DKIM colleagues, You all know that the DKIM discussions have sometimes been contentious, and some participants have gotten hot under the collar. We note that that's been particularly true recently, and we'd like everyone to take a step back and remind themselves of a few things:
1. The purpose of this forum is for people to get together and discuss the development of standards, with the aim of forming consensus. That doesn't mean that everyone will agree on everything, and consensus may be with you on some points, and against you on others. 2. It helps neither the formation of consensus nor our individual reputations to be impolite, abrasive, sarcastic, derisive, belittling, or otherwise snarky. We all try to be somewhat tolerant of the occasional bit of snark, but it should be rare -- the group should not be expected to accept it as normal discourse. 3. We make progress when arguments give technical points for or against an issue. We don't make progress by exaggerating, oversimplifying, or otherwise mischaracterizing others' positions, by name-calling, by "Is not!"/"Is so!" bickering, and so on. Messages that are essentially content-free apart from saying, "You're wrong," are not useful. Messages that say, "You don't know what you're talking about," or the like, cross the line of acceptability. Please keep these points in mind when you participate in this -- and in any other IETF -- working group. Every time you post, ask yourself what your post does to further the discussion. And look at what you're saying, and ask yourself whether you'd be annoyed if someone said that about you. Make sure your messages are polite, respectful, and useful, even if you feel angry or upset. A word on the mischaracterization: If you attribute a point of view to someone else, make sure what you say is an accurate rendering of his position, erring on the side of caution. It's always OK to ask, "I understand you to be advocating [X]. Is that correct?" We need to understand each other's positions clearly. As an example, it's fair to say, "John says that we should not publish signing policies at all. I think he's wrong because [of these clear arguments]." John has made his position on that clear, and it can be addressed directly. It's not fair to say, for example, "John would allow the phishers to rob us blind because he won't let us protect ourselves." That's the sort of thing we mean by "mischaracterizing". It's important, as we move the working group into its next phase, whatever we decide that phase to be, that we all keep the discussion reasonable. We will not be as tolerant of impoliteness as we have been. Everyone should be aware that from this point on, unnecessarily abrasive posts, things that violate respectful discourse, will be subject to administrative action. That may include suspension of the right to post to this mailing list. Everyone here has given useful input to this working group. We would like to see everyone continue to. Thanks for your contributions, and for your cooperation. Stephen and Barry, as chairs --------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html