RE: What's the alternative to "snarling"?

Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org> Mon, 19 April 2021 22:35 UTC

Return-Path: <masinter@gmail.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 C3CC33A472B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:35:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 56lptyTgi-2A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102b.google.com (mail-pj1-x102b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25C053A472C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102b.google.com with SMTP id nm3-20020a17090b19c3b029014e1bbf6c60so15164778pjb.4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=wRwAFWLrBEoCLe1uaEjEUdIWbDc+NCJh7tqAKrIaT6Q=; b=uTeuPk/9l4dT9d9BAKbJOpenGPZ5vSILz8bC+dubAmPdrj7nG2bHRbN3igyaZZsr6F WEifedvUWAxE6Rz63CnoWk2B2PTyeV3rYYFwMzq/wXblUjtQVYRPCU1dj+XuU8EqhB6M an7Gf0ovGEBQdRXF/l36GI6Ax0CDl7+7u/THUURuguDWA7eEoXGiy7Db8I/Q4SDTO4gn BLBlWHkDtYZIhYe1u3/J7bjTyvhHQ5BCr8gjFF5vqCqPdb3W+7yZusJmCNyVCxEfnxfe 5vXVFARjacahYjH9FDB5+8yi2woAZAxkhgEPOdufjwWrgOQFw8GLfYupuztnAGHNPNlv FbfQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject :date:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=wRwAFWLrBEoCLe1uaEjEUdIWbDc+NCJh7tqAKrIaT6Q=; b=U3e+BX+LvJ9+RMAOwSqLoWXs08NdZFTeZ9ZEdZexpL+jk7hRnINjGYFPK8QBGdygdK 6rKexPrP0DurcvO1qz2QjZZkQI7OhEldOhUwpo9Y2tAzqZyVQJUxoNpt2eMG5XpQVUKE kLKkKqFKA26RV0xU5fdr6U5uTBkAoTfF249wfXbhyQbdkbSnBIMrx1QCFUT294lC55YG nLxaePahRm/gBKCOElbYnRVbIYie2s2Xr40XYr7nSbLzs5iscvDcWIa+zXGq1GhbXwqo ObhhWrGhkNA529K/xAMg+RXNht5gp0FpoIC+uIsW2cq+lhJCUt5qzUYChhypG2PCrQNS g/wA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5311bvxbaoUC3lbVc3yoBl3/Z8ACE7654GVl7/LFKBCvXc/Mqlz0 V4AJ0Mo21yC4ie28tqHxtn8rUS7N1eQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwYofasAPspHtFkvmeseKnQ1JAIQZk5JFgJkpeTou9U4V4COHOeddqSOcC2V3IJffQ37+4jeg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:4608:: with SMTP id w8mr1401468pjg.132.1618871715361; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:35:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from TVPC (c-73-158-116-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.158.116.21]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id kr16sm403731pjb.30.2021.04.19.15.35.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:35:10 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Larry Masinter <masinter@gmail.com>
From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
X-Google-Original-From: "Larry Masinter" <lmm@acm.org>
To: "'Michael Thomas'" <mike@mtcc.com>, <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <0b63d094-8c95-409f-282e-86231128f7b5@network-heretics.com> <1C5B7B67-27E5-41F5-89D4-765A407C1FC6@mnt.se> <1d7995d4-f193-2316-9052-d22c2961ac14@network-heretics.com> <8a1b6b42-d085-0b79-19e3-589b4e921b95@mnt.se> <d0ff2a6d-79ee-8533-f872-c731ecce0224@mtcc.com>
In-Reply-To: <d0ff2a6d-79ee-8533-f872-c731ecce0224@mtcc.com>
Subject: RE: What's the alternative to "snarling"?
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:35:06 -0700
Message-ID: <025001d7356c$420198e0$c604caa0$@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQGpSh6IkMBCPh1e8NGlXRABR2GoJgD0aXeRApaTDqsCY5tShgG2qMwGqtsXZKA=
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/nV4eNlAEVx_QOWu-nltNN1uAPZY>
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: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 22:35:22 -0000

The alternative to "snarling" is having at least one person per working group who takes seriously the requirement that RFCs and working group decisions be understandable by newcomers. Perhaps the WG chair or someone appointed by AD or chair. 
--
https://LarryMasinter.net https://interlisp.org