I agree with you totally. I will add that the problem is that IETF says that all inputs are IETF contributions, so if one disrespect input from one known participant to a newcomer or from minority, and others majority including managers don't stop that disrespect, I will conclude that IETF is possibly a disrespecting organisation or unsocial organisation.
AB
On Saturday, March 8, 2014, Stewart Bryant wrote:
On Saturday, March 8, 2014, Stewart Bryant wrote:
I am concerned that in the recent IETF discussion of interpersonal
dynamics, insufficient consideration has been given to the innate
personal characteristics of individuals that participate in the
IETF process.
Using the Myers-Briggs characterization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator
members of the 16 types can have difficulty understanding
arguments presented by another type. The nature of MBI-type
induced misunderstanding has been subjected considerable
research by the social scientists and is well documented. There
is a danger that the normal deduction of one MBI-type will not
be followed by another, and in the absence of an understanding
of that thought process, it might be assumed that an ad hominem
has been presented in place of an argument.
Whilst, of course, people have a right to be treated with respect
at all times, the IETF needs to be careful that consideration is given
to the personality types of those that take part and that it does not
institutionally prevent any MBI-type legitimately contributing to
discussion.
In the recent discussions that have taken place in the IETF on matters
related to social interaction, I have developed concerns that the
IETF is at risk of taking decisions outside its core competence.
In matters of organizational design and the creation of rules
that relate to interpersonal interaction, the IETF should, in my
view, be seeking wider professional input from those qualified
in the social and organizational sciences.
Stewart