Dave and all,
Dave Aronson wrote:
> On Mon March 15 2004 23:19, Jeff Williams wrote:
> > Dave Aronson wrote:
> > > Jeff Williams wrote (though I get the impression he's summarizing
> > > other people's objections, not raising them himself, as he then
> > > answers them):
> >
> > I sure did, and for what should have been an obvious reason. It
> > seems in your case Dave, what is plainly obvious escapes you. That
> > is indeed a sad commentary on the IETF...
>
> Well excuuuuuuuuuse... meeeeee!!! B-P Your diatribe that I responded
> to, was the first appearance of this thread on the IETF list, at least
> according to my trash-folder.
No excuse Dave as this thread originated on the DNSO GA forum,
and your previous response did a disservice to others on that forum by
you removing ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx from the recipients of that forum.
> Looks like you crossposted it. If you
> don't want our input, then don't bother us.
I "CC'ed" IETF@xxxxxxxx because my response included the
IETF by name. Hence it would have been rude and irresponsible
not to ensure those IETF members on the main IETF forum the
opportunity to respond/remark and/or contribute. If doing so is
offensive to you in particular Dave, you have my empathy...
However being one that is and has always been interested in,
and supportive of inclusiveness, reasonable transparency as well
as a long time IETF participant, it seemed reasonable and prudent
that I am interested in my fellow IETF participants... So "us"
is inclusive of you and I, Dave... >;)
>
>
> > > 1) The people at the UN are, generally speaking, career
> > > diplomats. Knowing foreign languages and cultures is part of their
> > > way of life.
> >
> > This is true in some UN agencies, and certainly not in others as
> > several are almost entirely volunteers...
>
> Fair enough. I was speaking mainly of the General Assembly delegates,
> though they are a minority of the entirety of UN employees, observers,
> etc.
Well sorry again Dave, but you are still mistaken. Most of the UN
General Assembly delegates are english speakers and all while in
the general assembly meetings have real time translation capability
both ways...
> Even regarding the others, the UN's entire point is international
> cooperation for basically its own sake (even if specific agencies have
> more specific missions). It seems obvious to me that they will be more
> often people who have an interest in foreign languages, than will most
> other groups, even those that operate internationally.
You MAY have a good point here I will grant you. But it is a
speculative point at least...
>
>
> > > Even if they do not know the particular language someone else is
> > > speaking in, they should at least be basically familiar with the
> > > most popular languages of the world.
> >
> > Agreed as should most IETF'ers or ICANN'ers as they espouse to
> > be an international organization.
>
> I suspect that many, if not most, of us would still be here even if the
> network were only available in our own respective nations. (Though
> admittedly, it would then be less useful, especially to the smaller
> nations.) That it lets me also communicate with the other side of the
> world is great, but frankly, the vast majority of the people I
> communicate with via the Internet, live here in the US. So, the
> international aspect of it is not as important *to me* (I won't presume
> to speak for anyone else), as (I ass-u-me) the UN's is to its people.
> Again, recall that the international aspect is basically the entire
> point of the UN....
Also mostly agreed here too. However as the UN is and has been
less than well respected on an international basis for various reasons
based on repeated errors in judgment and subsequent action they
as a international body, hardly are representative in any superior
way to many other international bodies that are not UN related...
>
>
> > So Erick in this instance should
> > have been easily to be able to provide an english translation as
> > would be in keeping with good manners. However he did not...
>
> Whatever. Remember, the IETF list did not get the background messages
> to which you refer.
True the ietf@xxxxxxxx forum didn't get the background messages because
the IETF was not mentioned..
>
>
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders
> > strong!) "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from
> > others" - Pierre Abelard
>
> "Be conservative in what you send, and liberal in what you accept."
> -Popular paraphrasing of Jon Postel from RFC 791 (Internet Protocol)
>
> --
> Dave Aronson, Senior Software Engineer, Secure Software Inc.
> Email me at: work (D0T) 2004 (@T) dja (D0T) mailme (D0T) org
> (Opinions above NOT those of securesw.com unless so stated!)
> WE'RE HIRING developers, auditors, and VP of Prof. Services.
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827