From nobody Fri Jul 15 02:22:36 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F080612DB1A for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 02:22:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.077 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.077 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=DkPQ/nh4; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=GZckSi6d Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4p6_bvSDNx9x for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 02:22:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E099E12DA34 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 02:22:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.34.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u6F9MKRY002151 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 15 Jul 2016 02:22:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1468574553; x=1468660953; bh=k8QOIarZgyBsmmEbDlAc/hMOFkc1EjP5txdL4jEtaR4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=DkPQ/nh4g+VckMWySYqs/ifw8nRGH6FqdFcUV500CcG4VxMopR9bgkgUA+Eu7OE9F fbTWOIvRjn5OJ9L6iTiv3PljW/o2XUAcRNpcogd8zOUb+FMBRUSEhDxxIqj9NB1NIp xT1wlBnr9/3IGCfm2iHhZLkj4w7ee2tC/D+5SchE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1468574553; x=1468660953; i=@elandsys.com; bh=k8QOIarZgyBsmmEbDlAc/hMOFkc1EjP5txdL4jEtaR4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=GZckSi6dx9q+dlZUWHQ7Sm7Gnf5O1B9u6SD3NMYyADzIknry8NPhw2wZad3lDxOyZ X3gPTbnNY1ljwevkCpytamkfAaIndt8XLi2DCHgXTr+STTDZP0NicixzUESVebYLkO /ISh4K/tNteV7VBUraK81Z7C4Gg6ZQlobkXzzOzI= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160714233214.0a4ff0b8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 02:20:20 -0700 To: Nalini Elkins , diversity@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: [Diversity] The nature of the IETF X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:22:35 -0000 Hi Nalini, I am following up on part of your message on this mailing list. Although I could discuss about the topic on the IETF Discussion list I avoided doing that as it might generate a long thread. At 13:18 14-07-2016, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote: >I am going to say that IETF@IETF.ORG is a somewhat special >case. Some of us in the U.S. (and I count myself among them!) feel >quite free to voice our opinions on all kinds of topics. We take >our freedom of speech seriously! I know I feel sometimes that I >should probably "cool it" and go write some code instead of spouting >off on the IETF@IETF.ORG list. So, I suppose there may be some >cultural issues here. There was a time where I would use the words "culture issues" as a description. From what I read there are different national concepts about it. In some parts of the IETF it is known that ietf@ietf.org subscribers take freedom of speech seriously. I'll quote some text from an IESG discussion: "It is in the nature of the IETF to be intimidating to non engineers or to less qualified engineers. Feeling intimidated because one is ignorant and where nobody is trying to do harm is something that is ok. Trying to intimidate is not ok, attempting to intimidate because someone is young, old, etc. is not ok, but that was already stated." And from an IETF mailing list: "For Example, Native English speakers may think that they are best contributors but they are wrong, because people chosen the language to be used with no smart reason." Would it be better that you and I have a conversation or would it be better if I agree with your opinion? Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Fri Jul 15 06:07:44 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98B1D12D788 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 06:07:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yahoo.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SR1fw1YQQFZT for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 06:07:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm44.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm44.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.120.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B54E12D796 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 06:07:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1468588056; bh=RYhDn9xx1JL8/+sa7xH8RL+y6kcT7E6dZcEsZRvEuZY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject; b=ecnk3hv1yRyB1Uts9e9QkD8gtQN0CPph3Di+49epOLhhXjuq4ZLHj6Oe7ICAHrZsazn76YHkvj2mlW4Ei0jR6vD0DkiY5DW4jGaGbA9Jjg4h1P4/Ti1BFvDT1kdAdMY/kAg0D9kImcFlgVnaRuOJzl0BQ7jFhQW6td/G0zYMk/SRkjNZMR3i1GlDcJCJsochDZ62UVIphjrDYFyM5uS3m6iR9ylcVEjeNlMqDnOd+MKpvozFNJ18g6LXQNiy2oM2BztkTaCBk7GJeZ10P/jndT5Pe5tAxCtLdZT+IywBDnHwShHgLilVm/+XH/MnTlan7HBfSx0NfSyshnu5KQTgVg== Received: from [127.0.0.1] by nm44.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Jul 2016 13:07:36 -0000 Received: from [98.138.100.114] by nm44.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Jul 2016 13:04:48 -0000 Received: from [98.138.87.11] by tm105.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Jul 2016 13:03:48 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1011.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Jul 2016 13:03:48 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 739398.69064.bm@omp1011.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-YMail-OSG: jeTk0NsVM1k_Xix_zfZZSFtXl_JA_eReGTx_HIQQ_4e9Oj_lCLNvnM1PtET5Ydb vmjVkuUmcXF7gKWWRmvqflI.QpNgyST.PiGiGU40jiE4iVh1fO92LOcuUFFj5P3hy9ztQ.UqYGET kCLAsQ53ReTJJ.pzuv1GIrsQn_sLUaFeM8iIExcQUKg_hVr2SUogj8bZAwzr5WA5RaCr3w2GW.W0 T839cT7Cq60VqVv4ZvxuIHdrsjHSHFDJDE2WaPxdQcxLHIxwcmuevbi.6V6c1.CICKPytVAhfBnC kx18NxaM0MM1INimBwa6zXRW4JNokmNz1YWyef_7t.6gpdrPOwnc2fWldIhiyMjeWQ1oVk7x8XE4 trXXlXGI9ybHhvLd5zhLbmX7aBfmzgKxkJ2g2uX1CTyYWXv1ByH7J7eo1VVZqFZTdUSbi8GCkEyZ 50PhJqlAxbyEQoYujb7szIrHjmlGpasGxA7kmZL8G__lY.v7IwCcuIR7kW66nqFrkS3.0y9q6pu6 Rkzza.dVicVdKk8.OlKZkzw2pVQssAAgX8z3_..pmU.ll7MfmXZUw Received: from jws100138.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sendmailws116.mail.ne1.yahoo.com; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:03:48 +0000; 1468587828.140 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:03:44 +0000 (UTC) From: To: S Moonesamy , "diversity@ietf.org" Message-ID: <1999803872.4245614.1468587824906.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160714233214.0a4ff0b8@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160714233214.0a4ff0b8@elandnews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Diversity] The nature of the IETF X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:07:42 -0000 At 13:18 14-07-2016, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote: >>I am going to say that IETF@IETF.ORG is a somewhat special >>case. Some of us in the U.S. (and I count myself among them!) feel >>quite free to voice our opinions on all kinds of topics. We take >our freedom of speech seriously! I know I feel sometimes that I >>should probably "cool it" and go write some code instead of spouting >>off on the IETF@IETF.ORG list. So, I suppose there may be some >>cultural issues here. >There was a time where I would use the words "culture issues" as a >description. From what I read there are different national concepts >about it. In some parts of the IETF it is known that ietf@ietf.org >subscribers take freedom of speech seriously. >I'll quote some text from an IESG discussion: > "It is in the nature of the IETF to be intimidating to non engineers or to > less qualified engineers. Feeling intimidated because one is ignorant and > where nobody is trying to do harm is something that is ok. Trying to intimidate > is not ok, attempting to intimidate because someone is young, old, etc. is not > ok, but that was already stated." >And from an IETF mailing list: > "For Example, Native English speakers may think that they are best > contributors but they are wrong, because people chosen the language to be used > with no smart reason." >Would it be better that you and I have a conversation or would it be >better if I agree with your opinion? Please, let's have a conversation. I am quite interested in your thoughts. Is using "cultural issues" too broad a term or somehow offensive? I would like to learn what is better to use or how to talk about this. I really was not meaning to be offensive. Thanks, Nalini From nobody Fri Jul 15 10:36:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7182A12D18E for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:36:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.077 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.077 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=giH6nGEb; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=Rh9JkLmB Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ysrAF0zqT6iP for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CCA712D14B for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.34.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u6FHaHTQ001499 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:36:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1468604189; x=1468690589; bh=ycAM5xPtl5Grns/spwk37GoT3MsnQ2F2W+n/da+OBsI=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=giH6nGEbmdQSLBRCOkH5NwdVDmXFcGXWylKElS8gPnzAvOKCey/Nu9aHfffv41ZDW IIalukQS66hCs7n07QBnTeRrlF96KJuYV03VqJK/bupUWfuM61KnLaYYgzBC8g8l1D lomgaC6ffoTpUdHrBd80uLjsTPukC5zVm8r+v6PQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1468604189; x=1468690589; i=@elandsys.com; bh=ycAM5xPtl5Grns/spwk37GoT3MsnQ2F2W+n/da+OBsI=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Rh9JkLmB5MsD3zziQaOZoXxz+EllEtBCvnfhgmcZy7cahwQ71RmMIFXPCgV1oVjVX r6gj+tMfEhwS11TRWoTkGcK6aFPepQSVWwkIbdAlKZq2ZlwAX/aMf2Vx9lCs71Vqzc cBEFuSRL8oV/yHyLHZ7ErGT84EaBOFIYsDUPLTOw= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160715084222.0c849478@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:35:25 -0700 To: nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com, diversity@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: <1999803872.4245614.1468587824906.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo .com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160714233214.0a4ff0b8@elandnews.com> <1999803872.4245614.1468587824906.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Diversity] The nature of the IETF X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 17:36:31 -0000 Hi Nalini, At 06:03 15-07-2016, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote: >Please, let's have a conversation. I am quite interested in your >thoughts. Is using "cultural issues" too broad a term or somehow >offensive? I would like to learn what is better to use or how to >talk about this. I really was not meaning to be offensive. You have not said anything offensive or done anything which I might view as offensive. The term is neither too broad nor is it offensive (in my opinion). I am seen that term in use and I have used it too. Around a year ago I noticed that some of the persons (not in the IETF) with whom I was communicating with did not understand what the term means. Based on a few messages on ietf@ietf.org from people of different countries, my understanding is that the term might be read differently. It may be easier to talk to people from different countries to understand how to talk about it. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Mon Jul 18 02:57:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D6FC12D5CB for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 02:57:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qr1arUtLvXrm for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 02:57:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x22d.google.com (mail-qk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43C5D12D52C for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 02:57:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id s63so152246456qkb.2 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 02:57:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ve1N/I83vrO7LX2tgWmlSsXluEdfQ8IQQCO8Cv2K+JE=; b=ZOVTrRWRkZf/AqbliIj1FPDM+7bWii045F0At++2LjbP5u37KvjbqKHBqN/sCyuh0d OLTOW1DtfKa6nEXtyF6xaFweuPHKTnoSO5P3Dbyw6Ks9pa1xTKjf2k3nUdLjSvwSwd8T bLKuFxBor2FWqUut7cGG++Lpa7Jd9+9P3gKlw8EzzK6NJpVxKNsy6B9lA6+tFP0pUPif AvbsNu4HbEDRAjEiHVbaHz5K6/wJKV7PQRJk1WQ98ra4M/lOpcEVQISlZdJ+ZoV0m4TZ wJRAYBMq4pSMMe/xc8xfDhX7w7w9ki2gakIOnE4jvHuBXKQZa3SoFvXav4b0Zh8uY7w2 PyyQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ve1N/I83vrO7LX2tgWmlSsXluEdfQ8IQQCO8Cv2K+JE=; b=mwItnaTJW2joH62UNnIFhihGCD9OGx2QE9OO1L9028I974infJifoF4wUvsWdd9tCm cRFOEh2vAQiAasD03nBFdjYPmosQ6h6/UfTAhaNb4EgU6pJ0TEWGuVPiC5lAIPhWx+FT ayVSGxcOOA40ki0o+Q0kBE6JDqgcrsAmwZW3QkEW8aC/+bDLIrfMRwuNaTEocq3pxl/9 02fmZMvqJBOHvhYgq/cmL8BzvZJqi4awHZPjh0EK7o7kHcv7Obc3OGKU119MU5avIywc WlCjDuPxrJnkp04rnR3WG8i4Zdvh2nVxUnY/ATZUcQE96nI0oi3sl+xmIIqTosEac5Qd PSsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLqaHiK8ZhbHS9QSLUI2vr17IMq+l8SjDF79CWq1YsmdoXQ0fcIpQpBp6L113tgvC89XCsfjmAuYUyykw== X-Received: by 10.55.69.69 with SMTP id s66mr43531628qka.100.1468835824474; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 02:57:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.81.137 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 02:57:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160715084222.0c849478@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160714233214.0a4ff0b8@elandnews.com> <1999803872.4245614.1468587824906.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20160715084222.0c849478@elandnews.com> From: Abdussalam Baryun Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:57:03 +0200 Message-ID: To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1148a3428d1e880537e5fd94 Archived-At: Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Nalini Elkins Subject: Re: [Diversity] The nature of the IETF X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:57:07 -0000 --001a1148a3428d1e880537e5fd94 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I don't understand your message, why some people don't understand or some may read differently. Please explain in more so we can learn. I support your idea that there are best ways of discussing between different people but we need to discuss what are the best ways. However, freedom in speech is not the best way of discussion, so IMHO best practice in discussions is that people on ietf list know that the IETF is an international organisation, and that to be polite is not to be free in using English words/statements. In my experience on the IETF list, there are people that are not polite, and no clear regulation is doing any thing clear about it. That makes freedom as many like it to be. I don't mind freedom as long there is a police/auditor that can take my rights. Your freedom or any person's freedom must not conflict with any other person's freedom. AB On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 7:35 PM, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Nalini, > At 06:03 15-07-2016, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote: > >> Please, let's have a conversation. I am quite interested in your >> thoughts. Is using "cultural issues" too broad a term or somehow >> offensive? I would like to learn what is better to use or how to talk >> about this. I really was not meaning to be offensive. >> > > You have not said anything offensive or done anything which I might view > as offensive. > > The term is neither too broad nor is it offensive (in my opinion). I am > seen that term in use and I have used it too. Around a year ago I noticed > that some of the persons (not in the IETF) with whom I was communicating > with did not understand what the term means. Based on a few messages on > ietf@ietf.org from people of different countries, my understanding is > that the term might be read differently. It may be easier to talk to > people from different countries to understand how to talk about it. > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > --001a1148a3428d1e880537e5fd94 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I don't understand your message, why some pe= ople don't understand or some may read differently. Please explain in m= ore so we can learn. I support your idea that there are best ways of discus= sing between different people but we need to discuss what are the best ways= . However, freedom in speech is not the best way of discussion, so IMHO bes= t practice in discussions is that people on ietf list know that the IETF is= an international organisation, and that to be polite is not to be free in = using English words/statements.

In my experience on the IETF l= ist, there are people that are not polite, and no clear regulation is doing= any thing clear about it. That makes freedom as many like it to be. I don&= #39;t mind freedom as long there is a police/auditor that can take my right= s. Your freedom or any person's freedom must not conflict with any othe= r person's freedom.

AB

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 7:35 PM, S Moonesa= my <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:
Hi Nalini,
At 06:03 15-07-2016, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote:
Please, let's have a conversation.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I am quite interested in= your thoughts.=C2=A0 Is using "cultural issues" too broad a term= or somehow offensive?=C2=A0 I would like to learn what is better to use or= how to talk about this.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I really was not meaning to be offensi= ve.

 You have not said anything offensive or done anything which I might view as= offensive.

The term is neither too broad nor is it offensive (in my opinion).=C2=A0 I = am seen that term in use and I have used it too.=C2=A0 Around a year ago I = noticed that some of the persons (not in the IETF) with whom I was communic= ating with did not understand what the term means.=C2=A0 Based on a few mes= sages on ietf@ietf.org from people of different countries, my understanding is that the term mi= ght be read differently.=C2=A0 It may be easier to talk to people from diff= erent countries to understand how to talk about it.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity

--001a1148a3428d1e880537e5fd94-- From nobody Mon Jul 18 03:32:16 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFAD312D835 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:32:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.077 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.077 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=Aq3UbGUi; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=YrSLAn7a Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XOmtC_K4459f for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:32:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B230A12D82F for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.227.85.212]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u6IAVqEu024398 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:32:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1468837924; x=1468924324; bh=pNu6ZndI1z9qQa3Xa5LEhI2vLp9xbdzpFD7BpbLBUGg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Aq3UbGUiE/t3tEGj5xItUr8E2W8CsDvgi6zKMvfvAs2WI1QVB2JrhrPPXoBUaXVBu Sxsc7wzapvP8UmL9uyEsPNUdPn5abfPXyfisVdElsnPaGkA/3pUGq0zA521nULacSg Pkk2z7atMiIqiORvLl7RXYbk8M8kr80MuBBZlCbE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1468837924; x=1468924324; i=@elandsys.com; bh=pNu6ZndI1z9qQa3Xa5LEhI2vLp9xbdzpFD7BpbLBUGg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=YrSLAn7adulQrQWN9AcbCEKKxl8t8ozh58ARZMpRgwWEKUdtgOPFefNmhlDiKRwLC 3/IXX7fCkyfFXkrccAXe/f/E9Zkxh77k3OFykvLkHNIFIxUZAWkssTDV+RwgrxUMd/ Au2Gp/KzeH/6if/pwyxTpxdwg902f64g87EawLCo= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160718030210.0ac2a920@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:29:49 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160714233214.0a4ff0b8@elandnews.com> <1999803872.4245614.1468587824906.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20160715084222.0c849478@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Nalini Elkins Subject: Re: [Diversity] The nature of the IETF X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:32:15 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 02:57 18-07-2016, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >I don't understand your message, why some people don't understand or >some may read differently. Please explain in more so we can learn. I >support your idea that there are best ways of discussing between >different people but we need to discuss what are the best ways. >However, freedom in speech is not the best way of discussion, so >IMHO best practice in discussions is that people on ietf list know >that the IETF is an international organisation, and that to be >polite is not to be free in using English words/statements. The less difficult way is to discuss in person as you and I can see whether we are understanding each other. It is not affordable for everyone to do that due to the cost of travel. The freedom of expression allows you to discuss with me by replying to my message. The alternative is have the persons managing this mailing list decide whether you can discuss with me. The following was recently posted to the IETF discussion list: https://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/EnsuringAppropriateDiscussionOnIetfAtIetfList If there is anything impolite, please send an email to the persons listed as the contact person for that problem so that the problem can be solved. >In my experience on the IETF list, there are people that are not >polite, and no clear regulation is doing any thing clear about it. >That makes freedom as many like it to be. I don't mind freedom as >long there is a police/auditor that can take my rights. Your freedom >or any person's freedom must not conflict with any other person's freedom. I agree that there may be people who are not polite. There are existing rules (much more than before) to deal with that. The police does not intervene unless there is a complaint. It is similar for IETF discussions. I read the IETF discussion list regularly as I am one of the Facilitators for that mailing list. I did not notice any message which might be considered as impolite being addressed to you. That does not mean that there isn't anything impolite. Please do contact one or more of the persons mentioned in the link I provided above if you encounter a problem. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Wed Jul 20 16:23:07 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D333412D5C7 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 16:23:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.077 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.077 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=cwUFBDKN; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=I7KwxEZv Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O4CZ_V8CssBO for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 16:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2981A12B030 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 16:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.227.82.105]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u6KNMiDM015564 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Jul 2016 16:22:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1469056978; x=1469143378; bh=LvW6Fwia/sXiJFCkconX3jHjG4qHFAnwQW6BTp1SBB0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=cwUFBDKNhvVwqVSMYnUGpgzv4ayrdywTiz/gnHvrrE1B7+B3d16ufK+rsjHQNYzSy jZNLIdcwQKmCCg+zqjF+5SeD5NajMaB2kgezEGkevYZhH0TVNxRmGWU/AOKVer+m1D McNE3e8XmQtfi0Qd8KqwMzRFG7D3EOOdFcX2nF10= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1469056978; x=1469143378; i=@elandsys.com; bh=LvW6Fwia/sXiJFCkconX3jHjG4qHFAnwQW6BTp1SBB0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=I7KwxEZvfqqG1lS0QPqzCPI6JPLaFGuoGc2M9zkVr4mh0J4IyXmj6HYH+mTa0Y9zl 5U1ixQFHS417w+WjZZuYLxWw7s2/qzaWdViTol0fCnCzX/jJRfAweNmR/gD0R+bt1K f0K6MlE6XufFpnTPyxyvFvoZlhn1cySnkavuXg30= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160720141950.0d5c7e50@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 15:34:59 -0700 To: Adam Roach , Michael Richardson , Ted Hardie , diversity@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: <14b99269-9999-dc44-c42c-87b228f4f92b@nostrum.com> References: <20160718132715.24782.50243.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <14b99269-9999-dc44-c42c-87b228f4f92b@nostrum.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Diversity] IAOC -- looking for committee volunteers X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 23:23:06 -0000 Hi Adam, Michael, Ted, At 04:52 20-07-2016, Adam Roach wrote: >One of the things that I find missing from this invitation is an >indication of the level of commitment required to participate: how >much time investment will be required? Does the position include >travel; and, if so, is it mandatory? What I'm most worried about >here is that people are going to have their own assumptions around >these kind of requirements, which might discourage exactly those >most capable of introducing diversity into the IAOC committees. (To >draw a clear and straight line: the people who can comfortably >assume that they can take on such load without worrying about >resources are exactly the same kind of people who currently comprise the IAOC). Yes. >Also, while I understand that it's something of a dead horse, I >think one of the things that the IETF 100 discussions threw into >relief is that the existing committees are quite homogeneous: unless >I'm mistaken, all nine Meetings Committee members are [removed] from >the US or Western Europe. Adding community volunteers, if done >right, may serve to That is noticeable and yet nobody mentioned it. There was a discussion [1] a few years ago during which the words "broader participation" was mentioned. There is an assumption that financial ability to travel is part of the requirements as the existing members regularly attend meetings. Would adding one or two persons from outside the usual set make much of a difference? I watched a Working Group session in which what a person from the U.S. discussing about metrics for participation did not get any support from the other persons in the room. The problem with this hopeless issue is that it is visible. There was a letter [2] about it in 2013. Regards, S. Moonesamy 1. https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-nomcom/current/msg00482.html 2. https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg77723.html