Dear Marc, On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 06:33:27AM -0700, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > 'Declaring yourself to be operating by "Crocker's Rules" means that > other people are allowed to optimize their messages for information, > not for being nice to you. I was not aware "Crocker's rules" exists, but I am not surprised given the variety that exists in humanity and our wild imagination. I believe "Crocker's Rules" are incompatible with the IETF process and as such notifications via IETF's communication channels about whether someone adheres to Crocker's Rules or not, don't serve a purpose. And even worse, I see potential for these rules to be harmful to our shared dreams. When person A consents to receiving communication in a specific style from person B, it doesn't mean that person C, D and E who observe the communication agreed to person's B conduct towards person A. Perhaps Crocker's Rules have value in private communication between consenting adults, but not in a public forum. We can't know how conduct in context of Crocker's affects person C, D, and E or even discourages them from participating. We have to be careful when making assumptions. I believe it is our collective duty to be cognizant and mindful of other people's perception and interpretation of the messages we sent, and we can't assume they were aware of Crocker's Rules or feel comfortable observing expressions within the framework of Crocker's Rules. I acknowledge individual people can commit themselves to attempt to take no offensive, but we - as IETF - have collectively committed ourselves to follow process outlined in documents such as rfc7154. My interpretation is there is no room for any offensive language to be submitted in the first place, even if one or more recipients have indicated they won't take offensive. Crocker's Rules are not for everyone, but the IETF is for everyone. Kind regards, Job
