RE: Free speech? Re: Against "PR-action against Jefsey Morfin"
Anthony, I actually feel that meeting summaries and - occasionally surveys - can be a critical constructive part of the process. -- Eric --> -Original Message- --> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --> On Behalf Of Anthony G. Atkielski --> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 9:55 PM --> To: ietf@ietf.org --> Subject: Re: Free speech? Re: Against "PR-action against --> Jefsey Morfin" --> --> grenville armitage writes: --> --> > Must admit I always thought it was constructive speech --> (in the sense --> > of attempting to engineer solutions, new architectures, --> protocols or --> > clarity of understanding) that was at the core of --> discussions at IETF. --> --> Then I suppose that threads such as "Meeting Survey Results," which --> have nothing to do with these goals, are out of order? --> --> Decisions as to what counts as "constructive" are --> subjective, unfortunately. --> --> --> ___ --> Ietf mailing list --> Ietf@ietf.org --> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf --> ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Free speech? Re: Against "PR-action against Jefsey Morfin"
Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: grenville armitage writes: Must admit I always thought it was constructive speech (in the sense of attempting to engineer solutions, new architectures, protocols or clarity of understanding) that was at the core of discussions at IETF. Then I suppose that threads such as "Meeting Survey Results," which have nothing to do with these goals, are out of order? On *this* list, my attitude is to be more tolerant about scope; the test is RFC 3005, and that is deliberately liberal. On WG lists, and specialist lists of other kinds, the test is relevance to the charter or purpose, and that is much narrower. Of course, it goes without saying that insults and unprofessional language of any kind are to be avoided on all lists; and sarcasm and irony can easily be misunderstood. Decisions as to what counts as "constructive" are subjective, unfortunately. They are, but one thing that is clearly not constructive is endless debate over issues where the responsible chair or moderator has already declared a rough consensus. As others have pointed out, rough consensus is different from unanimity. Once we have established rough consensus in the IETF, we accept it and move on. That means some people accepting things they don't agree with. Brian ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Free speech? Re: Against "PR-action against Jefsey Morfin"
grenville armitage writes: > Must admit I always thought it was constructive speech (in the sense > of attempting to engineer solutions, new architectures, protocols or > clarity of understanding) that was at the core of discussions at IETF. Then I suppose that threads such as "Meeting Survey Results," which have nothing to do with these goals, are out of order? Decisions as to what counts as "constructive" are subjective, unfortunately. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
