[TLS] Re: Changing WG Mail List Reputation

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

> On Nov 3, 2024, at 4:31 PM, Joseph Salowey <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On Oct 25, 2024, at 3:03 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 08:30:45AM -0400, Sean Turner wrote:
>> 
>>> The TLS list is infamous in that it is regarded by some as [insert
>>> your descriptive word; where the chairs have heard the following words
>>> used: noxious, toxic, unwelcoming, and rude]. The chairs want to
>>> change this reputation and we hope you do too. A big part of this is
>>> on the chairs to be be more proactive about moderating behavior that
>>> goes against IETF WG procedures, code of conduct, etc. The chairs are
>>> also going to send a monthly reminder, which is included below, that
>>> will serve to remind everyone from those who joined just today to
>>> those who joined many, many years ago of the policies and procedures
>>> that apply to IETF mailing lists.
>> 
>> One of the ways in which this WG is sometimes unwelcoming is not covered
>> by the called out unprofessional behaviour.  Rather, this list at times
>> appears to be dominated by a single browser-centric world-view, and a
>> dominant set of entrenched participants.  Perspectives from less
>> dominant sectors of the TLS user community may not always receive due
>> consideration.
>> 
>> I did not see being open to a broader set of perspectives on the list of
>> goals.  It was just the usual set of blatant violations of social norms.
>> 
> 
> Hi Viktor, 
> 
> While there is overlap between professional behavior and the perceived focus on browser specific use cases;  I think we should try to separate out the topic.  
> We should make sure that different perspectives are welcome and heard on the list, however it will not always be the case that we will have consensus to move the discussion forward on a particular topic, which will limit continued discussion of that topic. For topics that are not broadly applicable to main TLS use cases there may be more appropriate groups such as UTA or EMU. This is probably something we can address better in the TLS WG FAQ [1]. 
> 
> [1] https://github.com/tlswg/tlswg-wiki/blob/master/FAQ.md

Hi! We have updated the TLS WG FAQ:
https://github.com/tlswg/tlswg-wiki/blob/master/FAQ.md
Feel free to comment on the wiki.

Note that we are going to send two monthly reminders; one about mail list procedures and one about the FAQ.

spt