In article <028eaeaf25c24469bd1add1b5cbc4554@xxxxxxx> you write: >-=-=-=-=-=- >Hi Victor, >I think I may not have described what I was suggesting clearly enough. I wasn’t proposing any fixed (i.e., >MANDATORY or MUST) rules. I was trying to avoid problems caused by the perception that people inside IETF would >be identifying what words were problematic (using their own subjective criteria, and where the decision makers >are not members of the demographics perceived to be slighted by the words), and that use of these words would be >strictly prohibited. ... Unfortunately, that's much too simplistic. There are lots of words where the context is crucial. To take a familiar example, Master is a problem in the sense of someone who owns a slave, but not in the sense of someone who knows all about a topic. My daughter got a Master of Arts degree this year and I don't expect her to give it back. Certainly some words we should never use at all, like **** and !*%&# but we never use them in I-D's anyway. R's, John PS: Then there's words like "niggardly."
