On 21/10/2021 18:23, Eric Rescorla wrote:
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.
Eric,
Thank you. My wording was sloppy and you have clarified my intent.
Tom Petch
-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
