On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 11:20 AM Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8/23/22 19:32, Jess Porter wrote:
> just going to try to condense this for clarity:
>
> it doesn't look like they disagreed with what Masataka said, just how they
> said it
IMO, constructive disagreement would have been far better than calling
out someone (as a warning to others?) for violating a hopelessly vague
rule about "uncivil" speech.
May be not speech but input participation. There is big difference in 1) input by voice only, or 2) input by voice with video or 3) input by words only on list.
Also there are differences of such participations, while only one input is received publicly by registered ietf-community.
I miss the days when IETF was often capable of having constructive
technical discussions, even when some participants' frustration was
evident, without the need for moderators or Tone Police.
That was in the past because it was a smaller community, but if we plan to expand we should change for best practices.
As best as I
can recall, some people were really good at responding constructively to
less-than-perfect input, and this practice had the effect of making the
community more inclusive rather than less. That's a skill we (as a
community) would do well to cultivate.
I don't think it was about skill, I think those people were usually meeting face-to-face within WG once or twice a year (knowing each other), and then they discuss on the list each week, now days most of the people discuss on the lists and never have met each other so it is not the same,
I think the moderators are very important for most participants as they are registered to such lists and receiving all input, especially when mostly they participate by input to the list only.
AB
