Tell me if I should send this Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs
Mallory Knodel <mallory@article19.org> Fri, 21 September 2018 17:47 UTC
Return-Path: <mallory@article19.org>
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 92AEC12D7F8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 10:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 uTmEa5SWtwNZ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 10:46:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (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 B6A611277C8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 10:46:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mallory@article19.org>) id 1g3PW4-0005Ie-Qe for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 19:46:57 +0200
From: Mallory Knodel <mallory@article19.org>
Subject: Tell me if I should send this Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20180920233440.238CA20051DDE5@ary.qy> <5d3da769-5243-f6ee-35b2-d63f9e43b33a@cisco.com> <4c8aa4ce-b491-b816-9967-e723b8b3be03@digitaldissidents.org> <325538173.14441870.1537527705103@mail.yahoo.com> <6EC8B12E-0908-4AED-B2E4-6ADA37BF01DB@nohats.ca> <1275348340.14654769.1537539052249@mail.yahoo.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=mallory@article19.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBEx0TWcBCAC8sirY3nlDnRwY6XWmsvZtM9kmEK6H8no3ZuQ723PKwHOddw1nOykh0in/ /QGRmwtyVzsfLh6/94UUZTn10oo+xGAfw2gf1on5IJTIiphykk732PNnUakVGWwHNKQquTVc kLrydUaFVMb89BAXqExBKlMg2ciEjzbYMCs3I/qZAZ0Wr5nF3RQS8O78elTNAgWTZ98yKTZV DlRoDpnvbfwtIPqnISoSjDEvEUBdpykvS3jHqlR1f6Mx6Xs97S5CORaer/0qTcDm0PAb1Z9l IhMsFl05tNt2FpgS4/RN8NyLasAQNOlScpTJbAfRuyyvRm1N8GLIL1KX+YYeLyqzhdhZABEB AAHNJU1hbGxvcnkgS25vZGVsIDxtYWxsb3J5QG1heWZpcnN0Lm9yZz7CwJgEEwECAEICGwMG CwkIBwMCBhUIAgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAhkBFiEE4+tj4GWjskC82bBxDDKicb08x4AFAlqo 9WUFCRAV234ACgkQDDKicb08x4DklAf+ODKRmP6C2MnBz6vL8N8l3vZJUqoRcYXTn3uTpT05 Wou87ZIZ/P/OV2/uOMKkczLQQydj5S8PxbLTeg+U5f/63hdy99ON+K2b4izg7Qasdl1SqXTH q1pmhbrcbLbVKDJ345fdEg7RuMnv4gd3EaT/yQa99zHy8JHaBKaPEUQAa65HTt2Sy2c6L6BA aMZx1TOZ9/cZ7L1gJyytJbEyvg/JLOatJEI4rewUWU2TMSGJijwjAUBagwDPWyxpz+vXdKsD tqRTpY4xvXaeUQo0QXf0c5j1Gcglzv7ywZcyz1MGD1aLS9/CqeB3I4EMbvH/33LS3jNkfKbV XOTSjmo7l22CNc7ATQRMdE1nAQgA4mpP2LjFuAW2li9FPbDYOMzt0MtThXsnvHyY0fDv8FlU qnKgPrMY80VHntnxwqepFS3ncunVX4ipq+fadta+LHpTnbJSmlphBrc9qGJxqcjwf4yo35Xh OXCJFwnaoAwIX237lXRe4Xh6X4VMuJt8jiZdvgpbk/whvQH2grcq8KjCcy1iuL5pBl8ZwYG/ dphitFhQdqEcnc/krIqG4KQgKiUi3K/GR0OeEmw/cscWD7/CLEo7eHiaGQhSOyDQbM+Iu2o/ 6uMXMUPsYlMMqgmVL68zMacO3PE17jx0rQ8oZ7CpBY8YZWOWrzXrtFT8JO9guuCPsvd4KT6y 97y9LRJlPQARAQABwsB8BBgBAgAmAhsMFiEE4+tj4GWjskC82bBxDDKicb08x4AFAlqo9WYF CRAV238ACgkQDDKicb08x4DU4QgAmlyBlFhfU0jpkbyD3HQ+3CJqWdBT422pVIrj3qNT2ehy fWO66Muidmd4Y279uV3p3TQEJOQvnV7FVAC9+bI7AdBy00BAjHgJ5eSQZxKTXUoeeBAsTZHN /HaHewjYWHMvCuuzir/Wt3A6Cehh8gp9I/Vg+oL3dTldVqqgZLgnA83bT/R8fI/e85LDlpdx KJ0+uy/grg3AbH7LUUrmMIC2iO8mQWYuNlizsUZLFvJhCAU2c5l8B5mv2BoWFhL+l7mmNcdF bwBFXon7Ea1jkCnbWVxtXkPYkcuWuMSTJswn9HhZVJWjUonKqUZKAb9PxRzC9crZ+X14tQT3 iJt2a4ZM4w==
Message-ID: <db02fca4-34d8-e30f-f494-a0fe342ac05a@article19.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 20:46:54 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1275348340.14654769.1537539052249@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net
X-Scan-Signature: 882182757433e81d12f518c644a03b9a
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/txkOK72ONRtapQ2EiDo6-1wjMRc>
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, 21 Sep 2018 17:47:03 -0000
Hi, New co-chair of HRPC here. First, I'd like to thank folks who are defending the existence of our research group. And I'd like to deeply appreciate those throughout this long thread here, and in HRPC, who are reading and responding, even though talking about personal and social issues of oppression can be emotionally taxing. I know that I am emotionally exhausted by it. I couldn't agree more with everything that Avri said. For my contribution in this thread, I want to address Eliot Lear, > the co-chair has attempted to stifle debate I will admit that based on my experience and expertise that I disagree with nearly everything that he has said in this discussion. But it has not been my intention to "stifle debate". In one response I wrote, > I'm going to stop you right there. Of course I didn't actually stop him as he had pre-synchronously written his message. I also didn't stop him from writing subsequent messages nor did I want to. Apologies, Eliot. It was nothing more than a debate gimmick and turn of phrase, but language matters! I won't use it again. I've drafted a document to collect the various arguments and elements. Some of which Neils has just shared back to the thread at Alissa's suggestion. I hope to share that soon. This debate, at least in part, might be new to the IETF but it is not new to communities of technologists. I've been part of some of these communities and I'm glad the debate is happening here, as difficult as it might be. With thanks, -Mallory On 21/09/2018 17:10, Lloyd Wood wrote: > Paul > > "The arguments so far (from you and John Levine) have been > that since HRPC didn’t attain world peace and > universal human rights, it should be closed down." > > I can see where John suggested that. > > But where did I suggest or endorse that idea? > > I suspect you're confusing skepticism for stifling dissent. > And that you're confusing me with Eliot Lear. > > (on my mail agent behaviour, I'm suspecting the mail agent.) > > L. > > Lloyd Wood lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk http://about.me/lloydwood > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> > *To:* Lloyd Wood <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk> > *Cc:* "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org> > *Sent:* Friday, 21 September 2018, 23:38 > *Subject:* Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and offensive > terminology in RFCs > > > >> On Sep 21, 2018, at 07:01, Lloyd Wood > <lloyd.wood=40yahoo.co.uk@dmarc.ietf.org > <mailto:40yahoo.co.uk@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote: >> >> Niels, >> >> you are surprised about this conversation here and now on HPRC, >> despite you being the very person who initiated this conversation >> introducing the topic of HPRC to the main list? > > Niels introduced a topic from HPRC that he thought warranted discussion > outside of HPRC. Since HPRC per definition is about ALL of IETF > considering the impact of IETF protocols on human rights, that is > appropriate and expected output of the group. > > What Niels was surprised about was some people’s reaction to close down > HPRC, and I concur with Niels’ surprise. The arguments so far (from you > and John Levine) have been that since HRPC didn’t attain world peace and > universal human rights, it should be closed down. It fails to understand > the groups goal. If that kind of measuring is used, the Security Area > and IPv6 groups should have been closed down years ago. > >> And you complain >> about someone expressing a contrary and dissenting position while >> emailing from **digitaldissidents**..org? Irony much? > > Niels is not complaining, you are. And this attack doesn’t belong on > this list. > >> (I'd also like to know why my replies to you aren't cc'ing the >> list by default; that does look like an attempt to stifle debate, >> but I don't see the expected Reply-To: in headers.) > > And now you seem to imply the ietf@ietf.org <mailto:ietf@ietf.org> list > settings are somehow Niels’ fault. If you want to complain about these, > a new thread devoid of HRPC discussion, just discussions this > particular’s list settings would be the appropriate way to raise this as > an issue to discuss.. > > >> remember: social justice warriors have never been to war. > > > You are trying to prove that you “mastered” flame baiting? > > I guess if anything, you showed that IETF has a lot of work to do to > become more inclusive and considerate, and if we really need to discuss > whether HRPC should be closed down or not (I don’t think we do) than > your behavior shows the need to keep it open. > > Paul > > -- Mallory Knodel Head of Digital :: article19.org gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780
- Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Niels ten Oever
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Stewart Bryant
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Petr Špaček
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Niels ten Oever
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dave Cridland
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Loa Andersson
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mukund Sivaraman
- SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anne-Marie Eklund-Löwinder
- RE: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Roberta Maglione (robmgl)
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ole Troan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Michal Krsek
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Tony Finch
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Job Snijders
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anton Ivanov
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anton Ivanov
- RE: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Adrian Farrel
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs lloyd.wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… lloyd.wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Wouters
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Wouters
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs lloyd.wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Stephan Wenger
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Nottingham
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Stephen Farrell
- RE: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs John E Drake
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dick Franks
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs ned+ietf
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Hoffman
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- ""Man-in-the-middle""? <was, Re: SV: Diversity an… Charlie Perkins
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Michael StJohns
- Re: ""Man-in-the-middle""? <was, Re: SV: Diversit… Dave Aronson
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Heather Flanagan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Nottingham
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Heather Flanagan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs John C Klensin
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Anton Ivanov
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Yoav Nir
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Kyle Rose
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dave Cridland
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… John Levine
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Mark Rousell
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Alia Atlas
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Allison Mankin
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Lloyd Wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Lloyd Wood
- On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and offensi… Jari Arkko
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Eliot Lear
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Niels ten Oever
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Lloyd Wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Eliot Lear
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Alissa Cooper
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Paul Wouters
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Ted Lemon
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Donald Eastlake
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Lloyd Wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Niels ten Oever
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anton Ivanov
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Ted Lemon
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… John R Levine
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Wouters
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Eliot Lear
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Nico Williams
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Avri
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dave Cridland
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… John Levine
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Allison Mankin
- Tell me if I should send this Re: why exactly is … Mallory Knodel
- Mallory-in-the-middle attacks (Re: SV: Diversity … Nico Williams
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Nico Williams
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Glenn Deen
- Re: Mallory-in-the-middle attacks (Re: SV: Divers… Nico Williams
- Re: Tell me if I should send this Re: why exactly… lloyd.wood
- Re: Mallory-in-the-middle attacks (Re: SV: Divers… Mallory Knodel
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Mallory Knodel
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… S Moonesamy
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Mallory Knodel