Interesting. Like Tim, I've reached the
opposite conclusion.
Dan's behavior in this thread has made
me far more confident in my position that the PR action should
proceed. While there are numerous examples of Dan's messages I
could cite from this thread alone that I think cross the
line of professional behavior by a fairly incontrovertible margin,
I find this one in particular to be egregious and well beyond
excuse:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/T5eI486VJVnaLxoq3rSDygHudhk/
I'm absolutely floored that Dan not
only failed to see how his initial email implying that Lloyd
should seek a professional medical opinion on whether Lloyd is
suffering from dementia was vastly inappropriate, but that Dan
went so far as to double down on his recommendation so as to
compound the initial ad hominem attack.
In an ideal situation, we might rely on
Dan to moderate his own behavior. But if Dan can't even see how
these kinds of ad hominems are inappropriate, I'm not sure how we
might have any hope of him stopping himself from committing them
in the future.
/a
On 10/26/2022 11:25 PM, Brian E
Carpenter wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to change my position on this. In a recent message, Dan acknowledges that using sarcasm or satire is problematic:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/-8qnygF1ywCc3nQAWg0jGCEtLdo/
To my mind, given that Dan has been a significant technical contributor over many years, that is really all the community can ask for. I don't think the IETF would gain anything at this point by applying a PR Action, and would possibly lose future significant technical contributions.
Regards
Brian Carpenter
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
