RE: [Offlist] IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Fri, 31 July 2020 23:30 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 CC1163A0D35 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:30:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.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 lTlIh7Kmdka8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:30:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.elandsys.com (mx.elandsys.com [162.213.2.210]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736B93A08F5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:30:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.115.157.122]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPSA id 06VNTbIh007747 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1596238196; x=1596324596; i=@elandsys.com; bh=H7gLWRsJxnr7FJwAgUl9jGVdRgZLQZFm4b+h6Q87Ubw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=T0GYA/N/YcZVKeIByntDW4FHcGH/MeCal/CAYbpC6aYf8gPd9rOCnPmqtgPPLMU2Y DvUS+dg/p1Qcf4bo58Ij2us4fZetbhstE5G8O1C/VxloDbgyFaTSHKX3s18LxeaNmm rYksF7T/MO4HmWElFU6yD/6l+u+KrWIMfUlrGK9A=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20200731112118.09fc8cf0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:06:10 -0700
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>, ietf@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: RE: [Offlist] IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language
Cc: "Carlos M. Martinez" <carlosm3011@gmail.com>, Mallory Knodel <mknodel@cdt.org>, Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net>
In-Reply-To: <6532836a574145f3bc3c6203443ad5cf@att.com>
References: <159552214576.23902.6025318815034036362@ietfa.amsl.com> <D208C070-48ED-4878-AB2E-4671C2AC649A@gmail.com> <2c018854-bfc1-e014-6e5d-2ed799a6a602@gmail.com> <20200724081624.GA23120@nic.fr> <3C33CD3E-7765-4E79-854C-A035EF5CDAC5@dukhovni.org> <4B5F1FA5-710B-4DC5-892D-66067EC254D9@gmail.com> <6532836a574145f3bc3c6203443ad5cf@att.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ta3Dnt6sZ1GwNuvR4GG7WrG331c>
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: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 23:30:07 -0000

Hi Barbara,
At 02:09 PM 29-07-2020, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
>The sort of "language policing" you describe is 
>where the people in power prevented people not 
>in power from expressing their views and 
>opinions. It is not about the people in power 
>policing their own language so as not to 
>(intentionally?) oppress people not in power. 
>The powerful regimes you reference were very 
>effective at selecting words to maximize oppression – and theyy knew it.

In my opinion, the two persons who commented 
about "language control" probably have a better 
understanding of how it was applied at their locations.

>IETF is powerful. The people who are able to get 
>RFCs published are powerful. The suggestion 
>being made in this thread is that the IETF 
>proceed in a way to minimize oppression of 
>marginalized communities that IETF's words might 
>cause. I don't think outright bans are useful. I 
>do think it's a good idea to ask authors to make 
>conscious decision to use words that we know 
>communities of  marginalized people say harms them.

I don't see being listed as an author of an IETF 
document which was published as a sign of 
power.  If that was the case, I would not be 
sending comments as a reviewer of a draft.

I would give Ms Knodel and Mr ten Oever credit 
for writing about a topic which some people might not like discuss openly.

People who are at the periphery of what is 
described as "community" are sometimes told that 
"we have a mailing list" if you are unable to get 
to a meeting.  Sometimes, the question is 
ignored; I guess that it is for "language control".

>Language matters, as the debate over such things 
>as Texas schoolbooks * shows us. It can be as 
>insidious as the order in which things are 
>presented, omission of select information, and 
>use of passive vs. active tense (so no-one and nothing gets

I am not familiar with the Texas schoolbooks 
debate; I vaguely recall reading about a 
schoolbooks issue which occurred in the United 
States several years or more ago.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy