Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)

Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com> Wed, 14 April 2021 21:33 UTC

Return-Path: <victor@jvknet.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 3EF603A20B7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:33:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jvknet-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 4qftHPeJ0l7f for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x335.google.com (mail-wm1-x335.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::335]) (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 F229E3A20B5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:33:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x335.google.com with SMTP id t14-20020a05600c198eb029012eeb3edfaeso1091427wmq.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:33:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jvknet-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gb2vgLX8k126akitUj7gHweZa1rczbp75G81iQMtZJA=; b=sFSDLukrVEuycEvL6tA1QkgglFeRkH+Y4oOMUP/8XoT4FnN0ZmrNbr0/2WYNjctIIQ xbNxZPjMGIZoN/krRJvdozhh7VQxMFQTAjPVGdo5R228b8KyqU6VryItUucw7V3LLybp DjXn0ayuBIrLGRIIn+p6xmAR9Z3Sismd63bgUyBYtYYSYPSpKsQzaljTwepAISZ6Go6X ALY3iV3zGBQsB0DJ371vKmmZnuuMq4IpllEOgukSLkTNfUnwUDHjm0AvrEHLoy+IAqD2 nRGvg6UrKIquvlgbZxTCc9shGz+0cF7WCW5GwjExXIQe9zPJZSzbnhiAjOevDi8b8yPy gArw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gb2vgLX8k126akitUj7gHweZa1rczbp75G81iQMtZJA=; b=BaTNEbz2O1Wqfr/boDOaeGRWqy2G6M5KEk6j4rAGoU016OOsoJtos6Vgr1dCgBsCv7 3MWDabdCwBXjiOovGUPU9zkP4K2ZDoj7FJnmhqIH81pNpDmJNhXCOdhj2E9fEtOZukVs No0ndqYY34YbJGktULo5Vj6W0yGRwkUSJad4wIFiiQfQvoH+wVq2Lb4/8oCNd9pAJTEI Kb5D2iQ4rUsSgvzsOsL3zmfrplKakVc0ai92ZU0RSF3tYFwiPrmmyzJ/U7113R8YQynG 1WHRRJbnx0k4jnWdQSP4pZ59Dr8d9KyLpOH53uGEQphf0jkR9H+mExiWXN7X2nGjd7kX BQqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532kLE2Mb+1+mC6ZnbN7qEs0FEKGnmShrzT5hNNVw5WkrFz5azlK 8DYgYrIU+QURPoWQ48SIgCK0cxTb1dhj3wVkKyvvCQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyiqYzAjRtgLraKEcYVyVzhZeWBLWeIhBWewgflLiTZ/VxNTNbxyYCFm27SgOroVchBjx0kRrK+W4gH1Psr3KQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c3c7:: with SMTP id t7mr4734258wmj.142.1618436012535; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210413200535.BF29C72D2919@ary.qy> <7ac5ecf5-734e-7f63-a000-dea09cec1d0a@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <5198680E-3555-48FF-9FF5-77105DBC06D7@akamai.com> <52e31d01-c5cf-489f-aa9c-cea327ef03d5@dogfood.fastmail.com> <A3F46396-E636-4B35-AAEA-80FD45242F4A@cisco.com> <44E11446-F3B3-431C-BBF7-FA827E016833@bluepopcorn.net>
In-Reply-To: <44E11446-F3B3-431C-BBF7-FA827E016833@bluepopcorn.net>
From: Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 17:33:20 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJc3aaN=jYx3WzCzYzheAnVCR7ziBudAag5L04xBzSQYqVhGZw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)
To: Jim Fenton <fenton@bluepopcorn.net>
Cc: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, The IETF List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009e855e05bff57fe1"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/rlhsdfc_TOBBGWq2QNHZ1MkkA3Q>
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: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:33:41 -0000

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:02 PM Jim Fenton <fenton@bluepopcorn.net> wrote:

> On 14 Apr 2021, at 10:33, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> > What does this mean to the IETF?  I don’t think it means “stop
> > doing TERM”.  Rather I think it means that we should work on the
> > other aspects.  We should make it easy and fun to be here.  And mostly
> > it is fun (of course I’m biased), but sometimes it’s not easy.
>
> The question I keep asking myself (and I don’t have an answer) is
> whether by focusing on terminology in this way we are distracting
> ourselves from making more meaningful efforts to make IETF more
> inclusive. I don’t know what those more meaningful efforts might be,
> but I hope we’re addressing the big problems first.
>

I am most interested in meaningful changes that help people come and
participate.  I don't know if changing or updating terminology will help,
hinder or be neutral in that cause.  I guess it's worth a shot.

My (anecdotal) experience was that culture was the central and most
impactful obstacle to participating within the IETF versus any content of a
pre-existing documentation.  For example, when I read a draft or RFC
(others may disagree), I am absorbing technical content and associate
things I read, including words, to assisting in describing
the technology, method or principle.  On the other hand, when someone
engages, in-person or via email, I see that as a reflection of them
communicating and of their personal resolve.   How we communicate with each
other, as a unit, helps define our culture.

I think addressing culture, IMO, would likely result in more meaningful
ways to drive inclusion.

regards,

Victor K



>
> -Jim
>
>