Re: Censorship? Yes. Was: Re: A silly policy....

Bob Stewart <rlstewart@eng.xyplex.com> Sat, 08 May 1993 18:06 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03300; 8 May 93 14:06 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03296; 8 May 93 14:06 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12926; 8 May 93 14:06 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03286; 8 May 93 14:06 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03282; 8 May 93 14:06 EDT
Received: from xap.xyplex.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12921; 8 May 93 14:06 EDT
Received: by xap.xyplex.com id <AA28484@xap.xyplex.com>; Sat, 8 May 93 14:39:20 -0500
Date: Sat, 8 May 93 14:39:20 -0500
Message-Id: <9305081939.AA28484@xap.xyplex.com>
X-Orig-Sender: iesg-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Bob Stewart <rlstewart@eng.xyplex.com>
To: ietf@CNRI.Reston.VA.US, iesg@CNRI.Reston.VA.US, iab@CNRI.Reston.VA.US, snmp@uu.psi.com
In-Reply-To: Karl Auerbach, Empirical Tools and Technologies, 408/427-5280's message of Fri, 7 May 93 18:15:59 PDT <9305080115.AA07073@mel-brooks.empirical.com>
Subject: Re: Censorship? Yes. Was: Re: A silly policy....

IESG, IAB, ISOC, Karl, and everybody else on this massive cross-post,

I have a lot of sympathy for Marshall's frustration and his style.  It is
often difficult to suppress the impulse for a glib or sarcastic answer.  I
have that problem myself.  It would be better if none of us did that.

Those who hold back their contributions for fear of being publically ridiculed
are clearly not confident of their opinions nor accurately observant of this
so-called public ridicule.  If the shoe fits, wear it.  If it doesn't then it
clearly isn't yours.  Pass it on or drop it in the trash.  The so-called
ridicule is typically a response to what appears to be the same old bad idea,
misunderstanding, or circular argument, and is the exception even then.  If
you have been unfairly "ridiculed", defend yourself with reason and maturity.

If Marshall or I or anyone else treats you in what you believe is a shabby
way, say so and say why.  I've yet to see anyone in our technical leadership
who will not respond reasonably to a compelling technical argument or an
expression of hurt feelings.  Resorting to "you called me names so I won't
play" is just as childish as name calling.

The SNMPv2 Gang of Four, the Network Management Directorate, and I are not a
bunch of in-grown, incestuous conspiritors, enriching ourselves at the expense
of the community and the weak and downtrodden.  We're a loose collection of
experienced engineers who've fallen together, do not always agree among
ourselves, and who are struggling to keep something relatively simple and
effective in an environment that increasingly sacrifices technical quality for
political correctness, warm feelings of cooperation, and wishing reality
could be otherwise.  Remember "engineers," those nerdy types that are much
more comfortable with machines than people, and who often behave in ways that
offend polite society.  Well that's what we tend to be.  Engineer-diplomats
are real hard to find.  We don't have enough good designers, much less
diplomats, too.  Can we give each other a break and try to keep it technical?

The hardest part of chairing the SNMPv2 working group was not the technical
part.  It was trying to be fair, make real progress, not screw up, and keep
from telling people to go away and let us work.

	Bob