> On 14 Oct 2022, at 15:18, Masataka Ohta <mohta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Jay Daley wrote: > >>> 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. > > I agree with you, Excellent. > though it requires us to *seriously* review > their proposals even if the review recognizes some proposals > are poor. Then, we are required to state "poor", if we must > respect "their contribution". "poor" doesn’t explain anything, it is simply a subjective summary of a set of specific observed problems. In my view, subjective summaries like this are unhelpful, particularly if they are presented without the underlying observed problems. The best result is achieved when those observed problems are presented without a summary. I have often seen examples where some people regard something as "poor" because it has ten things wrong with it while others regard it as "good" because it has ten things right with it. By using the subjective summaries of "poor" and "good" in that situation the two groups are worlds apart, but by sticking to the details they are much closer. > > So, what is required for the respect is serious review, not > always resulting positively. Respect =/= positivity, and I don’t think anyone is claiming that it does. > > Anyway, can we agree that we can disrespect poor results, after > the work has finished. No, we can’t. I don’t think we should disrespect and I don’t think we should use subjective summaries in this way. If summaries are to be used then ideally they would be objective, for example "there are X listed issues with this". If someone has to give a subjective summary then it works so much better if they own it as their opinion and do not claim it is an objective fact, for example "I do not like X" or "X is not how I would have done it" rather than "X is poor". Jay -- Jay Daley IETF Executive Director exec-director@xxxxxxxx
