On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 12:59 PM John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
--On Sunday, 02 October, 2022 14:31 +1100 Lloyd W
<lloyd.wood=40yahoo.co.uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 2022, at 00:57, Rob Sayre <sayrer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Fully agree. I have a list of people I mute, and that works
>> for me.
>
> Maybe the IESG, IAB, wg chairs and other responsible people
> should compare notes on who they're each muting and filtering
> - and why.
Lloyd, I suggest that, if that group of people, but especially
the IESG, start muting those whose messages they don't like
--for any reason-- we go rapidly down the slippery slope toward
having no opinions count that don't agree with the preferences
of those in "the leadership". There may well be extreme cases,
but that is what all of the other mechanisms that have been
discussed, ultimately leading up to BCP 83, are about.
Otherwise and independent of the wishes of the allegedly
problematic author, the rest of us need to have the right to
presume that the IESG (in particular) is hearing the voices of
everyone in the community who might be expressing an opinion
about a matter relevant to the IETF.
If that sounds like I think a certain amount of abuse-tolerance
goes with those roles when people volunteer for them _and_ that
Nomcoms should consider observed low tolerance for criticism as
disqualifying for AD (and some other) roles), well, yes.
What decisions you, Rob, or myself might make about who or what
to filter; messages we do or do not care to read carefully and
in their entirity; etc., is another matter entirely: none of us
have the responsibility to evaluate community consensus and do
that fairly.
And, again, if their perception is that the abuse and/or
disruption level has gotten high enough that neither they nor
anyone else should need to put up with more of it, that is what
BCP 83 is about.
+1
One of the dynamics that comes up time and again is people are unable to distinguish objections to their work from attacks on themselves and respond in kind.
Sometimes the reason someone is upset is because they are being treated badly. One of the very common techniques used by a bully is to deliberately provoke someone so that they can complain about their bad behavior.
That is not the issue with Dan's inputs. He is captive to a political ideology and world view that is antithetical to the objective of creating an Internet that is for everyone. And he is actively disrupting our work to prevent that objective being realized.
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
