Dear colleagues, Though I am employed by the Internet Society, in this case I do not speak for it. On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 10:02:40AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > happened. And it seems abundantly clear that many people are > unwilling to admit that perhaps "mistakes were made", and that in > fact, perhaps we *should* improve. I don't find that "abundantly clear" at all. What I have seen in this quite large volume of mail are several different reactions, many of which seem to me to be suggesting that the outcome was (in more than one dimension) less than everything one might have hoped, which is the same thing as people admitting that mistakes were made. I think there may be differences of opinion about what the right path would have been, but that does not mean that people are not conceding that, whatever else is the case, the current state of affairs is not ideal. In my opinion, some of the people who have been involved in this dicussion have been pretty aggressive about their positions, and I think that there have been several posts in the thread where, if people were working anywhere in a management chain where I have responsibility, I would be taking them aside for some discussion about constructive approaches. I don't think it discourages discussion to point out that such aggressiveness may tend to drive people to avoid expressing their opinions. Whereas we have plenty of evidence that highly aggressive styles of communication _do_ tend to discourage discussion. (And I recognize that I am one who is sometimes guilty of that transgression.) Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
