Matthew, with respect, what Adam said was also quite disrespectful, just more subtly so. Not that two wrongs make a right—they do not. But consistency is a virtue. Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 26, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Matthew A. Miller <linuxwolf+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This language is not professional or respectful, and we urge careful > consideration in future replies. Disputing one's view of events is of > course welcome; insinuation that others are speaking or acting in bad > faith is not. > > > - > IETF Sergeant at Arms > >> On 19/06/26 13:41, Michael StJohns wrote: >> Wow - just wow. >> >>> On 6/26/2019 3:29 PM, Adam Roach wrote: >>> By way of disclosure, I'll be the first to point out that I'm on both >>> the IESG and the RSOC, and so I'm going to have a certain perspective >>> on the events underway. I hope that my statements below stand on their >>> own, independently of whatever interests my position may imply. >>> >>>> On 6/26/19 10:20 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: >>>> I am claiming that some think that this situation has just occured, and it >>>> resulted in the RSE deciding to do something else rather than attempt to >>>> continue fighting against some bad thing happening. >>>> (I am not saying that I even understand what the "thing" was, or agree that >>>> it was "bad") >>> >>> >>> You or anyone else for that matter. What happened is: >>> >>> 1. We, the community, liked Heather personally >>> 2. Heather is leaving >>> 3. So we're sad [1] >>> >> What a piece of self serving revisionism. What appears to have really >> happened from the emails that have been published is: >> >> >> 1) We the RSOC like Heather personally (or so the RSOC has said repeatedly). >> >> 2) Because of this the RSOC decided we needed to recompete the RSE and >> used the excuse of needing to tweek the RFP process - said process that >> could have been delayed for almost 3 years but was considered by the >> RSOC to be of critical importantance (why?) that the RSE just did it now. >> >> 3) Because of the short time to do so the RSOC grudgingly offered to >> extend the current RSE contract through the end of 2021 and notified her >> of the intent to terminate the contract at that point. >> >> 4) At some point near the time Heather was notified, the RSOC sent a >> note to the IAB indicating (2) and (3), which Heather would have read. >> >> 5) Heather, analyzing both what has been said and not said declined the >> extension for the reasons she stated. >> >> 6) Some of us are sad, and I'm not sure of who that includes. >> >> >> >>> 1. >>> >>> >>> You're kind of pointing sideways at some conspiracy theories that >>> people have come up with to explain why #2 happened, but they're not >>> really supported by facts in evidence. This is natural: because of #3, >>> it's understandable to try to find someone to blame. But this is why >>> you're having a hard time understanding what the "thing" is: it's >>> whatever boogeyman the conspiracy theorists have chosen to invent for >>> that moment. And so it's definitely "bad", but it isn't actually "real". >>> >>> I'm not saying that all of the critical posts on this topic are wrong. >>> There are some valid points being made about the overall RFC Editor >>> model, its history, and where its future may lie; and some of these >>> are necessarily being couched as criticism. >>> >>> But there is also some poorly motivated rage being expressed based on >>> wholly fabricated assumptions, much of which seems to be impervious to >>> facts and unable to cite sources. Again, this is an understandable and >>> natural reaction to being sad, although it is far from helpful. Even >>> worse, it may harm our ability to find a suitable replacement for >>> Heather: who wants to walk into a community full of rage? >>> >>> And so I strongly encourage you -- and others -- to be wary of >>> arguments based on supposition. Share what you know and think, but >>> please don't amplify untested theories. >>> >>> /a >>> >>> ____ >>> [1] I'm using "sad" here as a proxy for a complicated maelstrom of >>> negative emotions that people seem to be undergoing at the moment. >>> There's probably an entire doctoral thesis's worth of explanation that >>> could be used to describe these emotions more accurately, but I don't >>> have the tools to do so. >>> >> >
