On 8/13/2020 9:08 AM, Nadim Kobeissi
wrote:
RFC 3005 mentions that the following topics determine what constitute inappropriate postings to the mailing list:
- Unsolicited bulk e-mail
- Discussion of subjects unrelated to IETF policy, meetings,
activities, or technical concerns
- Unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject
- Announcements of conferences, events, or activities that are not
sponsored or endorsed by the Internet Society or IETF.
The discussion on terminology falls into none of the above categories. In contrast, the following is listed clearly as an appropriate topic of discussion:
- Discussion of IETF administrative policies
The discussion of a proposal to revise the fundamental language, even into the past, used by the IETF due to political and ideological reasons espoused by some IETF members in the United States seems like a pretty important IETF administrative policy issue.
I would appreciate it if the Chair would directly address the above point and explain how 3005 applies to the discussion rather than threatening a PR.
I will also note that
from RFC 7776 which deals with harassment could apply to the Chair's threats of PR actions. I don't think there's any precedent for the IETF management shutting off a discussion they caused by threatening mass posting restrictions.This document concerns itself with harassment that has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's participation in IETF activities or of creating an environment within the IETF that would be intimidating, hostile, or offensive in such a situation. One way in which harassment can occur is when submission to such conduct is made, either explicitly or implicitly, a term or condition of an individual's participation in IETF activities or is used as a basis for decisions affecting that individual's relationship to the IETF.
To be clear - I find the discussion tiresome and wish it would go away, but I find it difficult to twist the 3005 language to apply to this discussion.
Mike
