On 10/4/22 9:19 PM, Christian Huitema wrote:
I looked at Dan's posts listed in the last call, and I find a mix of
reasonable arguments followed by attacks, with quite a bit of
trolling. Take for example
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/i-d7HlWgrkmrVlC7JZQSXDwIJCQ/.
It argues that a word like "master key" is an established term of the
art whose origin is not tainted by racism, and that the IETF (or the
IEEE) should not attempt a systematic replacement. Whether one agrees
or not, that's a reasonable argument during a discussion of
terminology. But then, the message goes on with a rant about the
political priorities and personal ethics of the proponents of such
replacements, and the IETF can do without these kind of attacks.
What I was saying was essentially what was said here:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/XKikRaujzMZw7-tkz7WnQHbB2mk/
which is that a certain group of North Americans is patronizingly treating
other groups in the world as children. I was just a bit more direct in
identifying
said North Americans.
It can also certainly do with the kind of trolling found in
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/-On8AHrdnnCMlJOOyb1M1nlYMpk/,
in which Dan pretends to be offended by the use of the word "native"
in some computer languages.
Should we also replace "motherboards" with "birthing person boards"? :-)
And why is it bad that I pretend to be someone offended by innocuous
terminology? I'm ridiculing a ridiculous position. I understand that those
holding the ridiculous position are not happy about it but why must we
respect the ridiculous? They are trying to impose ridiculous processes on
us and "no" doesn't seem to do the trick. Neither does "hell no!". So bring
out the next weapon in the arsenal: ridicule.
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
