At 10:11 27-08-2013, Ted Lemon wrote:
But the most rude behavior that ever occurs on IETF mailing lists is
not listening. Not trying to understand what the person who is
speaking to you has said. Not trying to figure out if what they
said meaningfully contradicts your own position, and not making a
sincere effort to determine if they might be correct in
contradicting your position.
Yes.
We have seen some incredible rudeness of this type in the recent
spfbis discussion, with various supposedly smart people in our
community utterly ignoring what their opponents are saying, and
simply re-asserting their own position in a variety of ways.
I'll add the message from Scott Brim below and comment.
At 10:20 27-08-2013, Scott Brim wrote:
IMHO that's not a job for the sergeant at arms. The SAA is
responsible for how things are said. The shepherd -- or
supershepherd or whatever -- would be responsible for the substance.
The shepherd would have to request PR-action on the grounds that
there has been a BCP violation. That would cause other process
issues. The community will remain quiet and the shepherd will take the fall.
At 12:08 27-08-2013, John Leslie wrote:
I feel sorry for Ted, who _does_ have to evaluate consensus here.
Me too.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy