Subject: Against "PR-action against Jefsey Morfin"

From: "william(at)elan.net" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:01:27 -0800 (PST)

I'm against the PR action. From links included with PR action, I do
not see that Jefsey's actions include anything that maybe deemed as 
personal attacks or similar actions clearly prohibited by IETF and
his posts seem to be an advocacy and representing his views and IETF
as organization is based on free participation and representation of 
everyone's views to arrive at consensus. Free speech is at the core
of discussions at IETF and those representing minority positions
should not be prevented from expressing it and most definitely it
should not cause such global IETF-wide ban as PR action represents.

-- 
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: grenville armitage <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:45:28 +1100

william(at)elan.net wrote:
	[..]
> Free speech is at the core
> of discussions at IETF [...]

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.

How things change.

cheers,
gja

---

From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 03:54:56 +0100

> 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.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:44:59 +0100

> 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