Thanks Paul. Well, said.
Despite the long history of the IETF discussion list being awful, I've
felt an obligation to stay on it. However, it has now become so bad
that I can longer do so.
I would like to thank the IESG for creating the last call list so
that it is still possible to participate in the business of the IETF
without being part of this toxic environment. I'll see you there
and in the WGs.
-Ekr
Despite the long history of the IETF discussion list being awful, I've
felt an obligation to stay on it. However, it has now become so bad
that I can longer do so.
I would like to thank the IESG for creating the last call list so
that it is still possible to participate in the business of the IETF
without being part of this toxic environment. I'll see you there
and in the WGs.
-Ekr
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 8:38 PM Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 13, 2020, at 23:26, IETF Chair <chair@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> It’s clear from the list traffic today that the process described in my message below is unworkable because the interpretation of "substantive message on this same topic” is subjective rather than objective. My apologies for the mistake. I’ve asked the secretariat to unblock the three threads listed below and restore Nadim Kobeissi’s posting privileges. Given time zones, I expect these changes will not take effect until Friday.
Thanks for the message and the warning.
The last few hours has seen a lot more toxic discussions from people who feel that they must be able to say anything “because freedom”..
Unfortunately that is exactly the behaviour that was the source of the problems with this thread.
I do not want to be on such a toxic list, even more so now that as a result of this IETF Chair action reversal, those people are further emboldened in their Abu’s I’ve behaviour.
I am now unsubscribing from the list.
Paul
