Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins

Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org> Sun, 02 October 2022 04:38 UTC

Return-Path: <dharkins@lounge.org>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7542EC14CF1B for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Oct 2022 21:38:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JeAa3zVoV9ps for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Oct 2022 21:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from www.goatley.com (www.goatley.com [198.137.202.94]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90AF5C14CF04 for <last-call@ietf.org>; Sat, 1 Oct 2022 21:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kitty.bergandi.net (cpe-76-176-14-122.san.res.rr.com [76.176.14.122]) by wwwlocal.goatley.com (PMDF V6.8 #2433) with ESMTP id <0RJ30RJPZZK9AW@wwwlocal.goatley.com> for last-call@ietf.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2022 23:38:33 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.153] (kitty.dhcp.bergandi.net [10.0.42.19]) by kitty.bergandi.net (PMDF V6.8 #2433) with ESMTPSA id <0RJ300LGIZK72J@kitty.bergandi.net> for last-call@ietf.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2022 21:38:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from customer.lsancax1.pop.starlinkisp.net ([98.97.56.194] EXTERNAL) (EHLO [192.168.1.153]) with TLS/SSL by kitty.bergandi.net ([10.0.42.19]) (PreciseMail V3.3); Sat, 01 Oct 2022 21:38:32 -0700
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2022 21:38:30 -0700
From: Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
In-reply-to: <CAChr6SzgOGPyqcAOuqAf9d8cuawDyHkNXySP6HO7vYyYx7qyEw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Cc: "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
Message-id: <52f7e856-85fd-eefb-c878-acb9f6429174@lounge.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_Z+CtDJLVojHw2D2yNY4rTw)"
Content-language: en-US
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.0
X-PMAS-SPF: SPF check skipped for authenticated session (recv=kitty.bergandi.net, send-ip=98.97.56.194)
X-PMAS-External-Auth: customer.lsancax1.pop.starlinkisp.net [98.97.56.194] (EHLO [192.168.1.153])
References: <CFE25E25-D131-468E-9923-80350D6216F3@ietf.org> <2E2133EC-4FB1-4DED-B5A3-663195BAE668@mnot.net> <1ee0e91a-8cf3-4271-a61e-9d23fd7accdc@app.fastmail.com> <CAChr6SzYYnTP4qD4cz5z4PdKhVNtMfJ5BhHRM0h9YOUd9-+nPA@mail.gmail.com> <1443934364.808479.1664608335622@mail.yahoo.com> <1861172491.645872.1664628385229@email.ionos.com> <CAPDSy+5cdDpPT3OUNA2Zgwdb0L066_=PvruooS7uj-1euOvovA@mail.gmail.com> <482425613.350860.1664666506208@email.ionos.com> <CAChr6SzgOGPyqcAOuqAf9d8cuawDyHkNXySP6HO7vYyYx7qyEw@mail.gmail.com>
X-PMAS-Software: PreciseMail V3.3 [220926a] (kitty.bergandi.net)
X-PMAS-Allowed: system rule (rule allow header:X-PMAS-External noexists)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/DfnTI2Xy738FSUbmbgXE6DibAxY>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2022 04:38:43 -0000

   Rob,

   So you're cool with impolite debate on technical issues but not with
impolite debate on procedural issues? That's odd. I can see tolerance
on both. And I can see intolerance on both (I disagree with the approach
but at least it's consistent). I can even see it the other way around
because technical issues are not personal while procedural issues kind
of are. But I'm having a hard time understanding your position. Can you
explain?

   Also, do you think my "problematic" emails were racist? If so, can
you explain why?

   Dan.


On 10/1/22 5:03 PM, Rob Sayre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm cool with impolite debate when there is a technical issue at hand 
> (others are not, and I see their point).
>
> But most of this stuff seems to be sent regarding procedural issues. I 
> think the IETF should tighten the charters and policies of all 
> non-technical mailing lists.
>
> thanks,
> Rob
>
> P.S. - at Mozilla, we used to keep a bulletin board of the various 
> strange letters we received in the mail
>
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2022 at 4:27 PM Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com> 
> wrote:
>
>     OK Dave let's dig deeper, The good news is that you didn't
>     disagree with me when I said Dan's emails were not racist. The
>     rest inline.
>
>
>     > On 10/01/2022 3:32 PM EDT David Schinazi
>     <dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     > Hi Tim,
>     >
>     > I think you've inadvertently helped clarify what a "problematic
>     email" is.
>     > Let's take your email that I'm replying to as an example. The point
>     > you're trying to make (please correct me if I'm misunderstanding) is
>     > that you disagree about the posting rights action regarding Dan
>     Harkins.
>
>
>     Yes that's correct, notably on whether Dan Harkins has engaged in
>     postings that are "unprofessional commentary, regardless of the
>     general subject" in a manner disruptive enough to warrant this action.
>
>
>
>     > But let's look at how you're making that point. You say:
>     > <<Anyone who is actually upset about the "problematic emails" is
>     either
>     > to weak for a leadership position or has an underlying agenda.>>
>     > I was upset by Dan's emails, so now you're accusing me of either
>     being
>     > weak, or being dishonest.
>
>     Whoa whoa Dave, I didn't say you were dishonest!  Thats a bit of a
>     bait and switch with my words sir.  But since you bring it up and
>     you said Dan's emails upset you, I'm sure you spoke up about it. 
>     Lets check over on the terminology list, nope no Dave there[1]. 
>     Lets check on every one of those problem email threads, I'm sure
>     you said something there....nope, no Dave there either.  Maybe
>     they didn't really bother you.  Maybe you were right to use the
>     word dishonest, idk.
>
>
>
>     > Why do you feel the need to belittle me here?
>
>     I guess subconsciously I was trying to fit in, I've been picking
>     it up here and there.  But I get so confused...Carsten calls me
>     stupid and gets a thumbs up;  Masataka Ohta calls some one stupid
>     and gets banned.  I'm just not sure who to belittle these days.
>
>
>
>
>     > Then let's about this drink you're having at the pub. The way
>     you repeat it
>     > seems to indicate that you already know that this way of naming the
>     > drink is offensive,
>
>
>     Yeah, the guy next to me ordered a White Russian and I just about
>     knocked him out I was so furious!!  Doesn't that guy know all
>     Russians aren't white!  How dare he not know the litteral roots of
>     the drink he ordered!  I'm going to tell the manager how upset I
>     am and see if I can get him kicked out. But first I'm going to get
>     all my friends together so we can all tell the manager, that way
>     it will look like a huge issue and they will have to do something!
>
>
>
>     > Some people on this list might
>     > be of Irish descent, and might find it upsetting that you
>     belittle a part of
>     > their history where some of their family members might have lost
>     their
>     > lives.
>
>     Not sure if you caught my last name but....whatever.  If I had
>     family members that were burned to death I wouldn't call you
>     inconsiderate for having a campfire.
>
>
>     > So by this rhetoric flourish of yours, you're intentionally
>     making people
>     > feel bad by bringing bad hard memories.
>
>     That was a poetic.  Eliot!  Where's Eliot?  There is a poet over
>     here!
>     If calling you a poet stirs up any hard memories, well, idk, I
>     guess that's poetic justice.
>
>
>
>     > There's no way that repeating this
>     > drink name six times helps make your point that Dan Harkins
>     should be
>     > allowed to post on a mailing list.
>
>     No no, that's not true.  The repitition is to help you remember.
>      Remember how ridiculous this whole thing is.
>
>
>
>     > So yes, your email is problematic.
>
>     There you go again with the labels.  Did you know that by labeling
>     something you make it exclusive?  And being exclusive is not very
>     inclusive.
>
>
>     > In the future, please attempt to make you points without
>     intentional being rude,
>     > disrespectful, or belittling. You'll find that people will
>     listen to you
>     > more.
>
>
>     How did I do this time?
>
>
>
>     [1]
>     https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/terminology/?q=dschinazi.ietf%40gmail.com
>
>     -- 
>     last-call mailing list
>     last-call@ietf.org
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
>
>

-- 
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to
escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius