On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 3:41 AM Masataka Ohta <mohta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jay Daley wrote:
>>> "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,
>
I don't agree to respect the funny RFCs which are issued in April a waste of time and effort, I will not call it any word that makes me out of the list but it is very strange that some participants say it is IETF culture, which I don't seem to know if IETF have defined what is its culture or defining motives for such funny-RFCs. So I don't respect those RFCs because it does not title that it is a joke or drama,
The reader needs to be respected, so the technology-producer, or document-producer needs to respect/understand the Reader's interests, without making him feel bad. I discussed about this before, but maybe time will help,
> Excellent.
And our traditional phrase used for people who lack such
respect has been "Read the draft."
With the phrase, we have been doing very well to
respect each other.
> "poor" doesn’t explain anything,
Then, "uncivil" does not, either.
Maybe better to say non-communicative or non-social, the words we use to argue needs to be helping the progress-communication among the participant, or between the Technology-Producer and the Technology-Consumer, or between the RFC-Writer and RFC-Reader.
Usually Readers and Consumers get Angry, because the thing they used was not the way they thought it was so they get to call it bad words, then the other side gets Angry too, we (or our good managers) should make sure to know who is doing wrong, and not looking at words only, but looking at ALL the IETF-production-output and IETF-input related to that problem situation/environment.
AB
Masataka Ohta
