On 6/19/2013 8:08 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 6/19/13 8:32 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 6/19/2013 5:35 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
There is a real problem with accountability and transparency in the IETF
constitution which was designed by a bunch of old boys to maintain
control in their own hands. Peter is a member of the IETF establishment
so of course he sees no structural problem.
PSA's been an AD, yes, but:
Forgive me, but you just responded to a rather unpleasant ad hominem.
We should not sustain such threads.
...
My apologies for the extremely egregious manner in which I stated the
point. It was not directed personally at Mr. Hallam-Baker, but at all of
us who talk and don't take action -- myself very much included.
oh dear. /my/ apologies for being unclear. I didn't mean that /your/
posting was an ad hominem, but that you were responding to one.
Your own point is fine and constructive. Worthy thought. Worth
pursuing. Offered independently it would have been dandy.
My point is that we need to stop tolerating ad hominem content and that
starts by not responding to it. Posting a reply -- even one that
ignores the offensive content -- constitutes tolerance for the behavior.
The view that we should be resilient against such behavior is long past
its time. We should, instead, demand professional demeanor, and that
means shunning behavior that attacks people and their motives.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net