Nick Hilliard <nick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The onus is on the IETF to engage in a civil and reasonable way,
> with clearly thought-through arguments on points of disagreement.
Well, that is kind of why these arguments go in a bad direction, right?
Usually these issues are raised with a sense of entitlement. For example, some participants think the IETF must adjust its specifications to accommodate the laws of their country, but I don't think they would stick up for Kazakhstan in the same way [0].
I am a US citizen. Some of the UK or EU laws are good in my opinion, but some are not. For example, the web is littered with cookie dialogs from the EU Cookie Directive, to the point that it is a feature[1] to hide them.
I do not think the onus is on the IETF here. Input from anyone is welcome, of course.
thanks,
Rob
