the language in
> our RFCs is problematic, which for the most part I don't, I am
> confident that no RFC has ever enslaved anyone, nor put anyone on a
> secret list that kept them from working (the actual meaning of
> blacklist for people who know their history.)
>
> There are real human rights problems that HRPC could engage with, but
> don't.  They need to make up their mind whether they're serious.

Well said.


-- 
Mark Rousell