> On 13 Oct 2022, at 09:22, Masataka Ohta <mohta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Toerless Eckert wrote: > >> Since the last last time you mention, AFAIK, there has been a lot more focus >> on language in the IETF including inclusive language which made every RFC author >> more involved in considerations about language by being called out on it by >> RFC editor. > > As for difficulties with inclusive language, see, for example: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/szfzLAbV9EmQ7kmz3HGfaLkLhT0/ > > As such, insisting on inclusive language with your own idea > on "inclusive" is rather a problem to be corrected, not a > good practice to be followed, I think. > >> Likewise we have BCP 83 PR action going on. > > The following statement in rfc9245 (part of BCP 83) > > Uncivil commentary, regardless of the general subject, per > the IETF Note Well [NOTE-WELL] > > and the following statement in [NOTE-WELL] > > As a participant or attendee, you agree to work respectfully > with other participants; > > certainly prohibit personal attacks but not beyond, which means > nothing has changed for decades. "Working respectfully with other participants" does not just prohibit personal attacks, it also means respecting their effort, their contribution and their motives. As many others have already stated, it is perfectly possible to disagree with something while maintaining that respect. Jay > > Masataka Ohta > -- Jay Daley IETF Executive Director exec-director@xxxxxxxx
