Re: on "positive" organizational culture
Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Mon, 09 March 2020 02:04 UTC
Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.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 088313A0DE0; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 19:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 uGE4NVMZX7gN; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 19:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BF4F3A0DEE; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 19:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 952AE21B36; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 22:04:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 08 Mar 2020 22:04:14 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=d91H/FgYbAO78m2gpvmCrQ59LwptVP77eomIv9dK3 vg=; b=oSz94vjKa3Hd4ZKDaBniD6QjoLTrSIeTgEElCd4iJjOJ1KzCrX1IM8dDd 7nhRj6vjr+LbXJG3xrlUybRVmzZCTRFmpaIhQPgkv74XPqiqC8wu9ifGTHQTpARu L6Uga2VACuom8a5RcR29nC9piGEyspyItZvwLUCiL6U1uZMg9BdUZKRgMcg78DR+ XFQ/YLPquLmWsP7k1JYlk0IayYUdIc86huoTONlggyfSAE7x+WgOBLKIJEt2e8VN WeL2aITUbRy2KfRNrSPwODV9/bBTkcwqzsunL4NLTywoTCZpTqbV5Wn3GpCKwFl9 pQI1x5TDSYY1lGhksYuXyaT3o+2Ng==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:HqRlXuMc-oYYsPT9z_O1BADc3asqHNHq13gyqbzSG2NlRJXr812hyA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedruddujedggeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefhuffvfhfkffgfgggjtgfgsehtke ertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthif ohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucfkphepuddtkedrvddvuddrudektddrud ehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhho ohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:HqRlXsoAMTNpn4SaiYX0auZS3xDiI6XGfmL9nooUrWmq012HpUFIFw> <xmx:HqRlXg5YQxtcUmP8kwu3TtExOqVJfC29yfuYd7uZcNrDc2aZf_IgZA> <xmx:HqRlXqhV_2TMv-ffXY3m8cJ5uP8tIAThOhghRpwpY_3Xubv3GiKT_w> <xmx:HqRlXmnpeZGAm3TawBhCzVJyB9yZq8Fzw1HVWX9xev0OhGmtXFLFmQ>
Received: from [192.168.1.97] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C0790328005A; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 22:04:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Subject: Re: on "positive" organizational culture
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
References: <7a0c887d-d259-3a75-b6a5-c33a62ee8d5d@network-heretics.com> <0DAAE6A4-9F3F-4F2F-9DF5-723D15EE9AB3@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <46ca09d6-7c6a-de73-67b6-7b272678e247@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2020 22:04:12 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0DAAE6A4-9F3F-4F2F-9DF5-723D15EE9AB3@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/p31hX2KpTFA-dqeUnl0BBk4ofRg>
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, 09 Mar 2020 02:04:41 -0000
>> I would state your sentence differently - the behavior of those who control an organization, in the long term, approaches the worst behavior that the community is willing to tolerate. > I don’t agree that is inevitable. There are plenty of people out there, both in leadership positions and not, who have a strong moral compass or some other strong personal limiter and so will not bend. That is not to say that I think safeguards should not be in place to prevent this - they should. (Again, I'm not talking about any specific persons here.) Even people with strong moral compasses will occasionally "bend". Those with weaker moral compasses will "bend" more often. Some people will not even see the same decisions as having a moral or ethical consideration. People with more political skill may be able to negotiate better compromises than those with less skill. If those with such skill are also wise and well-intended, that's great. But sometimes politically skilled and/or well-intended people make unfortunate decisions, as we all do. Individuals also have personal biases which may affect their decision making, in ways that are not well-aligned with IETF's goals. Sincere and thoughtful opinions can differ about that alignment. All of these factors are always present to varying degrees. Over time, the mistakes tend to accumulate, as unfortunate decisions made in the past become used as justifications to demand additional unfortunate decisions. It is _very_ difficult for even the best-intentioned, wisest, and most politically skilled persons to buck that trend. It would be extremely unwise for IETF to adopt an organizational culture that presumes we can always have leaders with strong moral compasses, considerable political skill, wisdom, good intentions, and no harmful biases. We have generally been fortunate, I believe, in often having very good leaders. But we should know better than to presume we will always be so fortunate. That's why IETF's organizational culture needs to be one that is both crafted and maintained by the whole community, not dictated by its leaders. And that's just one reason why IETF's expectations for behavior between contributors (and leaders are also contributors) need to favor openness and transparency. But back to a statement you made in a note to Randy Bush: > There is a big difference between people asking questions, making > recommendations, providing alternative analysis, challenging > decisions, etc and impugning motives, deliberately misrepresenting > people/processes, plain insults, etc. The former is perfectly > acceptable, the latter is never acceptable. I am largely in agreement with this statement (and have used similar words myself). I certainly don't find personal insults acceptable. When someone misrepresents a person or a process, my general assumption is that it's more likely to be a misunderstanding than deliberate. (But deliberate misrepresentations do sometimes occur. ) I also agree that it's not appropriate to impugn others' motives - at least not without citing supporting evidence and even then it should be done only as a last resort. But we should not be so naive as to assume that people never have inappropriate motives. The problems I have with such accusations are: (a) it's very easy to misunderstand someone else's motive and for the accusation to simply be wrong; and (b) discussions about motive almost always serve as distractions from development of better technical solutions. So at least in most IETF contexts, it seems better to try to keep the discussion in the technical realm. For instance, if a proposal is motivated by a desire to use the standards process to gain an unfair technical advantage over competitors, it almost always will do some harm to Internet users - and that harm may be easier to demonstrate than the motive. But sometimes inappropriate motive does rear its ugly head. IMO current IETF processes are not well-designed to deal with these cases, but I'm not sure what remedy to recommend. Where you and I might disagree is in use of the word "positive" to describe the culture that is needed. For IETF to function well, it is essential to have technical disagreements and criticism of technical proposals. These disagreements and criticism are often unpleasant, because the process of examining potential flaws in one's own proposals is itself unpleasant. The process is unpleasant even if everyone is being respectful, so it's not a surprise if discussions sometimes get heated. But it's only by exposing such flaws that we can fix them, or discard proposals that can't be fixed. And many people understand that it's more important to ultimately get good results than to have their own proposals win. It's even possible to be happy that someone else has found a better way, and good engineers know that. I've also seen cases (both inside and outside of IETF) in which a demand for positivity has been deliberately used to suppress input that those in leadership positions didn't want to have aired. Bottom line: I believe that for IETF to be able to do its job well, transparency must be more important than a vague notion of positivity. Or, to put it differently, I prefer to emphasize a different kind of positivity: I believe we as a community should commit ourselves to producing solutions of benefit for a broad spectrum of Internet users, and our norms of interacting among ourselves should be defined in furtherance of that purpose. Keith
- IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet Draft… IETF Secretariat
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [107all] IETF 107 Standard Registration and I… Randy Bush
- Re: [107all] IETF 107 Standard Registration and I… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [107all] IETF 107 Standard Registration and I… Randy Bush
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Robert Raszuk
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Randy Bush
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Carsten Bormann
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Lou Berger
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Lou Berger
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Salz, Rich
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Wrt. cancelling IETF107 in-person registration (w… Toerless Eckert
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Alissa Cooper
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Alissa Cooper
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Randy Bush
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jay Daley
- RE: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Larry Masinter
- Re: risk zones (was: IETF 107 Standard Registrati… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Dirk Kutscher
- Re: risk zones Joseph Potvin
- Re: risk zones Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: Wrt. cancelling IETF107 in-person registratio… Jared Mauch
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Lou Berger
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: risk zones Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Toerless Eckert
- Re: risk zones Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: risk zones Rich Kulawiec
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: risk zones Christian Huitema
- Re: risk zones Randy Bush
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Jim Fenton
- on "positive" organizational culture Keith Moore
- Re: on "positive" organizational culture Jay Daley
- Re: on "positive" organizational culture S Moonesamy
- Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet D… Toerless Eckert
- Re: on "positive" organizational culture Keith Moore
- Re: on "positive" organizational culture Jay Daley
- Re: on "positive" organizational culture Toerless Eckert
- Re: on "positive" organizational culture Keith Moore