On 10/3/22 10:48, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I question the characterization of the raw materials under
consideration here as mere "varying opinions". The target of the PR
action has proudly stated that his tactics involve the use of
ridicule. I prefer the term "polemics", but either way, it's not as
simple as a difference of opinion.
I haven't seen that statement, and can't really judge it without seeing
it. I guess I think that ridicule can serve a useful purpose in
constructive dialog, but is more likely than not to be counterproductive.
But I don't think it's fair to judge such statements in the abstract,
and it's better to judge the actual statements made, while attempting to
understand the context in which those statements were made.
Keith
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
