Re: RFC Series Editor Resignation

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

I disagree with your efforts to police my speech, and think further parsing of Mike’s speech has passed the point of diminishing returns.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 3, 2019, at 11:04 AM, Richard Barnes <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I assume you mean that you disagree with her (and the Sergeant-at-Arms') evaluation that Mike was using unprofessional language?  Even if that's the case, it's clear that the intent is to address tone, not content.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 10:59 AM Keith Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> With respect, I believe Alissa was incorrect in her assertions.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Jul 3, 2019, at 10:57 AM, Richard Barnes <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I would invite you to re-read Alissa's message, which is explicit that the issue is Mike's "repeated use of unprofessional language" -- not anything to do with his arguments.
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 10:52 AM Keith Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> No, what is being talked about is the suppression of necessary and constructive speech out of a misguided idea that telling the truth is disrespectful. 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jul 3, 2019, at 10:49 AM, Richard Barnes <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Nobody is talking about varnishing truth, Keith.  They're talking about treating fellow contributors with respect.  There's a big gap between those two ideas.
>>>>> 
>>>>> --Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 10:42 AM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics..com> wrote:
>>>>>> I believe such rules (or something akin to them [*]) are essential to productive technical discussion and therefore essential to IETF.  I also believe that efforts to prevent people from telling the unvarnished truth about a technical mechanism, or a political one, are harmful to IETF in the most extreme sense possible.  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [*] my preferred version is closer to “Criticize ideas, not people.  But criticize harmful ideas when necessary to prevent harm even if there’s a risk that people will take such criticism personally. “
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> > On Jul 3, 2019, at 10:13 AM, Job Snijders <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > believe "Crocker's Rules" are incompatible with the IETF process and
>>>>>> > as such notifications via IETF's communication channels about whether
>>>>>> > someone adheres to Crocker's Rules or not, don't serve a purpose.
>>>>>>