On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:13 AM Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 21, 2021, at 11:30, tom petch <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 21/10/2021 15:44, Christian Huitema wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/20/2021 1:56 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
>>> I do wish we would retire the term SAA. It’s unnecessarily
>>> militaristic (possibly due to English not being my native language)
>>> and seems like a silly workaround for avoiding the commonly used term
>>> “moderator”.
>>
>> +1.
>
> To me this is an unmoderated list
But it is not. It is moderated. For example to enforce our harassment policies. there is no constraint of topics, but that is not the same as not moderated.
Yes.
It's important to distinguish between two senses of the word moderated:
- There is a moderator who is empowered to enforce certain policies
- There is a moderator who must approve every posting.
People often use "moderated" to mean the second (and some of our tooling kind of encourages that usage) but the IETF list has the first.
-Ekr
-Ekr
-Ekr
> and so another term, like SAA, is a more appropriate one. Quaint, may be, but seems in keeping with the modus operandi of the IETF.
Going by an (obscure) dictionary definition that is quaint to English speaking people and oddly militaristic for non-native speakers is not taking into consideration the multiple cultural backgrounds of participants.
We can’t both claim to work on our openness and stick to long term “modus operandi”
Which is why I am suggesting a change.
Paul
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
