Re: [sidr] adverse actions -01 posted

On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> wrote:

> Randy
>
>> Tim offered no suggestion for a different term, which is not helpful.
>>>>>
>>>> the suggestion was "unwanted".
>>>>
>>> I reread Tim's message; I don't interpret it as having suggested
>>> "unwanted" as an alternative.
>>>
>> that is clear.  others, such as matthias and i, did.  but this is not
>> productive.
>>
>> to be clear, i hereby suggest s/adverse/unwanted/
>>
> I will process your suggestion in the same spirit that you continue to
> ignore my comments about revising the folksy language in the LTA use cases
> document.
>
> The term "adverse" is appropriate here.
>
>
The discussion here seems to be about (though I haven't seen this word
used) connotations attached to 'adverse'.  'by the english definition'
 adverse may be correct. It may be worth using 'unwanted' though to avoid
the connotations associated with 'adverse' ?

Is the point here that occasionally a parent my ask you to eat your peas,
while you don't enjoy that thought?

> Contrary to Tim's assertion, it does not imply, ".. that for conscious
> actions by a parent CA against the will by a child CA, the parent is
> "wrong" and the child is "right."
>
> "unwanted" is a wimpy term that fails to convey the fact that the actions
> have a negative impact on the INR holder.
>
> Steve
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>