IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Terminology] offensive terminology draft progressing on independent stream

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Sat, 28 August 2021 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@lear.ch>
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 5132E3A152E; Sat, 28 Aug 2021 07:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.891
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=lear.ch
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 p6AJ-xz3EhhH; Sat, 28 Aug 2021 07:49:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (upstairs.ofcourseimright.com [185.32.222.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A58CD3A1533; Sat, 28 Aug 2021 07:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:aa15:4101:2a80:5415:988f:5d70:6f2d] ([IPv6:2a02:aa15:4101:2a80:5415:988f:5d70:6f2d]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 17SEnW6g041624 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 28 Aug 2021 16:49:33 +0200
Authentication-Results: upstairs.ofcourseimright.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lear.ch
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lear.ch; s=upstairs; t=1630162173; bh=f4Jc8cNpJOWSC1D5MfMtqpyrP1bhekH1uZBpD7sWDTg=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=fLUGfh5jaFNfHPy7X2VGsaVW0HF5N9DyofP94ZSlFQ85gsg0zLZStlD7zl4yKi4X/ KkLmH2a923BbbIlQlxKueXr3KHrN9h2JXGYILayL0+5uJbBMj81LDlzHWxcCArU0Sd kS17VoWh062j2X+o2O8h7nyaeBPuPAjYMBe0il3k=
To: ned+terminology@mrochek.com, Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
Cc: "terminology@ietf.org" <terminology@ietf.org>, Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=40open-xchange.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "'Salz, Rich'" <rsalz@akamai.com>
References: <94194463.1597269.1630036678075.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <94194463.1597269.1630036678075@mail.yahoo.com> <702578c5-8068-4f6b-75ca-fe58d1bcf758@gmail.com> <75059653.22122.1630053646465@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com> <bd39906c-df90-6fa3-b391-7567dfb18141@lounge.org> <01S34PRKZ51W00D1OX@mauve.mrochek.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
Message-ID: <6cb09f59-823e-f01d-9976-77ece1ae7c6b@lear.ch>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 16:49:30 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <01S34PRKZ51W00D1OX@mauve.mrochek.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vChpHqXjvxms7RT4q6XXEy0pLgyAjCQk7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/U1IWJXLqul18QuF-0crWXuqs3xY>
Subject: Re: [Terminology] offensive terminology draft progressing on independent stream
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: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 14:49:47 -0000

You guys do realize you have to direct your comments to the ISE?

On 28.08.21 16:29, ned+terminology@mrochek.com wrote:
> +1 to what Dan Harkins said. There are additional issues with this
> draft, but the ones he pointed out are more than sufficient.
>
> 				Ned
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email