RE: What's going on with the IETF.

["Gorman, Pierce" <Pierce.Gorman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you for the erudite lecture. I am humbled. For thousands of years it has been the prerogative of kings and cultures to destroy offensive information from the past. In honor of your effort to eliminate communication which offends, I urge that my e-mails deploring excessive useless discussion be deleted, including this one.

 

From: Lloyd W <lloyd.wood@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 7:28 AM
To: Gorman, Pierce <Pierce.Gorman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: What's going on with the IETF.

 

[External]

 

 

On 10 Sep 2021, at 08:53, Gorman, Pierce <Pierce.Gorman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Sorry.  I apologize for being abstruse.  I was attempting to inject humor but failed.  There is a saying, "It does no good to flog (i.e., beat) a dead horse".  It refers to the futility of whipping a dead horse because no further work can be gotten out of the animal.  Sometimes the saying is used to indicate a topic has been exhaustively discussed and further discussion will not result in useful work being accomplished.

 

Flogging a dead horse is intersectionally:

 

violent - an act of beating

ableist - presuming an actor who is physically capable of flogging

sadistic - the flogging may have killed the horse

performative - the act of horsewhipping is primarily to be observed. not by the horse.

historical - horses are no longer widespread workers.

English - this particular local idiom does not translate well internationally.

Artistic - see the Chapman brothers.

equestrian - see the horse.

speciesist - why, in particular, a horse?

targetive - again, the horse.

exclusionary - see ableist, speciesist and English.

praxis - for too long, this has been accepted.

pointless - it's a dead horse.

this tired metaphor is clearly legacy offensive terminology that should be forbidden and placed on some sort of prohibited list.

 

Lloyd Wood

 

http://lloydwood.users.sourceforge.net/Personal/L.Wood/publications/internet-drafts/draft-wood-term-modest-proposal/

 

if you're going to fail at injecting humour, fail hard. Commit.

 

Pierce

-----Original Message-----
From: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 5:37 PM
To: Gorman, Pierce <Pierce.Gorman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Scott Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: What's going on with the IETF.

[External]


Which draft you are talking about ?

Khaled Omar

-----Original Message-----
From: Gorman, Pierce [mailto:Pierce.Gorman@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 12:09 AM
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Scott Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: What's going on with the IETF.

IMHO the expired draft animal has been sufficiently flogged.


-----Original Message-----
From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Khaled Omar
Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 4:59 PM
To: Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Scott Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: What's going on with the IETF.

[External]


Some areas people need IPv6 and ISPs don't have IPv6 deployed.

Other cases, ISPs are IPv6 ready but enterprises don't need to deploy IPv6.

Khaled Omar

-----Original Message-----
From: Randall Gellens [mailto:rg+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 6:49 PM
To: Scott Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>; ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: What's going on with the IETF.

On 9 Sep 2021, at 9:47, Scott Bradner wrote:

why bother -

 

when they actually need to do something they will or they will perish

That's my point.  When they need IPv6, they'll deploy it.

--Randall