> On Jul 17, 2019, at 09:43, Nick Hilliard <nick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I know of many people in the operational community who either don't contribute or who no longer contribute to IETF discussions because of perceived hostility. > Is that because of perceived hostility in tone or maybe because of perceived > hostility towards their ideas (i.e., IETF is going to ignore their points > anyway)? Speaking from my perspective as an apps area person - other areas may be different - it used to be the latter, now it's the former. There was a fairly long period where the IETF was openly hostile to work on new application protocols. And by "hostile" I mean direct accusations of ill intent both in email and at F2F meetings. (In one especially egregious case I ended up with the proponent of a particular piece of work literally on my doorstep because of the treatment they received.) The result is quite a lot of work was done elsewhere. And I have no doubt that memories of this behavior linger in some circles, to the IETF's detriment. I haven't seen this happen recently - at least not in email or in the streamed sessions I've watched. (I no longer attend F2F meetings, so maybe it's still happening there, just behind the scenes.) People seem more generally receptive to new ideas these days, and I've seen numerous instances where people have gone out of their way to be encouraging to work that is interesting but has serious flaws that need to be addressed before it can possibly be viable. But there absolutely has been a rise in tone policing. And since it adds cost to communications - both having to perform additional scrutiny of what is said as well as the risk of having something, no matter how well vetted, be taken the wrong way - in my case at least has led to my no longer bothering to provide technical commentary on minor points. And while I have no proof, nor any way to get any proof, I rather suspect I'm not alone in this. Ned
