Re: Notification to list from IETF Moderators team

[Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Aug 24, 2022, at 12:54, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

But the reason that I think that IETF is not a good use of my time isn't that "unprofessional" or "rude" people have been getting in the way of progress.

I believe they have been and are. As part of the newcomers participation, we hear that the hostility displayed is definitely a concern and leads to people to at least be reluctant to come back.

Speaking for myself, I am not subscribed to this list for the same reason, the insulting rude behaviour vs useful content is too much for me. (I am looking at this list now only because of being pointed to it as an IESG member)

   It's that too many people seem to feel entitled to suppress the inputs of those with whom they disagree, using any excuse whatsoever other than a technical argument, or maybe no excuse at all, or any means at their disposal.

I have not seen this happen. I are you saying these valuable contributors have been silenced because they couldn’t rephrase their technical content in emails without the word  “stupid” in it? Part of working with a diverse group on protocols is being good at communicating, in writing drafts but also in interacting with others in a positive and constructive way. 

   If they can discredit someone as being "rude" or "unprofessional", or "naive", or belittle or discredit them in any way, they'll do that. 

This is quite the accusation to “they”. 

  They'll do anything except argue the issues on technical merits.

Again, quite the accusation to “they”.

And that's the reason I started calling out people's demands for "professional" behavior, because I'd seen too many occasions when that demand was used as an excuse to distract from technical discussion rather than contribute to it.

So far, I have seen none.

Again, personally until I joined the IESG, I had some of these “rude” people in my /dev/null redirection, so your assumption that rude people should be allowed to be rude for technical merit still seems to fall short - there is a higher chance of their merit being heard if they are in fact, not insulting individuals or groups.

And the organization treats those people as if they're entirely legitimate, even promoting some of them to positions of leadership.  

Could it be that you are in fact in the rough of rough consensus, and that people who promote inclusiveness and professional behaviour are in fact the kind of people that our organization wants to see in leadership roles?

There's nothing "civil" about their behavior at all.

Again, quite the unsubstantiated accusation in response to an issue where all the contributor had to do was restate their technical point without insulting or accusing individuals or certain groups ?

Paul (speaking only as individual)