IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Terminology] [Gendispatch] WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)

Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> Sun, 25 April 2021 03:39 UTC

Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
X-Original-To: terminology@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: terminology@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053C43A2CB1; Sat, 24 Apr 2021 20:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 HzmqcNsSt5yz; Sat, 24 Apr 2021 20:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D2543A2CB0; Sat, 24 Apr 2021 20:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D96E29DD4B; Sat, 24 Apr 2021 22:39:28 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OXWSDnWO91iR; Sat, 24 Apr 2021 22:39:25 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [172.16.1.27] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 19273E29DD14; Sat, 24 Apr 2021 22:39:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: terminology@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2021 22:39:23 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5795)
Message-ID: <14001D13-CBFA-4A5A-9F15-933D02BFC6D5@episteme.net>
In-Reply-To: <219fd089-1d7c-88f9-c3c6-80872fd86319@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <161918836800.7390.6996403788262551415@ietfa.amsl.com> <2563B42A-20A4-4A9F-B9CA-518A72A0A095@eggert.org> <219fd089-1d7c-88f9-c3c6-80872fd86319@cs.tcd.ie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; markup="markdown"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/7jEpU0PfmZmtmqy4h1_JtxgACd0>
Subject: Re: [Terminology] [Gendispatch] WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)
X-BeenThere: terminology@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents <terminology.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/terminology>, <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/terminology/>
List-Post: <mailto:terminology@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/terminology>, <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 03:39:35 -0000

[Chair hat]

I'd really appreciate if people would remove gendispatch from the Cc 
line (or at least move it to a Bcc) unless you really think gendispatch 
needs to be part of this discussion. The TERM charter is not a 
gendispatch topic.

Cheers,

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email