On 10/2/22 4:02 PM, Eric Rescorla
wrote:
On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 3:49 PM Adam Roach <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But in many ways, none of that is really applicable here. Once we reach
a point that someone's reaction to the Executive Director of the IETF
asking for community input on in-person meetings is to respond with a
hostile mini-rant about a tenuously related tweet that he found
elsewhere,Not that it actually changes the situation, but as it happens, the
mini-rant in question arguably misrepresents, the tweet, whichreads:
.@MaraGay "Masking remains an act of solidarity & respect for
vulnerable people, that includes people w/ disabilities, w/ chronic
conditions like asthma, as well as for hard-hit communities like
native & black communities especially, Hispanic communities"
In the email you are referring to, this was characterized as:
Well the other thing to keep in mind about masking is that "it remains an
act of solidarity & respect" for... BIPOC (natch).
I don't think it's really necessary to unpack this, but suffice
to say, this doesn't seem like a particularly good-faith reading
of the tweet in question (whether you agree with said tweet or
not).
OK Eric, what was bad-faith in that characterization? She was
including black, indigenous, and hispanic communties in her
listing of "vulnerable people" . Is that not BIPOC?
Dan.
-- "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
